Check figure 3... a bit down on the-age...
https://audioxpress.com/article/spe...ng-iec-60268-5-part-1-what-comes-next-and-why
//
https://audioxpress.com/article/spe...ng-iec-60268-5-part-1-what-comes-next-and-why
//
chatgpt is a data privacy nightmare if youve ever posted online you ought to be concerned:
https://theconversation.com/chatgpt...osted-online-you-ought-to-be-concerned-199283
https://theconversation.com/chatgpt...osted-online-you-ought-to-be-concerned-199283
Hi TNT, my 2c thoughts....So I can see why a dirac impulse is not possible. But maybe one could modify it i.e. LP and HP filter it in know way to make it usable as a stimuli. If we know the used filters characteristics, the theoretical result of the filtering would be known and we would know what result should come out of a system that tried to reproduce it. Now we have an impulse stimuli that has the suddenness and jolt looking more like that of a percussive musical instrument.
Is this stimuli a harder task to reproduce for a speaker than a sweep? I would imagine that as some physical properties and non-linearities would be more prone to stick out their ugly faces... no?
//
I think a Dirac pulse is a good acoustic test signal. All the bunk about a Dirac needing infinite bandwidth, is just that ... bunk.
I've used a Dirac pulse to capture impulse responses of my DIYs, which of course be converted to frequency responses, plenty of times.
For measuring a room's acoustic transfer function, a stimulus like balloon pop or a gun shot using blanks is a long time practice...captured via FFT.
Those stimuli still work fine, when a true omni speaker like a dodec isn't available to excite the room in a more friendly manner.
Yes,..... FFT handles transients...just fine.🙂
Chat GPT appears to suffer the same problem as most of the info we find on the web....
Parrot Speak... that thinks parrot speak has to be true because it sounds so authoritative, and quotes so many sources (other parrots) Lol
The ChatGPT prose is entertaining but lacks context (references) so there is no way to guess the truth of it's reports. It is a big web scraper which collects data without knowing if that data is true, false, or obsolete. Google stock took a big hit when Bard reported an incorrect fact. But there was no reason to panic because these mistakes are intrinsic to all AIs that have been created by training.
I suggest to follow a ChatGPT query by asking how it knows it's facts plus when and where they were acquired.
I suggest to follow a ChatGPT query by asking how it knows it's facts plus when and where they were acquired.