In Reply to: Oh, more mythology posted by Silver Eared John on November 17, 2005 at 22:42:19:
"Y'all said:
. (But as I stated earlier, the playback *must* use digital filtering to reap the benefits of dither.)
---"To which I can only respond 'stuff and nonsense, slick'."
I'll say it again- The playback *must* use digital filtering to reap the benefits of dithering. Just because you conveniently call it "nonsense" does not mean it is nonsense.
"First, any properly done sampling system HAS to have an output filter, so what you're measuring without one isn't anything meaningful."
What constitutes "properly done sampling??" (You sure like using the word "properly"...) Are there common instances of "improperly done sampling??"
Most people refer to the "output filter" as the analog post filter, which is **not** what I was discussing. I was discussing the **digital** filter. Which comes before the "output" or analog post filter.
"However, if y'all look at the spectrum of the signal before the output filter, y'all see the tone, the images, and the noise."
Not if it's after the digital filter.... The analog post ("output") filter removes any residual noise pushed way out of band by the digital filter.
"Y'all won't see any harmonics like y'all would see if the dither didn't work."
Under what circumstances would dither not work??
"So, no, y'all don't need an output filter for dither to work, but you certainly do need one to get reconstruction to work properly."
The reconstruction filter *is* the digital filter. One and the same. (I don't know why you brought up "output filter".... Maybe you didn't realize it was not the "digital filter".... ) You basically re-stated what you originally called "nonsense."
"Please, please, go study this, and stop spreading mythology."
Nah... I've decided to teach you the stuff... You can either learn it or continue to call it "mythology"... The choice is yours.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Oh Really?? - Todd Krieger 01:50:32 11/18/05 (21)
- You're full of it. - Silver Eared John 13:59:04 11/18/05 (0)
- Re: Oh Really?? - macaque 06:58:07 11/18/05 (19)
- Noise? - Silver Eared John 14:00:09 11/18/05 (11)
- Re: Noise? - macaque 14:57:55 11/18/05 (10)
- Indeed. - Silver Eared John 16:14:12 11/18/05 (9)
- Re: Indeed. - macaque 17:40:26 11/18/05 (8)
- Re: Indeed. - Todd Krieger 23:21:00 11/18/05 (7)
- Re: Indeed. - Links to PDFs - macaque 07:14:25 11/19/05 (3)
- Outstanding! Thanks. (nt) - andy_c 13:13:59 11/20/05 (0)
- Links to PDFs - Thanks..... - Todd Krieger 21:41:32 11/19/05 (1)
- Re: Links to PDFs - Thanks..... - macaque 09:19:26 11/21/05 (0)
- Goodness, gracious, and you're talking like an expert? - Silver Eared John 01:20:10 11/19/05 (2)
- Re: Goodness, gracious, and you're talking like an expert? - macaque 07:48:24 11/19/05 (1)
- Well, there are some issues, I'm sure. - Silver Eared John 10:42:34 11/19/05 (0)
- Re: Oh Really?? - Todd Krieger 09:56:19 11/18/05 (6)
- Re: Oh Really?? - macaque 10:50:34 11/18/05 (5)
- Bit depth vs.analog stuff - Silver Eared John 11:50:06 11/22/05 (3)
- Re: Bit depth vs.analog stuff - john curl 10:38:20 11/24/05 (2)
- Bull pucky, plain and simple. - Silver Eared John 11:15:44 11/25/05 (1)
- Re: Bull pucky, plain and simple. - john curl 11:26:08 11/25/05 (0)
- I Think You Got It.... - Todd Krieger 22:55:44 11/18/05 (0)