Leaderboard

Did anyone else read these two posts and hear them to the tune of Katy Perry's I Kissed a Girl?

I never use the baro on my Core but I might need a Sapphire so I can switch up watches so I don't get bored with my watches at the gym.

My guess is use it to smash bats?

Love seeing the happy kitty posts! Snapped this one of my 14 yo one-eyed cat, Koshka. I really liked the rim lighting. She's still ridicously affectionate, ridiculously loud, and ridiculously playful for a cat her age.

Since going back to the safe room method, she is now eating anything and everything we put in front of her. Even dry food. So again, human error seems to be at the root of her problems. We are taking our sweet time with her now and she is a much happier feline. Matter of fact, here she is:

Not today but last Wednesday night was a rough night. At 1am we were awoken by the phone ringing, never a good thing. So we launched out of bed and my wife answered the phone only to find that it was a wrong number. Give me a break. At 2am Andrew woke up and needed to be briefly settled before falling back asleep. Ok, ok, it happens and I comforted myself with the idea that I could still get 3hrs + of uniterrupted sleep if I was lucky. Luck was not with me. At 3am I awoke to the sound of a bat in our attic. Shit. It happens and the normal course of action is to put in a set of earplugs and go back to sleep. But I dozed off again quickly but then awoke to a strange noise. Now in order to fully appreciate the following you need to know that our alarm clock is somewhat obnoxiously bright and blue and puts out a pretty eerie glow under good circumstances. Factor in that when I opened my eyes in addition to the normal blue fog I saw a winged spawn of Satan circling my ceiling fan. The FUCK?!?! My wife, for all her wonderful qualities, will launch 10 feet in the air if she sees a mouse. I did not wish to find out what would happen if she woke up to a bat flying at her. So I attempted to calmly wake her up, instructed her to get on the floor and make her way to the door. Once that was accomplished and she was safely shut in with Lily in her room I went about the business of getting rid of the bat. It was thankfully easy. It flew into a window where I was able to pop the screen and set it free. We called a specialist the next day and their coming next week to bat-proof the house. Sleep has been fitful since that night with frequent incidents of additional noise in the attic and we were all feeling like we had life pretty bad until we talked to our next door neighboor last night. He's killed 9, fucking NINE, bats in his house in the last week. I believe that Maura put it best, "We would have moved." I had a stronger reaction, suggesting that torching the place might be in order. Thankfully last night yielded better, noise free sleep.

The point regarding filters isn't that you can hear ultrasonic noise; it's about avoiding audible intermodulation of noise with your passband. Ideally, the noise is uncorrelated but in practice cyclical errors are likely to show up in a 7th order 1-bit modulator as you can't employ dither. One would have to find out experimentally if this turned out to be audible. Digital filtering is already used in DSD playback; you can see that in datasheets for DACs that support DSD playback (and probably in the case of 'digital amplifiers' that support DSD playback, if they specify such things in their datasheets). However, the design of the filter may vary, particularly depending on how DSD is handled by the specific DAC. Aside from that issue, I disagree that DSD is relevantly 'simpler' except when working with very loose, largely undescriptive metaphors for the functional architecture of an audio system. That is, if one thinks that DSD permits a 'dacless' playback architecture, one has made too much of the notion of a DAC. DSD is not more of an 'analog' format than PCM, nor does it in some intrinsic sense somehow get you closer to a "pure" representation of 'the signal.' I somewhat obliquely suggested this earlier, but audio systems are probably best modeled as control systems. The 'signal' is a metaphor for an idealized reconstruction of the input; the sense in which the signal is in the format is relational to the system. Under Sony's functional diagram, all that is happening is the functional blocking is done slightly differently than CD Audio, such that the D/A conversion block is divided differently, where the front-end and back-end of a delta-sigma DAC is physically split. Sony's functional diagram isn't representative of real-world implementations of DSD playback, in any case, but this is essentially what that diagram represents. Certain functional blocks of the total system are distributed in time and place, but they are all relatable in terms of a total system, and whether the reconstructed output of the playback device is 'pure' is only really intelligible within the confines of thinking about the system. It makes little sense to describe a playback device, that is lacking ordinary features of the control system, as providing a more pure output simply on the basis of lacking such features. It may be a mechanically simpler device, but omitting certain processing (such as filtering, noise shaping/dither, and so forth) may effectively represent a failure in the control system and a less accurate or 'pure' reconstruction of the input. Therefore, you cannot tell that a DAC design contains superfluous parts, or is likely to adulterate 'the signal,' simply on the basis of its complexity and the extent of processing involved. You can only tell when taking into account the total system. People generally get around this caveat by inserting a tacit ceteris paribus clause - that is, all other things being equal; but that's the problem, they aren't. Design requirements are domain-specific, and simplicitly is not a particularly good universal indicium of fidelity in audio design. That doesn't mean that all complex designs are good (or that complexity itself is good); it means evaluation is domain-specific. In the specific case of DACs, simplicity often leads to a lower-fidelity reconstruction of the original recording (subject to production variables like post-processing). To the extent that DSD allows for 'simplicity,' it does in the sense that you could (in theory) use it as a control signal for what is essentially an open-loop switching amplifier, which is architecturally "simpler" in its most basic sense than an R-2R latter. However, as I noted before such a device would have abysmal performance that is not in any relevant sense 'pure' or architecturally equivalent to high-performance switching amplifiers designed for audio reproduction.