Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
Forum rules
READ: VSE Board-Wide Rules and Guidelines
If your Help request has been solved, please edit your first post in order to select the
Topic Icon to let others know your topic has been solved.
READ: VSE Board-Wide Rules and Guidelines
If your Help request has been solved, please edit your first post in order to select the
Topic Icon to let others know your topic has been solved.
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
From 85 to 87 there was an upmarket Denon CD player, the DCD1500 which used one PCM54HP per channel. Denon dubbed it "double super linear converter". Interesting.
Herrare umanum est.
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
So I´m on a hardware Reverb phase right now, having just added an LXP-5 and a Midiverb 2 to my rig. So couldn´t help but notice the current crop of reverb pedals out there. I knew there was something goin on in the industry.
So jxalex, have you seen this http://www.spinsemi.com/products.html ? Stereo inputs and outputs, plus DSP and DACs on a SOIC-28 chip! It´s not the future, it´s the present. Is there a point in making single DACs anymore, when there´s this level of integration available?
So jxalex, have you seen this http://www.spinsemi.com/products.html ? Stereo inputs and outputs, plus DSP and DACs on a SOIC-28 chip! It´s not the future, it´s the present. Is there a point in making single DACs anymore, when there´s this level of integration available?
Herrare umanum est.
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
,,
Last edited by jxalex on Tue May 23, 2017 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
..
Last edited by jxalex on Tue May 23, 2017 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
madtheory
- Supporting Member!
- Posts: 5310
- Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 12:45 pm
- Real name: Tomas Mulcahy
- Gear: Wurlitzer Opus 1536, Model F, Morovdis Arpeggiator, Maplin My First EQ, Jeff Wayne Thunderchild rack, Thermostat, Buck Owens' Moog.
- Location: Cork, Ireland
- Contact:
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
Awesome. Can you do an AB? Old DA vs new DA?
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
Here in this forum happens some my posts random deleting here and neither I am notified by this happening.
So it seems quite pointless with contributions.
So it seems quite pointless with contributions.
-
Stab Frenzy
- Moderator
- Posts: 9723
- Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:41 pm
- Gear: Eurorack, RYTM, Ultranova, many FX
- Location: monster island*
- Contact:
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
The answer is because synths are designed by engineers.
"An optimist will tell you the glass is half-full; the pessimist, half-empty; and the engineer will tell you the glass is twice the size it needs to be"
"Any idiot can build a bridge that stands, it takes an engineer to build a bridge that barely stands"
etc
"An optimist will tell you the glass is half-full; the pessimist, half-empty; and the engineer will tell you the glass is twice the size it needs to be"
"Any idiot can build a bridge that stands, it takes an engineer to build a bridge that barely stands"
etc
-
madtheory
- Supporting Member!
- Posts: 5310
- Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 12:45 pm
- Real name: Tomas Mulcahy
- Gear: Wurlitzer Opus 1536, Model F, Morovdis Arpeggiator, Maplin My First EQ, Jeff Wayne Thunderchild rack, Thermostat, Buck Owens' Moog.
- Location: Cork, Ireland
- Contact:
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
I downlaoded the AB WAV. Very subtle differences. Which Roland was it? Seems to me every second one sounds a bit fuller, the DX EP has more bass. So is every second one the old DA? Because those seemed to have more background noise? Is there an EQ somewhere in that path with the old DA? It was often rumoured to be so.
But the test does not have enough sounds to go on I think, and are some of the performances not identical?
But the test does not have enough sounds to go on I think, and are some of the performances not identical?
Re: Thought about synthesizers channel multiplexing
It was Roland JD990..
The AB comparison was that first was NEW and second was old, if it was NEW-OLD....xxx.WAV file. THe old one has more background noise, yes.
Every second was the OLD DAC with its own filterEQ.
It is not only rumor, it is the fact that it has its some strange filterEQ at the end. ALso the JD800 and D50 has.
It was different becouse the original JD990 does not have flat filter, (it adds bass and midrange). So yes, the ROland had some its own EQ in the path. Strange why they did it so. When using the same filterEQ as the original, then it is the same. Whereas I choosed deliberately the filter from XV5080 (which is flat LPF 12dB/oct filter).
But when using the JD990 filterEQ at the end as the original then all sounds the same, except the
lower distortion and background noise.
The AB comparison was that first was NEW and second was old, if it was NEW-OLD....xxx.WAV file. THe old one has more background noise, yes.
Every second was the OLD DAC with its own filterEQ.
It is not only rumor, it is the fact that it has its some strange filterEQ at the end. ALso the JD800 and D50 has.
It was different becouse the original JD990 does not have flat filter, (it adds bass and midrange). So yes, the ROland had some its own EQ in the path. Strange why they did it so. When using the same filterEQ as the original, then it is the same. Whereas I choosed deliberately the filter from XV5080 (which is flat LPF 12dB/oct filter).
But when using the JD990 filterEQ at the end as the original then all sounds the same, except the
lower distortion and background noise.