On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Folderol <folderol@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Isn't all this "A+B=C" stuff (or A*x+B*y=C as one person stated) >> actually begging the question a bit? Are we certain that every DAW >> implements their mixer that way? Isn't it possible that some might >> try to model analog mixers to some degree? >> >> I'm not arguing either way; I have no clue. > > I think you'll find that fundamentally an analogue mixer *is* A+B=C precisely. the "magic" in analog circuits does not come from the way it adds two in-range voltages, which is precisely as stated above. take 0.1V, add 0.18V, get 0.28V. it really is that simple (we're ignoring temporal effects that are similar for actual air pressure waves and thus not relevant to a discussion of artifacts caused by recording and playback). the magic comes, to the extent that its actually magic (let alone actually desirable) from the way it does more complex processing, such as compression, limiting and EQ, and also the way that some media will store the result when C is "out of range". even these can be replicated to any arbitrary accuracy if you're willing to spend the CPU cycles on it. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
