Re: For the believers and SoundBlaster haters

"Ethan Winer" <ethanw at ethanwiner dot com> writes:

In your SB triangle example, peak level was about -6 dB, and the
basic background noise level was about -67 dB. That gives 61 dB
dynamic range, which is pretty typical. The Apogee test was
actually a shade worse. I don't think that was significant. Were
they actually recorded in perfect parallel?

Yes, I used a Y splitter and had Sonar record one track from each
device at the same time. And you are correct that 60-70 dB is typical,
which shows how silly it is to argue that stuff 30 dB lower means
anything at all.

Perhaps now is a good time to ask why we need a new medium? E.g., one
with 24 bits and 96 kHz sampling or somesuch? (For distribution -
recording is another matter).
--
% Randy Yates % "How's life on earth?
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % ... What is it worth?"
%%% 919-577-9882 % 'Mission (A World Record)',
%%%% <yates@xxxxxxxx> % *A New World Record*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: For the believers and SoundBlaster haters
    ... and the basic background noise level was about -67 ... That gives 61 dB dynamic range, ... The Apogee test was actually a shade worse. ... We had two candidates for that new medium, ...
    (rec.audio.pro)
  • Re: For the believers and SoundBlaster haters
    ... That gives 61 dB dynamic range, ... The Apogee test was actually a shade worse. ... I used a Y splitter and had Sonar record one track from each device at the same time. ...
    (rec.audio.pro)