On 22/08/2015, Ethan Duni ethan.d...@gmail.com wrote:
So your whole point is that it's not *exactly* sinc^2, but a slightly noisy
version thereof? My point was that there are no effects of resampling
visible in the graphs.
And you're wrong - all those 88 alias images are effects of
On 22/08/2015, Alen akoe...@rogers.com wrote:
Indeed. This debate is getting tiresome.
That's what happens when someone does not accept that he is wrong,
despite overwhelming evidence.
___
music-dsp mailing list
music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
So you claim that the graph depicts a sinc^2 graph, and it shows the
frequency response of a continuous time linearly interpolated signal,
and involves no resampling.
That is false. That is not how Olli created his graph. First, the
continuous time signal (which, by the way, already contains an
So let me get this straight - you have an *imaginary* graph in your
head, depicting the frequency response of a continuous time linearly
interpolated signal, and you keep arguing about this *imaginary* graph
(maybe to feed your fragile ego and to prove that you won).
That is *not* what you see on
And besides, no one ever said that Olli's graph depicts analyitical
frequency responses of continuous time interpolators. The graphs come
from a musicdsp.org code entry:
http://musicdsp.org/archive.php?classid=5#49
There's no comment whatsover, just the code and the graphs.
If you read his 65
On 2015-08-18, Tom Duffy wrote:
In order to reconstruct that sinusoid, you'll need a filter with an
infinitely steep transition band. You've demonstrated that SR/2
aliases to 0Hz, i.e. DC. That digital stream of samples is not
reconstructable.
The conjugate sine to +1, -1, +1, -1, ... is 0,
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:59 PM, b...@bobhuff.com wrote:
To unsubscribe please see the list info page:
https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
best,
douglas
___
music-dsp mailing list
music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
On 22/08/2015, Sampo Syreeni de...@iki.fi wrote:
The conjugate sine to +1, -1, +1, -1, ... is 0, 0, 0, 0... Just phase
shift the original sine at the Nyquist frequence.
Let me ask what do you mean by conjugate sine ?
If you mean complex conjugate, and assume the sine to be the real
part
Okay, I'll risk exceeding my daily message limit. If the
administrators think it is inappropriate, dealing with that is at
their discretion.
Here is another proof that the alias images in the spectrum are caused
by the sampling/upsampling, not the interpolation:
Let's replace linear
Hi everyone, Douglas the list admin here.
I've been away and haven't really been monitoring the list recently.
It's been full of bad feelings, unpleasant interactions, and macho
posturing. Really not much that I find interesting. I just want to
reiterate a few things about the list.
I'm loathe
Thank you, Douglas.
Regards,
Mike
-
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://michaelgogins.tumblr.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Douglas Repetto
doug...@music.columbia.edu wrote:
Hi everyone,
On 08/22/2015 08:59 AM, Peter S wrote:
Second, why take something off-list if it's related to the
discussion?
I agree, as long as one can present a professional attitude
___
music-dsp mailing list
music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
Ditto!
Richard Dobson
On 22/08/2015 16:50, Michael Gogins wrote:
Thank you, Douglas.
Regards,
Mike
___
music-dsp mailing list
music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
I think this might be a bit too restrictive; there have been many highly
informative exchanges here over the years, all well-considered, that
have exceeded this limit. The key is surely well-considered - and the
absence of egoic chest-beating!
Richard Dobson
On 22/08/2015 16:21, Douglas
Perhaps the knowledge that you might risk exceeding your limit (which I'm
sure would not be pedantically enforced) would make you to consider for
yourself how much the given message is contributing to the discussion.
Thank you Douglas, for clarifying the etiquette and audience. It was needed
and
15 matches
Mail list logo
