16 Feb
2009
16 Feb
'09
4:27 p.m.
On Monday 16 February 2009 20:55:15 Sampo Savolainen wrote:
On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 20:19 +0100, Fons Adriaensen
wrote:
Are they really upsampling?
I was under the impression that they use one fast converter (far faster then
the sampling rate you hear) and the (de-)multiplex the signal to the various
channels. Should be easier than syncing several converter clocks.
The devices I work with on the other hand go exactly the other way, they
combine several 1GS/s adc's to have one 4GS/s adc. But they face their own set
of clock-sync problems...
Have fun,
Arnold
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 08:49:50PM +0200, Sampo
Savolainen wrote:
That was the point I was trying to make in the previous paragraph
from the
one you quoted. The point here was that it seems a lot of companies making
high quality converters don't feel upsampling is worth mentioning. Let's ask the question the other way around:
if upsampling is a
superior way to convert from digital to analog, why do we see
upsampling being mentioned only in obscenely expensive hi-fi CD
players? Why Lynx, Apogee, RME, etc. don't use this technology in their
highly praised converters?
Don't they ? It's probably just inside the
chips they use.