> This paper appears to speak to many of the issues discussed in
> this thread:
>
> <>
>
> Austin, I never count you out buddy, but this Analog Devices diagram and
> text looks to be in clear opposition to your interpretation of
> Higgins. Your
> comments are most welcome.
Hi Todd,
I'll have to read the paper thoroughly, but I doubt it disagrees with
anything I've ever said, as I've worked on the design of some of their A/D
converters...and done quite a bit of work for and with them over the years
in the audio realm and DSP realm. That was a good find, BTW...and BTW, the
Higgins book IS "sponsored" by Analog Devices ;-)
What, specifically, do you believe that write-up disagree with me on? My
cursory look at it seemed like they had things well under control. They
just bring in a few new terms, that are more particular to audio, like
headroom.
Their equation for dynamic range is precisely what I've used, remember, it's
in dB, and subtraction in dB is the same as division in non-log numbers.
They say (peak level - noise floor)...sounds perfect to me. Is it that
you're having trouble understanding that subtraction of logs is the same as
division of non-log numbers (which means it's a ratio with regular numbers)?
For logs, "the difference between" and for non-log numbers "the ratio
between", are the exact same thing.
Austin
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
