naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: moles and atrac

Subject: Re: moles and atrac
From: Walter Knapp <>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:42:03 -0500
Klas Strandberg wrote:
>>Klas Strandberg wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I agree with your observation. If ATRAC has some disadvantage, it is tha=
t
>>>the final sounds, the last of a fading echo, will get slightly broken an=
d
>>>crispy, especially if you boost it, of course.
>>
> Dan replied:
>
>
>>This could be a converter artifact, and have nothing to do with ATRAC.
>>
>
>
> Hm? What do you mean? Converter? Do you mean DA?? If so, we can forget it=
. I
> use MultiWav PRO24, in my opinion about the best sound cards ever made fo=
r PC.
> And it can be heard (??) when replayed analog.
>
> Just let me clearify - this "crispy" is hardly audible, and only when you
> have the most perfect recording, replayed with the most perfect headphone=
s.
> Even so, it is so vague that it could even be imagination.

Considering how much the mind modifies what's "heard" based on your
attitudes about it, this could be highly likely. What we hear is what
our mind decides we wanted to hear. That applies equally to experts and
beginners alike.

That's one of the reasons why blind listening tests are so very
important. Hard for the mind to make it fit consistently when it does
not know what it is.

At the very fine level many of the digital filtering systems produce
artifacts. This includes simple equalization. What's more, each layer
interacts with all others. Tracking down the source of a faint sound is
not as simple as it might seem.

Klas, were you bringing the sound off the minidisc via digital or analog
methods? Walkman MD portables don't have digital outputs, so everything
out of them passes through their D/A.

"crispy" is a very hard thing to define for me, as described it's not a
consistent feature of recordings from the Portadisc, and it would be if
it was ATRAC. I've heavily worked over recordings made both with the
MZ-R30's and analog transferred and with the Portadisc and digitally
transferred. In the course of that I've produced all kinds of filtering
artifacts, in many cases pushing right to the edge of audibility of the
artifacts to get where I needed to go. In some cases even over and then
use a dynamic filter to remove the artifacts. I've layered multiple
filtration on the same frequency band. In some cases the sound is passed
through a dozen or more filters at once. The artifacts I've found have
all been those of the filters, I can produce the same ones from audio
from any source. Sound processing has limits, and it's not the end of
the settings available in most cases.

To me the most crisp sound is usually the original, particularly with
the portadisc recordings. Filtering tends to make it less crisp. But I
might not even be talking about the same thing.

Walt




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU