 Lbjefferies7 wrote: | |
This Weiss’ paper is very stupid one. I really do not like when the professionals of the Weiss’ caliber trade their reference opinion about the subjects just to promote mendicancy, selling the half-true or juts deceptions. Daniel Weiss know much better than this but in this case he chose to express only 5% of true, leaving the rest in comfortable silence. What Mr. Weiss said is true and there are shity digital controls and there are better controls. If people go for higher rates or use dither to mask out the problems when they loose bit-resolution then it does not support the notion that digital volume controls are “good” but juts indicate that the different masquerade methods are affective to impress the Morons who do not understand better results. Saying all of it I have to note that it is possible to have a digital volume control that is problem-free and that will have even at -90dB the full bit-death resolution. To my knowledge it was implemented in one DAC and in there the entire conversion algorithm is recalculated based upon the setting of the volume control. Ironically in that DAC the volume control still sound very bad but because of VERY different reason. Anyhow, the Daniel Weiss’ half-ass explanation do not do honor to the designer of his competence. The caT |