|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Laurence Payne
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 12:06 pm Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
 |
|
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 02:07:30 GMT, "Tim Martin"
<tim2718281@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | What have tapes and microphones got to do with it? I was talking about
analog signals, not recorded approximations of analog signals.
|
And this analogue signal was captured from where? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Laurence Payne
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 12:06 pm Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 02:19:12 GMT, "Tim Martin"
<tim2718281@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | An analog signal, such as a bird singing in the woods, has infinite
bandwidth.
|
No it isn't. It is constrained by all sorts of physical limitations,
both in the bird and in the environment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr.T
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 12:06 pm Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
"Richard Crowley" <richard.7.crowley@intel.com> wrote in message
news:d7lqpp$okb$1@news01.intel.com...
| Quote: | Do you have some magic method of creating additional data where
there was none before?
|
Any computer can do that if suitably programmed.
You can add any sort of additional data you want. It can even have something
to do with the original data if you like :-)
| Quote: | Don't even answer this message, rush down
and patent it and become an instant millionaire.
|
You could probably patent a novel way of generating random numbers. Whether
you will become a millionaire is another matter.
MrT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:05 pm Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:04:25 +0100, Laurence Payne
lp@laurenceNOSPAMpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 20:59:25 -0400, Joe Kesselman
keshlam-nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
Well, yes, analog is _theoretically_ infinite precision.
Only if your theory allows zero noise and infinite signal amplitude.
That's VERY theoretical :-)
And could only happen at absolute zero, which wouldn't be good for
your vinyl................ :-)
|
Or the bird. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Pearce
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:05 pm Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 11:56:25 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
<patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:04:25 +0100, Laurence Payne
lp@laurenceNOSPAMpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 20:59:25 -0400, Joe Kesselman
keshlam-nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
Well, yes, analog is _theoretically_ infinite precision.
Only if your theory allows zero noise and infinite signal amplitude.
That's VERY theoretical :-)
And could only happen at absolute zero, which wouldn't be good for
your vinyl................ :-)
|
Not even at absolute zero. No escaping the old zero point energy I'm
afraid - Heisenberg will not be argued with.
d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tim Martin
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 11:03 pm Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7m53a1hqvjcmqec6g4ad5cpmafe3vjnti2@4ax.com...
| Quote: | Only if your theory allows zero noise and infinite signal amplitude.
That's VERY theoretical :-)
And could only happen at absolute zero, which wouldn't be good for
your vinyl................ :-)
|
Suppose thereare two birds silent, and both start singing.
What do you think is the minimum detectable time difference between the
start of the birds' songs? (That is, if the difference in time is greater
than this interval, we can determine which bird started singing first,
otherwise we are unable to determine which started singing first.)
Tim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ben Bradley
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 2:03 am Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 22:45:34 GMT, "Tim Martin"
<tim2718281@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7m53a1hqvjcmqec6g4ad5cpmafe3vjnti2@4ax.com...
Only if your theory allows zero noise and infinite signal amplitude.
That's VERY theoretical :-)
And could only happen at absolute zero, which wouldn't be good for
your vinyl................ :-)
Suppose thereare two birds silent, and both start singing.
What do you think is the minimum detectable time difference between the
start of the birds' songs? (That is, if the difference in time is greater
than this interval, we can determine which bird started singing first,
otherwise we are unable to determine which started singing first.)
|
What do you mean? Are these unladen birds? And using what tools?
Your ears and a stopwatch? An analog or digital stopwatch?
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Crowley
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:03 am Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
"Tim Martin" <tim2718281@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:iaqoe.6548$hT6.2151@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
| Quote: |
"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7m53a1hqvjcmqec6g4ad5cpmafe3vjnti2@4ax.com...
Only if your theory allows zero noise and infinite signal amplitude.
That's VERY theoretical :-)
And could only happen at absolute zero, which wouldn't be good for
your vinyl................ :-)
Suppose thereare two birds silent, and both start singing.
What do you think is the minimum detectable time difference between
the
start of the birds' songs? (That is, if the difference in time is
greater
than this interval, we can determine which bird started singing first,
otherwise we are unable to determine which started singing first.)
|
Picoseconds or even femtoseconds. But likely not reliable at that
resolution in a real forrest with noise and air movement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Platt
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:02 am Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
In article <11a4o9593r5eq73@corp.supernews.com>,
Richard Crowley <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
Suppose thereare two birds silent, and both start singing.
What do you think is the minimum detectable time difference between the
start of the birds' songs? (That is, if the difference in time is greater
than this interval, we can determine which bird started singing first,
otherwise we are unable to determine which started singing first.)
Picoseconds or even femtoseconds. But likely not reliable at that
resolution in a real forrest with noise and air movement.
|
Picosecond resolution of time difference would require that the birds'
song have significant frequency content up in the GHz range. I doubt
that it does.
--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Crowley
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:02 am Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:11a4rcqbf3tcs60@corp.supernews.com...
| Quote: | In article <11a4o9593r5eq73@corp.supernews.com>,
Richard Crowley <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:
Suppose thereare two birds silent, and both start singing.
What do you think is the minimum detectable time difference between
the
start of the birds' songs? (That is, if the difference in time is
greater
than this interval, we can determine which bird started singing
first,
otherwise we are unable to determine which started singing first.)
Picoseconds or even femtoseconds. But likely not reliable at that
resolution in a real forrest with noise and air movement.
Picosecond resolution of time difference would require that the birds'
song have significant frequency content up in the GHz range. I doubt
that it does.
|
Are you assuming we are using only one microphone for both
birds? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stewart Pinkerton
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 7:55 am Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 19:43:05 GMT, donald@pearce.uk.com (Don Pearce)
wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 11:56:25 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:04:25 +0100, Laurence Payne
lp@laurenceNOSPAMpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 20:59:25 -0400, Joe Kesselman
keshlam-nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
Well, yes, analog is _theoretically_ infinite precision.
Only if your theory allows zero noise and infinite signal amplitude.
That's VERY theoretical :-)
And could only happen at absolute zero, which wouldn't be good for
your vinyl................ :-)
Not even at absolute zero. No escaping the old zero point energy I'm
afraid - Heisenberg will not be argued with.
|
Or perhaps he will, I'm uncertain.........
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stewart Pinkerton
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 8:03 am Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 22:45:34 GMT, "Tim Martin"
<tim2718281@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7m53a1hqvjcmqec6g4ad5cpmafe3vjnti2@4ax.com...
Only if your theory allows zero noise and infinite signal amplitude.
That's VERY theoretical :-)
And could only happen at absolute zero, which wouldn't be good for
your vinyl................ :-)
Suppose thereare two birds silent, and both start singing.
What do you think is the minimum detectable time difference between the
start of the birds' songs? (That is, if the difference in time is greater
than this interval, we can determine which bird started singing first,
otherwise we are unable to determine which started singing first.)
|
That would depend on the bandwidth of the detector, and is in any
event a pointless question, since the birds are not coincident. This
being so, the orientation of the detection point vis a vis the two
sound sorces will determine which birdsong is heard first. The error
caused by this is significantly higher than that caused by any actual
transient delay. Sound travels at roughly 1135 m/sec at sea level and
20 degrees Celsius, so a 1/2 inch difference in position of the birds
will cause a +/1 10 microsecond error in the timing. This is pretty
close to the sampling interval of CD................
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Pearce
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 9:01 am Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 07:55:11 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
<patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 19:43:05 GMT, donald@pearce.uk.com (Don Pearce)
wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 11:56:25 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:04:25 +0100, Laurence Payne
lp@laurenceNOSPAMpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 20:59:25 -0400, Joe Kesselman
keshlam-nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
Well, yes, analog is _theoretically_ infinite precision.
Only if your theory allows zero noise and infinite signal amplitude.
That's VERY theoretical :-)
And could only happen at absolute zero, which wouldn't be good for
your vinyl................ :-)
Not even at absolute zero. No escaping the old zero point energy I'm
afraid - Heisenberg will not be argued with.
Or perhaps he will, I'm uncertain.........
|
In principle, maybe.
d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tim Martin
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:02 am Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:81c5a15kmk2hu98vtpkaa3jhmhkuajmlks@4ax.com...
| Quote: | Sound travels at roughly 1135 m/sec at sea level and
20 degrees Celsius, so a 1/2 inch difference in position of the birds
will cause a +/1 10 microsecond error in the timing. This is pretty
close to the sampling interval of CD................
|
Typo there, you mean feet a second. So if you're detecting singing by an
acoustic instrument placed some distance from each bird, an error of half an
inch in the measurement of the distance of each instrument from its bird
will cause a 50 microsecond error in the measurement of the start of the
birds' singing.
Is that the greatest error in the measurement?
Tim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stewart Pinkerton
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 5:38 pm Post subject: Re: HiFi vs. Computer |
|
|
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 09:38:40 GMT, "Tim Martin"
<tim2718281@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:81c5a15kmk2hu98vtpkaa3jhmhkuajmlks@4ax.com...
Sound travels at roughly 1135 m/sec at sea level and
20 degrees Celsius, so a 1/2 inch difference in position of the birds
will cause a +/1 10 microsecond error in the timing. This is pretty
close to the sampling interval of CD................
Typo there, you mean feet a second.
|
Ooops, yes, 345 m/sec, much easier to remember! :-)
| Quote: | So if you're detecting singing by an
acoustic instrument placed some distance from each bird, an error of half an
inch in the measurement of the distance of each instrument from its bird
will cause a 50 microsecond error in the measurement of the start of the
birds' singing.
|
Pretty much.
| Quote: | Is that the greatest error in the measurement?
|
Yes, since everything else can be measured to very high precision.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
 FAQ
 Memberlist
 Usergroups
Featured Site: Free Antivirus and Antispyware Info
Powered by p|-|pBB
Usenet and forums posts belong to their respective authors. Everything else is (c) 2004 - 2006 Web-S-Sense Pty. Ltd.
Terms and Conditions of Use
|
|
|
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Profile
Log in
