And the 44.056 KHz sampling rate which results from the drop frame NTSC rate is what the Sony PCM-F1 (and other PCM to video units) uses. I still have a pair I use for digital stereo links around campus where I do not want the unpredictable latency, burstiness or factors out of my control which in general which is what you get using a web-AoIP link. Just run a piece of RG-6 and voila! There are much better ways to do it these days, but the PCM-F1 link has worked great for over 30 years, and it is paid for. I use a a Jensen video isolator to break any CM loops.
Amazingly the video output amps in the F1 can drive many hundreds of feet of RG-6 with no sync drop due to attenuation issues. This is hardly the usage Sony intended...
Cheers,
Howie
If there’s timing issues with the leading edge transients due to the brick wall filter it could be measured this way?
Wavelet transform - Wikipedia
Also a missing leading edge transient can also make the music sound slower....I’ve experienced it.
seems to be a casual disinterest in what looks to be the only real way to measure what’s been discussed here? Something I read mentioned wavelet transform might not being accepted by some is that it?
Last edited:
I already posted a picture using ordinary transforms, nothing there I found exciting. Appealing to something you apparently know nothing about is not a good way to advance the discussion.
Fourier transform doesn’t get the timing aspect across as well as the wavelet transform from what I’m reading about it?
Without being too negative, Bob, I think you really need to get a few lectures of this under your belt before jumping into wavelet transforms. There's a huge gap in understanding that needs bridging before that level of conversation.
Signals and Systems | MIT OpenCourseWare
Signals and Systems | MIT OpenCourseWare
Reposted from earlier in this thread because it seems apt once again in response to this...
I think you will find this can be attributed to (at least) the bispectrum being the foundation of our aural perception, rather than our hearing extending beyond 20kHz and our brains exceeding the Uncertainty Principle (or at least its equivalent in the time-frequency plane).
The ear and brain functioning as a (third order) bispectral analyser does not preclude the useful application of more easily represented, conventional (second order) spectral analyses, however, just that we might consider a dynamic trade-off between time and frequency resolution somewhat commensurate with the convergence evident in our perceptual apparatus.
In such analyses, there might even be found measures that identify oft-reported differences between transient and steady-state audible phenomena. Ohm's Acoustical Law (that the ear is insensitive to phase), for example, might only be an approximation, albeit a very useful one in most cases.
DPH, I’m not saying I understand it......just wondering why nobody measures a time/frequency issue with it as that seems to be what it does?
How about interpreting that into English there soundbloke? 😕😀
How about interpreting that into English there soundbloke? 😕😀
Last edited:
Why would there be a missing "leading edge" transient? So it sounded like the drummer slowed down?
John is talking Fs of 40 kHz so an 80kHz sampling frequency.
Partially set by the limitations of the day.
dave
I think the technical term is slew rate distortion but it was just me digging around to find something I heard in my system awhile back. From what I can tell slew rate disturbance is also somehow tied into this whole brick wall filtering?
Fs = sampllng frequency. Sampling at 384 ksps is basic stuff today.
Sometime this place feels like a retirement home :-D
//
Sometime this place feels like a retirement home :-D
//
At this point you really need to understand the basis of the terms you are using.
if I knew what I was talking about I wouldn’t be here...so I digress.
I only mentioned the slew rate thing because it kept popping up with digital brick wall filtering and how it’s tied to Nyquist limits etc.
btw....you fellers do see the question marks after I’m stating something.....means ‘I have no idea, is it at all relevant?’
I only mentioned the slew rate thing because it kept popping up with digital brick wall filtering and how it’s tied to Nyquist limits etc.
btw....you fellers do see the question marks after I’m stating something.....means ‘I have no idea, is it at all relevant?’
Last edited:
Bob,
If you use the term 'rise-time' rather than 'slew rate,' that's probably closer to what people are trying to talk about in the context you mentioned. Be my guess anyway.
If you use the term 'rise-time' rather than 'slew rate,' that's probably closer to what people are trying to talk about in the context you mentioned. Be my guess anyway.
