riley@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley) (05/10/90)
In article <1990Apr29.231644.11461@uunet!unhd> jwn712@unhd.unh.edu.UUCP (Jason W Nyberg) writes: >Flame me mercilessly if I am wrong, but the amiga uses 8-bit sound right? Right so far. >I want to see 16 bit sound now. then we could have true cd quality sound as >well as everything else we love about amy. (how much of a difference would >the extra 8 bits make? Not enough to make it CD quality. 16 bits at 14 KHz won't do, and it's going to be awhile before we see the custom chips running at 44.1 KHz. -Dan Riley (riley@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu, cornell!batcomputer!riley) -Wilson Lab, Cornell University
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (05/10/90)
In article <10232@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> riley@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley) writes: >Not enough to make it CD quality. 16 bits at 14 KHz won't do, and it's >going to be awhile before we see the custom chips running at 44.1 KHz. Well, as the custom chips run just a bit faster (oh, couple hundred?), I don't think it'll be that long :) Actually, if they do the new custom chips *right* (twice data path, twice speed), 16 bit 44KHz sound is just about where the new hardware would spec in... Summary: I think you made a boo-boo. KHz, not MHz... :) :) >-Dan Riley (riley@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu, cornell!batcomputer!riley) >-Wilson Lab, Cornell University David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu "Excuse my ignorance, but I've been run over by my train of thought." -me
lshaw@walt.cc.utexas.edu (logan shaw) (05/10/90)
In article <10232@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> riley@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley) writes: >Not enough to make it CD quality. 16 bits at 14 KHz won't do, and it's >going to be awhile before we see the custom chips running at 44.1 KHz. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I hope so! Considering they already run at 7 _MEGA_hertz, that would be quite a slowdown! 44.1 KHz 16 bit stereo sound translates to taking 176K off the bus a second. Since the bus is 16 bits, 88200 fetches must occur a second. My calculations say that would take about 1-2% of the bandwidth of the bus. ============================================================================ "The machine minded material man Logan Shaw desperately dreams of a brand new sedan. lshaw@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Wlll he expect long lasting gain ======================== from a toy that will race then rust in the rain?" - elim Hall, Things Break
riley@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley) (05/10/90)
In article <29700@ut-emx.UUCP> lshaw@walt.cc.utexas.edu (logan shaw) writes: >In article <10232@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> riley@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley) writes: >>Not enough to make it CD quality. 16 bits at 14 KHz won't do, and it's >>going to be awhile before we see the custom chips running at 44.1 KHz. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >I hope so! Considering they already run at 7 _MEGA_hertz, that would be quite >a slowdown! 44.1 KHz 16 bit stereo sound translates to taking 176K off the bus >a second. Since the bus is 16 bits, 88200 fetches must occur a second. My >calculations say that would take about 1-2% of the bandwidth of the bus. Yes, that was a reallly stupid bit of phrasing. (Flame retardant: Don't flame for me for calling myself stupid...I do it all the time, and a few flames won't stop me :-) All I meant is that current chips don't do 44 KHz audio, and therefore wouldn't do CD quality sound even if they were upped to 16 bits. There obviously isn't any clock or bus problems, just a bit of work on the DAC's and the DMA slots and such. Should have been 28 KHz anyway instead of 14 KHz, since that's what the current chips do. I should be more careful when I'm being picky... -Dan (who's too embarrassed too include his address)