Sampling frequency in the megahertz (as per the Hiroaki Nishijima - Korg interview)

Official support for: u-he.com
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

I was reading through the transcript of this interview here:
http://www.redbullmusicacademy.com/lect ... -takahashi

...with the chaps from Korg. Some interesting tidbits to be sure but what caught my attention the most was this paragraph:
"To make digital closer to analog you need to align them into sequence. To make that possible, you must raise the sampling frequency up to megahertz. And the resolution to, maybe about 32-bit these days? Doing all that, analog is still finer. But to the human ear, maybe not to people with exceptional hearing, but to the people outside of the music industry, the day is near when digital meets analog quality."

You can search for the paragraph yourself on the aforementioned link of course.

I tend to agree about the resolution thing. Analogue seems to have really high resolution (especially evident in the higher register). His reasoning seems sound as well.

I use a 12 core mac pro and 192khz is possible but it does tend to punish the computer a lot more than say 44.1. I realise some of the software upsamples internally anyway. Is the upsampling a multiple of the base sampling rate?

Curious to hear your guys' thoughts on, well, all of the above... :)

Cheers.

Post

Sounds like the paradigm from pre-Zero-Delay-Feedback / pre-MNA era.

While it's generally right, analogue components have a certain bandwidth too. MHz sounds over the top for many of the parts used in vintage synthesizers and effects.

Post

I think the interview is from December 2014 so very much post that era. I’ve been using Diva since 2012. (Maybe late 2011 I’m not sure. Have to check the receipt.)

Hiroaki was on the original ms20 design team (as well as the reissue mini as far as I understand).

Post

I only trust sample rates at terahertz so I can see the sounds.

Post

mcbpete wrote:I only trust sample rates at terahertz so I can see the sounds.
What processor do you use for that? It might be why the polar caps are melting :).

Post

But from bit stream perspective 24*96k is more than 2mhz and no joke most of adcs and dacs are working exactly on frequencies like this. :hihi:
Murderous duck!

Post

I also think they weren't aware of Diva's tech back then, and didn't know about ZDF at all...


That said, I wonder if Roland's ACB employs ZDF. It sure sounds like it might.

Post

EvilDragon wrote:I also think they weren't aware of Diva's tech back then, and didn't know about ZDF at all...


That said, I wonder if Roland's ACB employs ZDF. It sure sounds like it might.
Well I find it hard to believe that they were unaware. I mean Diva had been out for nearly 5 years at that point.

ZDF is statistical probability approach (approximating etc) right? Can't predict the future so instead you estimate output in order to solve the equation right now then work on the difference later (expected vs actual then refine). Something like that?

I'm not sure what that has to do with resolution though?

Post

nevernamed wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:I also think they weren't aware of Diva's tech back then, and didn't know about ZDF at all...


That said, I wonder if Roland's ACB employs ZDF. It sure sounds like it might.
Well I find it hard to believe that they were unaware. I mean Diva had been out for nearly 5 years at that point.

ZDF is statistical probability approach (approximating etc) right? Can't predict the future so instead you estimate output in order to solve the equation right now then work on the difference later (expected vs actual then refine). Something like that?

I'm not sure what that has to do with resolution though?
We do not need to predict the future for an exact result. We just need to calculate the present:

http://urs.silvrback.com/zero-delay-feedback

Post

nevernamed wrote:Well I find it hard to believe that they were unaware. I mean Diva had been out for nearly 5 years at that point.
If they were aware of it they wouldn't state that sample rate in MHz is necessary. That's all.

Post

Urs wrote:
nevernamed wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:I also think they weren't aware of Diva's tech back then, and didn't know about ZDF at all...


That said, I wonder if Roland's ACB employs ZDF. It sure sounds like it might.
Well I find it hard to believe that they were unaware. I mean Diva had been out for nearly 5 years at that point.

ZDF is statistical probability approach (approximating etc) right? Can't predict the future so instead you estimate output in order to solve the equation right now then work on the difference later (expected vs actual then refine). Something like that?

I'm not sure what that has to do with resolution though?
We do not need to predict the future for an exact result. We just need to calculate the present:

http://urs.silvrback.com/zero-delay-feedback
Great write up. Although it looks like the site is abandonware?

Post

EvilDragon wrote:I also think they weren't aware of Diva's tech back then, and didn't know about ZDF at all...


That said, I wonder if Roland's ACB employs ZDF. It sure sounds like it might.
I thought the same for Gforce Oddity 2, but, AFAIK, that one doesn't have ZDF.

Post

IIRC the first zdf filters were showcased in reaktor 5.0 around 2008 by vadim zavalishin , 3 years befor diva
https://www.native-instruments.com/en/r ... show/5345/
Eyeball exchanging
Soul calibrating ..frequencies

Post Reply

Return to “u-he”