Re: [music-dsp] Did anybody here think about signal integrity

2015-06-05 Thread Stefan Stenzel
Theo,

Any continuous function bandlimited to frequencies  fs/2 is completely 
determined by its samples.
That’s the essence of the sampling theorem, which answers all your questions.

Stefan


 On 03 Jun 2015, at 22:47 , Theo Verelst theo...@theover.org wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 Playing with analog and digital processing, I came to the conclusion I'd like 
 to contemplate about certain digital signal processing considerations, I'm 
 sure have been in the minds of pioneering people quite a while ago, 
 concerning let's say how accurate theoretically and practically all kinds of 
 basic DSP subjects really are.
 
 For instance, I care about what happens with a perfect sine wave getting 
 either digitized or mathematically and with an accurate computer program put 
 into a sequence of signal samples. When a close to perfect sample (in the 
 sense of a list of signal samples) gets played over a Digital to Analog 
 Converter, how perfect is the analog signal getting out of there? And if it 
 isn't all perfect, where are the errors?
 
 As a very crude thinking example, suppose a square wave oscillator like in a 
 synthesizer or an electronic circuit test generator is creating a near 
 perfect square wave, and it is also digitized or an attempt is made in 
 software to somehow turn the two voltages of the square wave into samples.
 
 Maybe a more reasonable idea is to take into account what a DAC will do with 
 the signal represented in the samples that are taken as music, speech, a 
 musical instrument's tones, or sound effects. For instance, what does the 
 digital reconstruction window and the build in oversampling make of a 
 exponential curve (like the part of an envelope could easily be) with it's 
 given (usually FIR) filter length.
 
 In that context, you could wonder what happens if we shift a given 
 exponential signal (or signal component) by half a sample ? Add to the 
 consideration that a function a*exp(b*x+c) defines a unique function for each 
 a,b and c.
 
 Anyone here think and/or work on these kinds of subjects, I'd like to hear. 
 (I think it's an interesting subject, so I'm serious about it)
 
 T. Verelst
 
 --
 dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website:
 subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp 
 links
 http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp
 http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp

--
dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website:
subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp 
links
http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp
http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp

Re: [music-dsp] Did anybody here think about signal integrity

2015-06-05 Thread gwenhwyfaer
Well, bandlimited to a bandwidth  fs/2 (but the distinction isn't
useful for audio), and given perfect reconstruction circuitry. But as
far as I can gather, Theo's concern is what happens when, as is
inevitable in practice, the reconstruction circuitry is imperfect?
And that is an interesting question, academically speaking, if there
really isn't a body of theory to cover reconstructive imperfection -
if only to be certain that all the improvements made to DAC technology
in the last three decades have actually been _improvements_.

But I think all of this is probably covered by existing research
anyway. Minimising phase disruption in digital filters is well
understood; LSB errors and resistor chain nonlinearities are fairly
obvious, sources of relatively predictable badness, and can be
assessed in the same way as nonlinearity in general; clock jitter is
easy to simulate... and then there are analogue reconstruction
filters. Unless I've missed any, I don't think there's anything else
to look at, unless he wants to disprove or augment Nyquist-Shannon.
Which would be an achievement, true, but... I would humbly submit that
there might be more fruitful avenues towards seeing Verelst theorem
in the indices of 22nd-century audio textbooks.

Still, I understand great white whales all too well; and if Theo
_needs_ to harpoon this one, we should perhaps not stand in his way.


On 05/06/2015, Stefan Stenzel stefan.sten...@waldorfmusic.de wrote:
 Theo,

 Any continuous function bandlimited to frequencies  fs/2 is completely
 determined by its samples.
 That’s the essence of the sampling theorem, which answers all your
 questions.

 Stefan


 On 03 Jun 2015, at 22:47 , Theo Verelst theo...@theover.org wrote:

 Hi,

 Playing with analog and digital processing, I came to the conclusion I'd
 like to contemplate about certain digital signal processing
 considerations, I'm sure have been in the minds of pioneering people quite
 a while ago, concerning let's say how accurate theoretically and
 practically all kinds of basic DSP subjects really are.

 For instance, I care about what happens with a perfect sine wave getting
 either digitized or mathematically and with an accurate computer program
 put into a sequence of signal samples. When a close to perfect sample
 (in the sense of a list of signal samples) gets played over a Digital to
 Analog Converter, how perfect is the analog signal getting out of there?
 And if it isn't all perfect, where are the errors?

 As a very crude thinking example, suppose a square wave oscillator like in
 a synthesizer or an electronic circuit test generator is creating a near
 perfect square wave, and it is also digitized or an attempt is made in
 software to somehow turn the two voltages of the square wave into samples.

 Maybe a more reasonable idea is to take into account what a DAC will do
 with the signal represented in the samples that are taken as music,
 speech, a musical instrument's tones, or sound effects. For instance, what
 does the digital reconstruction window and the build in oversampling
 make of a exponential curve (like the part of an envelope could easily be)
 with it's given (usually FIR) filter length.

 In that context, you could wonder what happens if we shift a given
 exponential signal (or signal component) by half a sample ? Add to the
 consideration that a function a*exp(b*x+c) defines a unique function for
 each a,b and c.

 Anyone here think and/or work on these kinds of subjects, I'd like to
 hear. (I think it's an interesting subject, so I'm serious about it)

 T. Verelst

 --
 dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website:
 subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews,
 dsp links
 http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp
 http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp

 --
 dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website:
 subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp
 links
 http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp
 http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
--
dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website:
subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp 
links
http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp
http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp