4 ms·
Maybe the OP has the hardware and can compare the sound both subjectively and objectively? Does it have to be 100% exact copy to be called the same? (Individual
by baq 10mo ago
Maybe the OP has the hardware and can compare the sound both subjectively and objectively? Does it have to be 100% exact copy to be called the same? (Individual electronic components are never the same btw)
- Blackthorn 10mo agoThe OP didn't clarify. But if there's a claim of 100% faithful recreation, I'd expect something to back it up, like time- and frequency-domain comparisons of input and output with different test signals. Or at least something. But there isn't anything. The video claims: "It utilizes the actual DSP characteristics of the original to bring that specific sound back to life." The author admits they have never programmed DSP. So how are they verifying this claim?
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- _o1yi 10mo agoWell it's a new project so give it some time. I feel confident that I'm not lying so I can make that claim. Also its target market is not a technical crowd but people who make music. I'm optimizing more for what they want to see (which are sound demos) rather than what a programmer would want to see.
- _DeadFred_ 10mo agoThat might make it 100% faithful for OPs use cases, but not necessarily anyone else's.