[Argha]

The main aim of this group is to discuss the Scientific aspects of the hobby to a newbie. Anything science/engineering related, from Clocks in DAC to Feedback Loops in AMP, from Impedance Curve of transducers to Downsampling Methods: every discussion is welcomed here.

 

[gregorio]

Welcome Duggu. It might be a good idea to define a bit more precisely what you mean by “influencing” and “any aspect of the audio chain”. This is because a whole range of things can influence almost any part of the audio chain but the only thing that ultimately matters in the digital portion of the chain is the analogue signal that comes out of the DAC and the only thing that ultimately matters about the analogue portion of the chain is the acoustic sound that comes out of the transducers. So, gravity, humidity, dust and all sorts of things can influence aspects of the audio chain and we could have a lengthy discussion on the construction of the cases for DACs for instance, or numerous things can influence the digital signal, such as the OS of the server, the internet connection, the digital audio protocol, the noise of computers/CPUs, etc., but virtually none of it will make it’s way into the analogue output.

“Anything engineering related” is also problematic, for two reasons: Firstly, we don’t necessarily know a great deal about the engineering, we generally know the basic scientific principles behind what’s going on in the specific bits of audio equipment but the exact engineering is typically proprietary and not publicly available, for obvious reasons. Secondly, “anything engineering related” could include the entirety of sound/music engineering and virtually all studio equipment (mics, ADCs, mixers, DAWs, effects processors, etc.) because obviously there’s the audio chain before the content is distributed to consumers and also obviously, that content is the biggest “influence” on consumers’ audio playback chains.

G

 

[Argha]

Welcome Duggu. It might be a good idea to define a bit more precisely what you mean by “influencing” and “any aspect of the audio chain”. This is because a whole range of things can influence almost any part of the audio chain but the only thing that ultimately matters in the digital portion of the chain is the analogue signal that comes out of the DAC and the only thing that ultimately matters about the analogue portion of the chain is the acoustic sound that comes out of the transducers. So, gravity, humidity, dust and all sorts of things can influence aspects of the audio chain and we could have a lengthy discussion on the construction of the cases for DACs for instance, or numerous things can influence the digital signal, such as the OS of the server, the internet connection, the digital audio protocol, the noise of computers/CPUs, etc., but virtually none of it will make it’s way into the analogue output.

“Anything engineering related” is also problematic, for two reasons: Firstly, we don’t necessarily know a great deal about the engineering, we generally know the basic scientific principles behind what’s going on in the specific bits of audio equipment but the exact engineering is typically proprietary and not publicly available, for obvious reasons. Secondly, “anything engineering related” could include the entirety of sound/music engineering and virtually all studio equipment (mics, ADCs, mixers, DAWs, effects processors, etc.) because obviously there’s the audio chain before the content is distributed to consumers and also obviously, that content is the biggest “influence” on consumers’ audio playback chains.

G

Hi, so glad you asked.

Influencing in the sense anything that is working in order to produce the music/audio that we are hearing. For example - Feedback Loops ( I would like to know how they are implemented and used in modern amplifiers by someone who knows his stuff in simple words. ) If you want to take another example in Software Realm - Convolution would be a great topic since the research papers are so complex to understand, articles by people - with simplified constructions should be great.

And yes, things like Acoustic Impedence, Pressure Level all of these are included since in Acoustic Engineering they make students study those in great detail. Things like galvanized metals and EMF interference are extremely ignored topics too in personal audio.

S/W wise - I agree, I might've to change the name to something because, anything related to digital Compression/Modulation ( IDK What protocol are you talking about but if you're talking about things like Wasapi/Direct stream - discussion about them should be interesting too ).

The second paragraph of your writing is why I made this thread. I am a CS student, venturing into AI Engineering. I was never good at Physics/Chemistry but still people like Cameron Oatley and Sean Olive inspired me so much , that it never became a problem.

There's a saying "A slice of information is more harmful than no information." - I just want to debunk that for anyone who is watching this thread by providing some deep understanding of the engineering aspects ( Audio is made by engineers only so it's the only term I could use ).

Your suggestion is welcomed, and looking forward to getting more tips from you.

 

[gregorio]

There's a saying "A slice of information is more harmful than no information." - I just want to debunk that for anyone who is watching this thread by providing some deep understanding of the engineering aspects ( Audio is made by engineers only so it's the only term I could use ).

Indeed, that saying does have a lot of truth to it but be careful because unintuitively, it can also apply to gaining “some deep understanding of the engineering aspects”! That seems wrong on the face of it, so what do I mean by this?

Take my case as an example, I’ve been a professional audio engineer for almost 30 years, for 6 of those years I was a senior lecturer and course leader in music/sound engineering at a UK university, so I know the subject well and have a deep understanding. However, I only have a deep understanding of some aspects, other aspects I may only have a relatively superficial understanding. For example, I know a fair amount about acoustics, I had to teach/explain Sabine’s formula, absorption coefficients, room modes, initial reflections, etc., but I’ve worked with professional acousticians, a couple of who were world class and compared to them, my knowledge/understanding is relatively superficial, not at all “deep”. Likewise your other points, I have a basic understanding of what convolution is, I’ve taught the specific use of convolution reverbs but I have very little understanding of the underlying programming, superficial at best. In all my years I’ve met and/or worked with numerous people who did have a deep understanding of these types of specialist areas of audio; acousticians, software developers, digital and analogue hardware designers, microphone and speaker designers, etc., and in my experience, the depth of their understanding in one specific audio area is virtually always inversely proportional to their understanding in others. So IMHO, it’s about identifying the important areas, prioritising and gaining a superficial or somewhat deeper understanding accordingly. Although of course, the prioritisation might vary somewhat from person to person.

There’s only only one or two people on this subforum who have more than superficial understanding of say the programming of convolution and even then, it’s probably not much more than a superficial understanding. So in some/many cases other, far more specialist forums would be better. Best way is probably to ask some specific questions and then we’ll let you know if the depth of understanding you’re after would require a more specialist forum.

G

 

[VNandor]

If you are interested in audio DSP and to some extent SW engineering, I think one of the better online forums to read is kvraudio, specifically the subforum for plugin the sellers, not plugin buyers. There are some people posting there who can actually make a living from programming VST plugins.

 

[Argha]

Indeed, that saying does have a lot of truth to it but be careful because unintuitively, it can also apply to gaining “some deep understanding of the engineering aspects”! That seems wrong on the face of it, so what do I mean by this?

Take my case as an example, I’ve been a professional audio engineer for almost 30 years, for 6 of those years I was a senior lecturer and course leader in music/sound engineering at a UK university, so I know the subject well and have a deep understanding. However, I only have a deep understanding of some aspects, other aspects I may only have a relatively superficial understanding. For example, I know a fair amount about acoustics, I had to teach/explain Sabine’s formula, absorption coefficients, room modes, initial reflections, etc., but I’ve worked with professional acousticians, a couple of who were world class and compared to them, my knowledge/understanding is relatively superficial, not at all “deep”. Likewise your other points, I have a basic understanding of what convolution is, I’ve taught the specific use of convolution reverbs but I have very little understanding of the underlying programming, superficial at best. In all my years I’ve met and/or worked with numerous people who did have a deep understanding of these types of specialist areas of audio; acousticians, software developers, digital and analogue hardware designers, microphone and speaker designers, etc., and in my experience, the depth of their understanding in one specific audio area is virtually always inversely proportional to their understanding in others. So IMHO, it’s about identifying the important areas, prioritising and gaining a superficial or somewhat deeper understanding accordingly. Although of course, the prioritisation might vary somewhat from person to person.

There’s only only one or two people on this subforum who have more than superficial understanding of say the programming of convolution and even then, it’s probably not much more than a superficial understanding. So in some/many cases other, far more specialist forums would be better. Best way is probably to ask some specific questions and then we’ll let you know if the depth of understanding you’re after would require a more specialist forum.

G

I am so glad that you choose to comment on this thread. I am always eager to learn from my seniors.

The word deep is seriously kind of stupid of me to include. There is no end off course.

I totally understood your point. I am changing few things about the forum then. Thanks for your concern, looking forward to learning from you in the future.

 

[Argha]

If you are interested in audio DSP and to some extent SW engineering, I think one of the better online forums to read is kvraudio, specifically the subforum for plugin the sellers, not plugin buyers. There are some people posting there who can actually make a living from programming VST plugins.

Will look into it. Is it a specialized forum for DSP devs only ?

 

[gregorio]

The word deep is seriously kind of stupid of me to include. There is no end off course.

I wouldn’t really call it “stupid” but it was ambiguous enough to make answering difficult.

Regarding your changed title and OP: It would be relatively easy to argue that this whole of this subforum already does what you are asking for! Although the title possibly indicates some very broad responses, rather than the highly specific areas you mention in your OP. As an example, you mention “clocks in DACs”. This is a very highly specific and specialised area and while it’s often discussed within the audiophile community, because it’s frequently a feature of audiophile marketing, it is largely a “red herring”, a non-issue.

IMHO, it might be better to start with (as you stated “newbie”) the very basics and the broadest areas, rather than going straight to the most highly specific areas, such as clocking, downsamplers, etc. For example:

Engineer types: The role of Sound/Music Engineers, Electrical or Electronics Engineers, Software Engineers, etc. And then you could ask about engineers within those categories, for example, Recording Engineers, Mix Engineers or Mastering Engineers.

The basics of digital audio: Why it was invented, what it achieves and the fundamentals of how it works. Only then can you move on to specifics.

The basics of analogue audio: The basics of what it is and how it works. The basics of transducers (microphones, speakers, HPs and IEMS), etc., and by extension, the basics of sound and acoustics.

Psychoacoustics: The science of how we hear. The physiology of our ears, the thresholds of hearing and how our brains process the information picked-up by our ears to produce hearing perception.

G

 

[VNandor]

Will look into it. Is it a specialized forum for DSP devs only ?

kvraudio mainly makes money by letting sellers to sell their plugins to potential buyers on their site. The forum is there to let people discuss plugins and related topics ranging from analog synth hardware to writing music. The subforum I linked is for DSP and plugin development. Anyone can register and post there but that specific subforum mostly used by people who develop VST plugins.