English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Coders > Coders. Asm / Hardware

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 12 February 2021, 09:18   #221
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 48
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by orangespider View Post
edit: The quality loss isn't constant across AUDxPER values, the higher the AUDxPER value is the less quality loss will occur.
This is what I suspected, hence the need for testing with lower frequencies.
meynaf is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 09:41   #222
Thomas Richter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
This is what I suspected, hence the need for testing with lower frequencies.
..and the more aliasing you get. Obviously.
Thomas Richter is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 10:02   #223
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 48
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Richter View Post
..and the more aliasing you get. Obviously.
On the PC, yes.
meynaf is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 11:50   #224
Thomas Richter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,045
No, always. "Unproven Nyquist theorem".
Thomas Richter is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 12:30   #225
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 48
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Richter View Post
No, always. "Unproven Nyquist theorem".
Maybe always, but PC will resample at 44100, Amiga at 3546895. So less on one side.
This has nothing to do with nyquist theorem. You test uses 1/100th of sampling frequency, not 1/2.
Anyway, aliasing due to used frequency is OT. This is about 14-bit. Your attempt here is a red herring.
meynaf is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 13:38   #226
Thorham
Computer Nerd

Thorham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Rotterdam/Netherlands
Age: 44
Posts: 3,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
Maybe always, but PC will resample at 44100
Yes, but does this affect the amount of quantization noise?
Thorham is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 13:50   #227
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 48
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorham View Post
Yes, but does this affect the amount of quantization noise?
One can not resample without adding noise. The used method only changes the amount.
meynaf is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 14:03   #228
Thorham
Computer Nerd

Thorham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Rotterdam/Netherlands
Age: 44
Posts: 3,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
One can not resample without adding noise. The used method only changes the amount.
When I resample to 28 khz using SOX I don't hear any quantization noise, so is it relevant?
Thorham is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 14:25   #229
roondar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorham View Post
When I resample to 28 khz using SOX I don't hear any quantization noise, so is it relevant?
It's the age old question: what is more important?
What people perceive or what can be measured?
roondar is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 14:30   #230
Thorham
Computer Nerd

Thorham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Rotterdam/Netherlands
Age: 44
Posts: 3,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by roondar View Post
It's the age old question: what is more important?
What people perceive or what can be measured?
Generally speaking measuring is better. In this case it seems to be about quantization noise, so using the ear might be good enough.
Thorham is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 14:38   #231
roondar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorham View Post
Generally speaking measuring is better. In this case it seems to be about quantization noise, so using the ear might be good enough.
Well, that entirely depends on your goal I'd say. But, thinking about it, that's a discussion that may not be entirely suitable for this thread.

Anyway, a bit more on topic: my understanding is that several methods for record/playing back digital sounds and that at least one of them (DSD IIRC) works by pushing the (in DSD's case large amounts of) quantization noise so far upwards in the spectrum it essentially becomes entirely irrelevant for what we hear. You can still measure it, but you won't ever hear it. This may (in a far more limited way) be what's going on here as well with Paula and it's high frequency "resampling".
roondar is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 14:53   #232
Don_Adan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Warsaw/Poland
Age: 52
Posts: 1,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by orangespider View Post
Did anyone ever try to compensate for the delay between the channels during 14bit playback?

AFAIK all the players just assume the channels are played at the same time, and this leads to huge quality loss. If you're trying to play an audio at AUDxPER 80, you get pretty huge quality loss. Here is a worst case scenario example (I'm using 14bit unsigned values to demonstrate more easily):
sample 1: 63/16384
sample 2: 64/16384
sample 3: 63/16384

audio channels:
0 at volume 64
3 at volume 1

expected result:
cycles 0-79: 63/16384
cycles 80-159: 64/16384
cycles 160-239: 63/16384

actual results:
cycles: 0-11: 0/16384
cycles: 12-79: 63/16384
cycles: 80-91: 127/16384
cycles: 92-159: 64/16384
cycles: 160-171: 0/16384
cycles: 172-239: 63/16384

This is the worst case scenario, but this will always happen unless the subsequent values in channel 3 are same. The average error will lead to quality loss that results in a quality equivalent to:
left channel: 11.76 bits / sample
right channel: 13.34 bits / sample

Any further problems with the volume and audio hardware imperfections come after this, but this would be the highest quality even with hardware that does everything else perfectly.

edit: The quality loss isn't constant across AUDxPER values, the higher the AUDxPER value is the less quality loss will occur.
Do you tried to set different periods? Something like this:

Aud0Per = 128
Aud3Per = 125
Aud1Per = 128
Aud2Per = 127

Or maybe change interrupt source from Aud0 to Aud2 or Aud3? Jochen Hippel's mixing routine used originally Aud3 as interrupt source.
Don_Adan is offline  
Old 12 February 2021, 23:51   #233
Photon
Moderator

Photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Eksjö / Sweden
Posts: 4,948
I think it's good that quality of software audio output is questioned - some software may be old and we know more now and have better tools.

Noise.
I replied on the topic of noise sources, because they directly correlate to SNR and thus measurement (sampling) of bit resolution. Top measurements and tools are required to know which is which.

Certainly, ears are not good enough to say "this is 14-bit" or whatever bit. But a sound card released in 1999 or before is not the right way to measure it either. (However, if played from the source without relays, aliasing noise can be heard by human ears in quiet portions of normalized sounds - this is not the topic here.)

If there's any resampling in the chain from input or generation to output and measurement, this will raise the noise floor from the aliasing distortion that comes from resampling.

Volume.
Volume must be maximized at the source to determine the noise floor. If it's played at half volume, the noise floor will be doubled or more to maximize it at the measurement point. This means no adaptation to the level of the measuring device. A logging oscilloscope will measure at the output level given, not be susceptible to impedance differences, and has measurement accuracy in bits in the spec sheet.

Volume includes software. The Amiga doesn't have a way to control the analog amplifier. Any software that adjusts volume will scale it digitally, and this reduces the number of bits by math, since the Amiga doesn't have floating point DACs. Obviously it's assumed that the output is play at maximum volume, and then this paragraph is moot.

The volume could be doubled if stereo only uses 2/4 channels. Assuming no phase issues, the same sound could be played through both channels in Left, and vice versa. If not, the the possible volume output of the DAC is halved, increasing the noise floor and therefore reducing the number of bits measurable.

Phase.
If the test sounds are actually stereo and the two completely different waves are measured independently, and the same sound is not doubled up (to increase volume as per above) in Left and vice versa, there can be no phase issues exhibited by the Amiga since the source sounds are two independent sounds and measured independently.

If sounds in each stereo channel are modulated, the accuracy of modulation is chip internal, and calculations to generate the modulation wave must match.

Modulation.
Modulation is limited to 6 bits, and will not quite double the volume as if an 8-bit wave was played in both Left channels and vice versa, and thus give a more quiet output, directly translating to a higher noise floor.

If this modulation yields a certain resolution depends in the end on the resolution of the Amiga DAC data bus inputs. Whatever resolution they manage is the maximum possible (not necessarily output) resolution per channel or per combined stereo channel. The output is then subject to internal analog noise floors and measurement equipment, which further deducts from this resolution. But this is the max.

This is all there is to say on maximizing the production of bit resolution, in my mind.

Just as I think the topic is good, I think it's good to question how we measure and whether we measure the quality of software. Because it can lead to better software.

Last edited by Photon; 13 February 2021 at 00:09.
Photon is offline  
Old 13 February 2021, 13:56   #234
Thomas Richter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,045
So, here is an FFT based measurement (probably to the pleasure buggs). My major error in the previous release is that that I measured the amplitude and not the power, hence FFT based SNR measurements were off by a factor of two.


This is a windowed FFT with a Hamming window, and a small algorithm upfront that tries to minimize leakage by taking windows at the zero-crossing of the signals.



Other than that, the measurement results aren't substantially different. The Amiga is still at 36dB (a little bit less than with the previous time-domain based method), and the PC is at 60dB (worse than with the previous method, probably not astonishing as I'm not trying to remove phase jitter).


Anyhow, the math works. It doesn't matter whether you measure in the time domain or frequency domain. The Amiga output is substantially worse than the PC output.


Oh, before somebody asks, the output for the "perfect" input signal is 95.5dB, that is very close to the theoretical limit of ~96dB one would expect for a quantized signal.
Attached Files
File Type: zip testsin.zip (3.3 KB, 14 views)
Thomas Richter is offline  
Old 13 February 2021, 13:59   #235
Thomas Richter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
One can not resample without adding noise. The used method only changes the amount.

There is no resampling going on, except the resampling of the ADC I'm using for measurement, and which applies to both the PC and the Amiga signal. This resampling is unavoidable. You can see a little bit of aliasing noise in the high frequency of the residual signal if you measure the PC output, but that's by several magnitudes (~40dB) smaller than the errors of the Amiga output.


But, as always, everyone is invited to measure themselves.
Thomas Richter is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
IDE 40/44 pin adapter to work in Amiga 1200,a bit "dirty" hack. Possible? hda support.Hardware 4 11 September 2020 00:05
"Voices8" 8 Channel Soundtracker "DemoSongI" song - "This is the Amiga with 8 Voices" DemosongIHunter request.Music 44 27 October 2019 19:04
Question on audio settings: Should I use UAE "sinc" or OpenAL "4-point sync" or both? Dr.Venom support.FS-UAE 3 14 September 2017 08:22
Amiga Power "Games Massive" Audio Tracks twcustom project.TOSEC (amiga only) 4 21 July 2016 21:09
"Bit för bit" demo (Swedish TV-show, hard to find!) Ziaxx request.Demos 5 10 March 2009 18:38

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:22.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Page generated in 0.09940 seconds with 16 queries