AudioSceptic
Major Contributor
Reminds me of Chuck McGill in 'Better Call Saul'.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
A warning. There is a new web article going aroud that is a crock of schmidt.
- Thread starter j_j
- Start date
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Yikes...
What suppressed noise in what logic circuit? I was talking about circuit noise that does not depend upon any logic circuits at all. Audio signals can be purely random (noise) or perfectly correlated (sine waves, square waves, and all that jazz). I do not think we are speaking the same language, and certainly not from any sort of common basis in electronics or music. I'll leave you to it...
Killingbeans
Major Contributor
Is this a vague way of saying that humans can hear the ones and zeros in digital music?
You are not the first person to claim that, and every time it points to a complete lack of knowledge of how a digital-to-analog conversion takes place. A bad DA conversion gives error which gives noise, NOT audible ones and zeros. It's doesn't even make sence trying to explain how ones and zeros would manifest themselves in the analog waveform.
Some of the more experimental jazz can be a bit too noise-like for my taste.
There is a great article, now a number of years old, about a piece of new atonal 20th-century music played by an orchestra (I knew one or two of the trumpets in the orchestra at the time). They rehearsed for a few days then the composer flew in Saturday to rehearse for the evening performance. Before he arrived, the trumpets couldn't figure out if it was for trumpet in Bb or C, and after trying it both ways they all decided Bb was best (I think, been a while). The composer congratulated the orchestra after the performance and -- you guessed it -- the trumpets (and sometimes horns) were in the wrong key and nobody (including the composer) noticed.
Robin L
Master Contributor
Some call it "Free Jazz".
Princess Bride movie reference?
Jeez. The original author really doesn't know much. Audio noise in electronic circuits can be Johnson noise, which is thermal noise from the electrons and varies with Temp and circuit impedance (and can be shaped by whatever filter effects are in the channel) and is universal and irreducible. Some audio noise appears as "shot" noise in systems where the discrete nature of electron charge is detectable. Shot noise has statistical qualities that differ from the thermal or Johnson noise.
Pseudorandom noise is a bit of a conundrum, as pseudorandom is a type of random number generation that uses digital computation and is detectable as such by very sophisticated randomness analysis techniques. Depending upon the application, pseudorandom generators may be periodically seeded from true random sources like turbulence or nuclear decay and a "not really true" but "not fully pseudorandom" sequence results. Cryptography is one area where true randomness or mitigation of some of pseudorandomness' qualities is critical.
This guy is blowing smoke (which is a good example of something shaped by truly random processes).
Computer people often think they understand everything and neuroscience people often believe the same and PhD's are sometimes blind once they stray outside their fields. This guy seems to embody all three effects in one person. Bravo!
Princess Bride movie reference?
Did you know Mark Knopfler did the soundtrack for that movie?
SheilaHears
Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2019
- Messages
- 5
- Likes
- 0
Too deep and subtle for this forum to understand without some members resulting to emotional fury and vitriol?
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #194
Nonsense. The noise in the electronics is just as random. It's that simple. While there can be pseudorandom signals added in some forms of processing (but not all) even those have a period that is far, far beyond the retention ability of the auditory system.
You really do not understand electronics, do you? Do you even know the difference between electronics and digital signal processing, for instance? And what "suppressed noise" are we talking about?
Again, the audio signal is not "pseudo-random", it is stochastic with a particular spectral model and a noise input, if you want to be more precise. The presence of an autocorrelation greater than zero does not mean something is "pseudo random" it means that it's a Markov process of some sort, in most cases, often with a pseudo-periodic driving function. And pseudo-periodic does not mean "pseudo-random". For instance, the string release on a bow that makes a violin work is pseudo-periodic, but the "error" around the mean pitch is random, NOT "pseudo-random".
You're using a lot of terms that it appears you do not understand.
But all of these diversions aside, the article you're defending was complete tommyrot.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #195
Refuting ridiculous mistakes is not "emotional fury and vitriol". You have your right to a silly idea. When you expose it to the public, you also have the right to see your silly idea ridiculed into bits.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #196
Second, what truly random nature of nature? Water flowing? Leaves rustling? Crickets chirping, cicadas buzzing, bears and lions roaring, birds singing, ??? Most all of those examples include significant amounts of correlated sounds. Nature itself has numerous examples of random and non-random (correlated) sounds. That's its nature.
I would put it a bit differently. A signal that has a non-zero autocorrelation (aside from r0, of course) has spectral shaping, but can still (and almost always does, except for pure digital synthesis) look like a random source (which can be pseudo-periodic) applied through a shaping filter. There is lots of Markov in the world.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #197
For me it's the QUIET. The silence, the lack of noise. Unfortunately low frequency sound from aircraft is present almost anywhere these days.
Focus on contributing to the topic than commentary about people you don't know. Is this topic part of your core expertise? If not, please don't dispute what is being said. We are not here to answer random challenges.
I would put it a bit differently. A signal that has a non-zero autocorrelation (aside from r0, of course) has spectral shaping, but can still (and almost always does, except for pure digital synthesis) look like a random source (which can be pseudo-periodic) applied through a shaping filter. There is lots of Markov in the world.
Yah, well, I could have said that, but I'm a hairy-knuckled country-boy engine-ear without no larnin'.
Besides, I've mercifully forgotten all I ever knew about Markov and stochastic theory (I hope!) And engineering seems to be pretty far from whatever the argument is being made by the OP.For the record, REALLY appreciate your contributions here and everywhere!
Whoa! No, I didn't. Now I'm gonna have to track it down and give it a listen.