It is currently Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:23 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 174 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Author Message
Post subject:
Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:52 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 10:20 am
Posts: 1369
Location: Ohio
johnny stecchino wrote:
Anyboby going to NAMM this year? We are planning to attend.

Ciao,
Johnny.


No, not to Anaheim this year. We have two shows that weekend, but most likely to Nashville.

_________________
Tony Houston

Image


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject: fender cyber foot controller discontinued
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:55 am
Offline
Hobbyist
Hobbyist

Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:22 am
Posts: 1
I emailed fender customer relations telling them most sites say the unit is discontinued here is the reply:

"Unfortunately, this is true, the Cyber Foot controller is no longer available, and there is no plans for a new model."


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:54 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:03 pm
Posts: 107
Too bad, I wonder how long before they discontinue the CT. I'm hoping they release a better version of the CT
Here's how I think they could improve the CT, if they really want to kick butt !
1. Have the input (guitar output) going directly into the preamp tubes, just like in a real tube amp. Then you can overdrive the preamp tubes, instead of just causing clipping on the chip that converts your guitar's signal to 16 bit digital as soon as it gets into the amp. Everyone now knows that 16 bit audio doesn't cut the mustard anymore, & might explain why the CT cannot reproduce the beautiful clean sound of a good ol' Fender tube amp. There's a loss that occurs, I call it a loss of character.
2. All digital audio in the CT should be 24-bit, or better still 32 bit or 64 bit digital audio. Watch out for who'll be using them when that happens.

That's my complaint about my CT, the 16-bit audio.
Some people say " but all music CD's are 16-bit", but they must also realize that high definition audio kicks 16-bit CD's butt ,without question.

If Fender doesn't do it, somone else will wake up & do it.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 10:41 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:53 pm
Posts: 483
Location: usa
I can't say I support the opinion that 16 bits is somehow an inadequate choice. 16 bits represents 65,536 levels, 24 bits represents 16,777,216 levels, human hear hearing is logarithmic and the low levels drop off quite fast.

As a point of comparison, the very best vinyl records and turntables (the studio stuff or millionaire line of audio gear) got 40dB or a ratio of 10,000 to 1 - that was totally analog equipment. When you factor in analog noise, well, guess what, 16 bits is more than adequate. All things held equal, going to 24 bits would be dominated by "thermal noise". The only possible advantage is a wider dynamic range, but again, once the signal begins to compete with the noise floor, there is no advantage.

By the way, it possible to reduce the noise by using low impedance, high current design (to reduce KTB noise). But this is quite expensive and I doubt the public would pay for it.

I am assuming of course, human hearing essentially brick walls around 20KHz, although some can actually go to 24KHz. Most humans, its about 16KHz. So, input sampling frequency might be another parameter of interest, essentially more is better, but beyond 96KHz, pretty useless. Output sampling is another matter, more is indeed better, but beyond 500KHz, again, pretty useless. The "trick" of course, is the selection of the D/A converter - it has to have the dynamic range to match the number of bits and keep the noise floor down. As for the power amp section, ultra clean, flat, wide-bandwidth, high power amps are easy to design - the trick however, is the D/A converter dynamic range and it's noise floor.

If anyone is interested, here is a reasonably good on-line reference: http://www.dspguide.com/CH22.PDF . It is the basis of good audio design, it explains well what the human ear and mind percieve as "high fidelity". The rest is digital signal processing, real-time software, and electronics design - electrical engineering territory.

As for the circuit topology, the CT/SE do have the ability to switch between tube preamp and solid state preamp. Making everything go through tubes may not be so smart as it cuts verstility and the obvious back up to tube failure.

I can't say I support tubes, I would urge any future designers to use solid state tube emulation, much more reliable and cost effective (I understand this might be heresy from a marketing POV). With today's design tools, this should be quite feasible.

As for tone, I would have to disagree, and rather strongly at that. The CT/SE tones are indeed there. They were hard to find mainly because of the built-in presets. But now that I have access to the entire amp (because of the software), it is easy to experiment and find the tones. BTW, I am selling my 65TRRI and going SE exclusive - I never use the 65TRRI. I personally find the tones coming out of my SE much better better sounding than the 65TRRI. To each his own I suppose.

If Fender rolls out a third edition (TE?), I suppose we'll produce a TE version too. As for the foot controller, it depends if the "TE" supports such a device or if Fender would offer one - although it makes a whole lot of sense if Fender did. If Fender is real clever, I would suppose they could package a "TE", a new foot controller, and software as one purchase rather than bits and pieces. This of course might make us reassess, but maybe we can produce a better product too!

caio,
johnny.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:37 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:03 pm
Posts: 107
I remember reading numerous times that various musicians such as Neil Young did not like CD audio because they just do not sound as good as good quality vinyl. So I compared them to see if they were correct or just talking. They are obviously correct.
Let's not muddy the discussion by saying that the vinyl quality goes down with every playing, we already know that, & that is not the point here.
None of your discussion changes the fact that there is an audible loss of quality when 16 bit audio is used.
I can hear the difference & anyone with good hearing will hear the difference if they do an A-B comparison. Can you hear any difference between 16-bit CDs and DVD Audio players and Super Audio CD players ?

Borrowed this from a site on the net:

The key to this question is the difference between a digital and an
analog recording. Natural sound is by definition analog.
When a CD recording is created, this analog is sound is digitized. To
do this, they take a lot of snapshots of the analog sound. For a CD
recording they take 44,100 snapshots in a minute. These snapshots are
then converted to digital information with a certain precision. For a
CD recording this precision is 16 bits which means that every one of
the 44,100 snapshots needs to be converted into one of the 65,536
(2^16) possible values.

You can probably see where I am going: by definition a digital
recording doesn't include all the sound information. You could
visualize a CD recording as a really large chest with a lot of
drawers. Because the number of snapshots that are taken are not
infinite (the maximum is 44,100 per minute), the process of taking
snapshots results in the loss of information. Information is further
lost because each of these snapshots must be made to fit in one of the
65,536 drawers of the chest.

A record player which plays LP?s is strictly analog. A vinyl record
has a groove carved into it that mirrors the original sound's
waveform. The record player than transforms this groove to an analogue
sound signal which can be fed into an amplifier.
In this process, no information can be lost. No snapshots need to be
taken and the sound doesn't need be converted to one of the possible
65,536 values. There basically is an infinite number of 'snapshots'
and 'possible values'. Therefore vinyl recording sound richer than CD
recordings (as long as you have a decent vinyl record player).

Be aware that recent DVD Audio players and Super Audio CD players come
closer to vinyl recordings as they have a much larger number of
possible snapshots in one minute (up to 192,000) and because these
snapshots can be converted to a larger number of possible values (up
to 16,777,216 possible values, or 24 bit).


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:58 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:03 pm
Posts: 107
Here's another explanation of the loss.

[url] http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question487.htm

This applies not only to the difference between analog vinyl & 16bit digital CD, but also applies to converting any natural analog sound to 16-bit digital.

It's not just a personal opinion, it is fact. Hope this helps all the tone lovers out there who are as fussy as I am.

DVD Audio is currently 24-bit. Played thru the 24-bit DACs in my Yamaha & Integra receivers, it sounds better than my CDs, with none of the noise you referred to.


Hmm. Sorry, Guess I need to learn how to post a link in this forum. Just copy & paste this into your browser's address bar:

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question487.htm


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 2:35 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 7:25 am
Posts: 356
The reason that I was told why Fender made the CT SE might bear looking at here.

When the question about any "updates", or "upgrades", for the SE came up - it was pointed out that the SE had all the updates and upgrades, plus some, that were available for the original CT. So the Second Edition has everything already - and is therefore considered "complete".

It is already in a class of it's own. No matter what some modeling amp companies may say - their product just isn't close to the CT SE. And the reason for that was explained in the DVD that came with the original CT, and was uploaded to youtube (I think that's the right place). It's a totally different concept from the "modeling" amp 'snapshot' technology. When you watch the video, they say it is rewiring itself to the actual amp. (and, YES, I would believe the people that make the amp over some faceless trouble maker on the Internet that claims something different) And, I think I'm correct in this, those old amps it is re-wiring to were analog amps that we so love and hold dear to our hearts. So, how many "bits" did those have and use?? I don't know - but, Oh Man!, they sure sounded great! Now the CT SE does them even better!

I still have my TRRI and DRRI. I can, and do, pull them out from time to time to compare the sounds. Yes, the CT SE can give that same sound - but it can also sound even better than them too.

The proof, and the point, is in the sound you hear - not in what some machine can show you on a screen. And I really, really, love what I hear coming out of my CT SE. So much so, that if all my music equipment were destroyed, or stolen, I would get another CT SE (as soon as I could!) - but not the others, since the CT SE does them better.

Now the Cyber Commander editor has been developed that makes a great amp even better. To call it an editor isn't adequate either. I use it everyday as a "controller" for the amp. Yes, it is a great editor too, but it does so much more. It should come with every amp sold - that's my feelings.

I hope they continue to make and sell the Cyber Twin SE. If they did take it away and come out with a Third Edition - what would a third edition add that I can hear? (that's in my hearing range) I'm not real sure that I can tell the difference in any of those "bit" things. Usually if I can adjust volume and tone, I can find "the sound" that I like.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:21 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:03 pm
Posts: 107
Easy now.....
I wouldn't call differences of opinion & technical discussions faceless troublemaking.
I like my CT but see areas where it could be improved.
I've certainly shared enough presets to illustrate that.
Have a nice day.
:)


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:29 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:53 pm
Posts: 483
Location: usa
The quoted article is quite misleading. It does not account for noise, dynamic range, human hearing, the listening room, sampling frequency, and numerous other digital signal processing considerations, not to mention the A/D and D/A converters. I'll try once more to explain:

First of all, noise is present everywhere, in the listening room, in all amplifiers and electronic networks, our own ears, and in outer space as electromagnetic radiation. The dynamic range of a product is determined by its design (amps, our ears). The effective signal-to-noise ratio is determined by how it's used (in a noisy room for example).

Humans also have a dynamic range. The lowest perceivable sound pressure deviation from ambient atmospheric pressure is about 20 micropascals at mid-range frequencies. This is 0 dB-SPL. Arguably the highest deviation that we can be exposed to without permanent damage is about 200 Pascals (140 dB-SPL), making the dynamic range of the human listener about 140 dB (this true in a narrow range of freqeuncies, not across 20Hz to 20KHz).

Now, before you think that an audio system's dynamic range must exceed that of the human auditory system, consider that even the quietest listening rooms have ambient noise levels at least 20 dB above the threshold of hearing. At the other end, we become quite uncomfortable at sustained SPL above 100 dB-SPL, with short term peaks exceeding this by 20 dB or so. So, if we knock 20 dB off of each end, the required dynamic range for a high-quality playback system is around 100 dB.

The dynamic range of a digital product is determined by the length of the digital word used to represent each audio sample. This is the “bit depth” of the signal, and the dynamic range can be approximated by 20log(#bits). This makes an 8-bit system about 48 dB. Each additional bit adds 6 dB of dynamic range. The standard for CD audio, 16 bits, has a dynamic range of 96 dB, which is very close to the magic 100 dB that fully exploits the human auditory system in most applications.

Most digital products today use a 24-bit word length, which yields a numerical range of about 144 dB for resolving and producing analog signals. In practice this is greatly reduced by the noise level of the analog signals on each end, so the realized dynamic range is closer to 100 dB than it is to 144 dB. Practical issues constrain the available dynamic range to lower values than the digital word length affords.

Even though 16-bit digital audio is adequate for many applications, the fact that it can be higher can offer a marginal, and in most cases, a miniscule gain in perceived quality. The positive effect of increasing word length (adding more bits) results in an increase of “foot room” (the floor) rather than “head room” (the peak) for the audio signal. 24-bit digital audio essentially surpasses human hearing. Current technology is at this threshold in practical terms - the required semiconductors and processing power is available.

However, it is noted that most concerts (classical music) rarely exceed 80dB dynamic range. Most analog amplifiers rarely exceed 60 dB dynamic range. Going beyond 16 bit processing can be considered quite adequate to the task of making a fine guitar amplifier. 24-bit exceeds human hearing, the concert hall, and all analog amplifiers.

A note about sampling: the Nyquist sampling frequency is the theoretical limit; in practice all signals are oversampled due to the fact that brick wall filters do not exist. As for analog reconstruction, the practical limit is the dynamic range required in the entire reproduction chain including the listening room, about a 100dB. 16 bits are indeed adequate although an argument can be made for 24 bit particularly if the end consumer perceives a benefit.

As for the prior arguments given in an attempt to explain 16 bits vs 24 bits, what it means to the CT, SE (TE?) and so on, and rather than render a harsh critique and risk flaming, I would suggest further study of the various papers in the Journal of the Society of Audio Engineers and obtain the learned and quantifiable results on this matter.

As for the CT-SE, it is arguably the finest guitar amp ever made by far.

Ciao,
Johnny.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:57 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:03 pm
Posts: 107
You are supply good & valuable information, but it doesn't explain why 24-bit DVD audio delivers an audibly higher quality audio, not only to my ears but also to the recording industry which is moving towards that format.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 7:20 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:53 pm
Posts: 483
Location: usa
I can't really offer an explanation except to suggest the following:

The source information may simply not be the same for 24 bit as it is for the 16 bit despite that same cd/dvd name, label etc... For example, the source data prior to 24-bit sampling may be THX enhanced, might have less noise, the source material may simply be better for the 24-bit dvd than the source used for the 16-bit cd. That has nothing to do with the number of bits used (except for marketing & sales...).

To run the experiment properly, identical source data would have to used to produce 16-bit and 24-bit cds or dvds (assuming lossless encoding for both). Identical playback systems would have to used. The same listening room would also have to be used. Only under such calibrated conditions can any meaningful conclusions be drawn. This is what the Society of Audio Engineers does and this is how they drew their conclusions.

I cannot offer any other explanation than the above, and I cannot claim that my supposition even applies to your case or why you perceive better quality. But the physics, math, engineering are invariant - the principles apply no matter how many bits are used (or not).

ciao,
johnny.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 9:41 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 7:25 am
Posts: 356
LesK wrote:
Easy now.....
I wouldn't call differences of opinion & technical discussions faceless troublemaking.
I like my CT but see areas where it could be improved.
I've certainly shared enough presets to illustrate that.
Have a nice day.
:)


Maybe "faceless troublemaking" was a bad choice of words. And wasn't meant necessarily for your comments, but for many that have attacked the CT and CT SE without just cause. (Peace, OK?) However you did strike a nerve with the remarks that I understood as being "negative" about the CT SE.

Someone that hasn't had the pleasure of owning and playing the CT SE could read a negative comment about the amp and think it didn't sound good. When the opposite is true - it sounds great! There are some out there that believe those negative comments without going to the trouble of checking it out for themselves.

Not being an electronics whiz myself, this techno talk makes me want it boiled down - how does it sound - good or bad. Fortunately, I already own the CT SE and don't have to guess if all that "bit" stuff means anything negative about the sound. I already know it sounds GREAT! Not just good - but GREAT!!.

But some people either don't bother to listen to one, or just listen for a few minutes. And, some of those with a preconceived "negative" idea already formed before even trying one out. And it's really their loss - they just missed out on the best amp available.

John was explaining something to me one time about how the "bits" affected a setting in one of the effects. I, of course, didn't understand completely about the "bits", and how they affected things. But, the part of his explanation after that, that said something to the effect of, the adjustment was so fine that you couldn't hear the difference between the two - now, that I understood. And I checked it out with my amp and my ears - and you know what - he was right!

So, I come back to - if it sounds good, it is good! And, If I can't hear a difference, then the difference isn't worth worrying about. Just in my opinion, of course.

(whew - I'm beginning to see, and appreciate, why Fender doesn't get involved in posting info, and opinions, about their products. Sometimes the best thing to say and do is nothing. - but then, .... NAAA ... I'm not made that way! :D )


P E A C E and Merry Christmas Y'All !!! :D :D :D


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 11:10 am
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:03 pm
Posts: 107
Everything is cool & I sincerely wish you & everyone else the best of the season.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:37 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:53 pm
Posts: 483
Location: usa
and the very best of the season to all!

btw, here in Montreal, it's snowing, about 6-7 inches from what i can tell. traffic is snarled, roads are slick, it's cold, but oh so dreamland pretty.

gotta go do some shoveling... looking forward to NAMM...
ciao,
johnny.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:30 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:53 pm
Posts: 483
Location: usa
we'll soon have Cyber Commander available on CD to complement the download (for anyone wanting a CD).

Counting down the days to NAMM!

Ciao,
johnny.


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 174 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: