Good point as well. That's a surprisingly high error for a FP32 calculation!
That's 64 bit FP (e-16 =~ -320dB), the problem is unbiased rounding goes all the way even with these slight errors. FFT's of the double precision data has the expected noise floor of -300dB or so but the rounding to 24bits can build in systematic errors (distortion). 32 bit floats have only a 23 bit mantissa, another set of problems.
EDIT - remember the instantaneous dynamic range is determined by the mantissa. 52(3) bits for 64bit is ~1e-16.
Last edited:
The work I am doing in motion control..the most interesting thing is that the most advanced algorithms I am developing involves multiple feedback paths, band limiting, dc servo loops... I am applying what has been done in audio for many decades.
Imagine what could be done if audio design experts (unlike me) got involved.
Imagine a world where someone challenged me to provide references, and I said John Curl.
Jn
Imagine what could be done if audio design experts (unlike me) got involved.
Imagine a world where someone challenged me to provide references, and I said John Curl.
Jn
Last edited:
Thanks, Scott. Makes sense. Total "derp" moment translating between decimal and binary. Mea culpa.
JN, I am not surprised that you don't rely on a library of books, either at home or at the office. I am a little disappointed though, I might have been able to buy a textbook that you might rely on, so that we are on the same page more often.
Attachments
Last edited:
With respect to what I discuss here, what I know or have access to is far beyond anything that has yet to be printed. I will admit, it is rather weird. I never figured myself being on the leading edge. Being the leading edge on anything, certainly unexpected.
But on the other hand, it is so cool being years beyond state of the art.
The reason I am so very good, is not because I'm best at anything. It is because I have a reasonable understanding of everything, and can talk to those who know more about their expertise than I. In meetings, I know exactly where we need to go, but spend the time asking everyone else how to get there.
That gives them ownership. That is my secret.(which was actually my wife's).
Running a multidisciplinary meeting where every single member feels ownership of the problem...you have no idea how that feels.
I need the best to advance SOTA. I welcome your expertise. As well as all others.
Jn
Ps. Your link to the tail fold octupoles is funny. I wound a super magnet in about ten minutes, it was for some fancy crab cavity stuff. Making the stuff, easy. The physicists don't know how to make the magnets, just what fields they need. I sit in the middle...kinda understand what they want, and know how to build.
The end result of a great collaboration is far more than the sum of the individuals. I welcome your (and others) expertise.
Pps. I feel like sully..."I will be remembered for exactly 208 seconds..."
Oh, forgot. I do have a specific text I rely on.. "This modern clock", Goodrich, 1905. Although, his discussion of lantern pinions w/r to hypocycloids is incorrect. He neglects the trundle diameter.
Last edited:
This looks like a fun project to work on ---->
Watch the Strongest Indoor Magnetic Field Blast Doors of Tokyo Lab Wide Open
|
Smart News
| Smithsonian
-RNM
Watch the Strongest Indoor Magnetic Field Blast Doors of Tokyo Lab Wide Open
|
Smart News
| Smithsonian
-RNM
Thank you 🙂. However, there are much better storytellers than me, here, and they even seem to be believing in what they are saying.
My stories are mostly told by graphs and measurements, and this is very boring for most 😉.
I guess it is easier to ask 'innocent' questions than estimate the likely magnitude of any effect.indra1 said:
Let me help you. Assume a wire is so bad that it is randomly changing its resistance by 5%. What would be the likely effect on audio if such a wire was used as a domestic interconnect?
Yes. Unfortunately some of the rest are just as open to snake oil as some people here - usually magic small antennas which seem to avoid Maxwell's equations, or currents which are not constrained to flow in closed loops.scott wurcer said:
You may need to carefully distinguish between energy stored in the fields and energy flowing in the wires. Audio is very low frequency (almost DC). In a circuit with a battery and a resistor most of the energy flows as potential energy of the electrons in the wire, which then gets turned to heat as the electrons lose potential energy by bouncing down past all the dislocations etc. in the resistor. Don't be confused by Poynting's theorem; most people misunderstand what he actually said.hhoyt said:
Genuine deep understanding has to be preceded by shallow understanding, which thus far appears to be lacking. Otherwise all you have done is learn some new words.john curl said:
So have I. So have some others here. So what?
Indeed, thank you and Scott for following up...my poorly delivered point being some of the effects being bandied about may apply to RF, but maybe not so much at DC or audio frequencies...
Cheers,
Howie
The discussion when to skin effect at 20kHz so some departure from R/L/C is necessary. Whether it matters is another point.
Again, I am sorry for the misunderstanding. Don't worry, I don't mind signal wires with 5% conductivity tolerance, I use no resistor better than 1%. The quote you made was from my response to your question :
A while ago, I found cited table which shows a 5% difference (on the same industrial grade material between a properly annealed and not) which is incredibly small. I expect any conductance change due to migration and burn in to be smaller than the rolled/annealed figure. And speculated that it seems more likely for anybody who wishes to investigate (KSTR perhaps? I don't currently have the means) to measure a discernible difference from lower grade non annealed wire.
However, I have not looked for anything that may relate to the "linearity" part of your question.
Personal message totally OOT to the members of this forum .
I was several time and kindly warned by members from this forum, full of delicacy, about one of my recurring spelling mistakes in English.
I write often WITCH instead of WHICH.
This typo has an explanation, "Witch" is the phonetic transcription of which in my native language. And I often mix up too with *this* word.
I suffer from this kind of problems because i was learned to read with a catastrophic method: "Lectures ?" (Méthode globale), *which* (that) consists of reading a whole word as an object and not a succession of letters: I read at the speed of light, but I dont notice my own mistakes as long as they look familiar to me.
I have to live with this and consider-it as both a chance and a handicap. Please consider only the second part with leniency, not as a lack of culture or respect and accept my apologizes.
Do not take this, neither, for a special taste for magic, that I do not taste more when it comes to electronics or audio, contrary to what some of you might believe ;-)
I was several time and kindly warned by members from this forum, full of delicacy, about one of my recurring spelling mistakes in English.
I write often WITCH instead of WHICH.
This typo has an explanation, "Witch" is the phonetic transcription of which in my native language. And I often mix up too with *this* word.
I suffer from this kind of problems because i was learned to read with a catastrophic method: "Lectures ?" (Méthode globale), *which* (that) consists of reading a whole word as an object and not a succession of letters: I read at the speed of light, but I dont notice my own mistakes as long as they look familiar to me.
I have to live with this and consider-it as both a chance and a handicap. Please consider only the second part with leniency, not as a lack of culture or respect and accept my apologizes.
Do not take this, neither, for a special taste for magic, that I do not taste more when it comes to electronics or audio, contrary to what some of you might believe ;-)
Last edited:
We are quite happy to read English with spelling and grammar mistakes from people whose native language is not English. Don't worry!
Some of us are less happy to read poor English from people whose native language is English but they are too lazy to bother to follow usual norms of presentation.
Some of us are less happy to read poor English from people whose native language is English but they are too lazy to bother to follow usual norms of presentation.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.