On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Jens M Andreasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 12:14 -0700, Justin Smith wrote: >> If you just did a simple phase inversion, you would lose half of the >> information you could be sending to the dac, you could easily use an >> algorithm that sets things up so you have full bit resolution (ie. >> double the rated resolution of a single channel). > > So what it is the magic number then for improved resolution? At first I > thought intuitively: -3dB! > > But now I am not so sure. I can't explain to an audiemce why -3 is a > better number than any other. > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev >
I am not sure if I understand what you aare saying herer at all. What I imagined was this: instead of sending one floating point output, you send two, out of phase with one nother, except ot perfetly out of phase, so tht you retin the potential of the full bit depth (if each signal were just the inverse of the other, you are wasting half of the bits you send). Now that I think about it more, this woul be most useful if the full signal chain used this format, and to really double your bit depth sending -29 on one side and +1 on the other would have to be different from sending -30 on one side, and 0 on the other. I think I was just confused, and maybe you had something in mind other than my erronious speculation. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
