> my guess is that the double A to D conversions are probably out of sync =
=0D
to get a better dither and less low level "gravel". Just a guess, but if =
=0D
they were doing an identical job, one would be redundant. Do they use two =
24 =0D
bit ADC's for the second 16 bit conversions? =0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
Hi David and Mike,=0D
=0D
=0D
As far as I understand the manual (see http://www.avisoft.com/PCM-D100.pdf=
http://www.avisoft.com/PCM-D100.pdf at page 70), at any time only one of t=
he two A/D converter output signals is being saved into the .wav file. So i=
n my understanding, this mechanism does not improve the lower end of the dy=
namic range. It would just extend the upper end of the dynamic range by tak=
ing the otherwise clipped samples from the second A/D converter that operat=
es at a lower gain. =0D
=0D
=0D
As David already pointed out, nature recordists are however rarely faced w=
ith such large dynamic ranges.=0D
=0D
=0D
Regards,=0D
Raimund=0D
=0D
|