"Rick Lyons" <r.lyons@_BOGUS_ieee.org> wrote in message news:401af766.185204703@news.west.earthlink.net...> On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:13:54 GMT, Al Clark <dsp@danvillesignal.com> > wrote: > > (snipped) > > > >Poor von Hann! His window is commonly called a Hanning Window only > >because there is also a Hamming Window. > > > >Of course, very few of us come up with something important that is also > >tied to our name. I guess that I would be happy if there was a "Clarking > >Window" ;-) > > Hi Al, > don't worry, at least you have a > candy bar named after you. > > That's better than the rest of us here. > > [-Rick-]Rick, you've got the "Lyons share". ;-) All I have is the semiconductor company that is now called Intersil. -Jon Harris
Resampling questions - from 44.1kHz to 48kHz
Started by ●January 28, 2004
Reply by ●January 30, 20042004-01-30
Reply by ●January 31, 20042004-01-31
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 00:09:34 GMT, disregard@disregard.com (Rick S.) wrote:> >>Another approach would be for you to interpolate to 160 in several >>smaller steps. 160=(2^5)*5, so you could interpolate by 2 five times, >>and then by 5 once. In each stage, set the cutoff frequency to 20KHz. >>The first stage will require a good (that is, long) filter. I think 32 >>taps would prolly be OK. After interpolating by 2 (and filtering) in >>the first stage, you'll have a spectrum something like this: >> >>______ ________ >> \______|______/ >> fs/4 fs/2 >> >>fs/4 is roughly 20KHz. >> >>The next stage can get by with a much smaller filter, because the >>spectrum between 20K and 60K has already been supressed by a decent >>amount. The later stages should still roll off starting at 20KHz, but >>you don't have to worry about stopband attenuation until you get into >>the 60KHz neighborhood. That's a pretty relaxed filter. You could >>prolly get away with interpolating in fewer stages - say in four stages >>(2,4,4,5). >> > > >Jim, > >I'm working on this as issue as well. Given your example of (2^5)*5 with a >20kHz signal, after interpolating your signal in the first stage by 2 and >filtering, how do you approach the second stage of the filter in terms of the >sampling freq.? > >In other words, when designing the filter for this 2nd stage to preserve the >20kHz content, would I be basing the sampling freq. for this stage off of: > >fs = 80 x 2 = 160kHz with fs/2 = 80kHz > >or would it be fs = 40 x 2 = 80kHz with fs/2 = 40kHz (again, like stage 1?) > >I assume that the fs is increasing with each stage. Is this correct? > >This concept is what isn't sinking in to my thick skull. > >-Rick S.Hi, well, ... after the first interpolation-by-2, the spectrum of the first filter's output will be ____ 44.1 ________ \____|____/ | \____ 0 | | 22.05 88.2 fs = 88.2 kHz. ---------------------------------------------------- After the second interpolation-by-2, the spectrum of the second filter's output will be __ 44.1 ____ \____|_______________...______/ | \________ 0 | | 176.4 22.05 88.2 fs = 176.4 kHz. Yes, the fs is increasing with each stage. I like Jim Thomas' idea because the filters for the first five stages could be "half-band" filters which are computationally efficient. Good Luck, [-Rick-]
Reply by ●January 31, 20042004-01-31
r.lyons@_BOGUS_ieee.org (Rick Lyons) wrote in news:401af766.185204703 @news.west.earthlink.net:> On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:13:54 GMT, Al Clark <dsp@danvillesignal.com> > wrote: > > (snipped) >> >>Poor von Hann! His window is commonly called a Hanning Window only >>because there is also a Hamming Window. >> >>Of course, very few of us come up with something important that is also >>tied to our name. I guess that I would be happy if there was a"Clarking>>Window" ;-) > > Hi Al, > don't worry, at least you have a > candy bar named after you. > > That's better than the rest of us here. > > [-Rick-] >That reminds me of an April Fools Day prank: I once told by boss that a Mr Lyon needed to talk to him right away. When he called the zoo, they told him that Mr Lion wasn't taking calls, but that Mr Monkey could help him. There is actually a Clark's Law (mine and certainly discovered by every other engineer and programmer) Clark's Rule of Ten: 1. All bugs take 10 secs, 10 minutes, 10 hours, 10 days, etc to solve. 2. They're all dumb shits after you find them. 3. If you find yourself in the 10 hour variety, its time to reboot or you may be headed towards 10 days. Clark's Corollary to the Rule of Ten: 1. Most bugs can be solved on the 494 bridge. (Two blocks from my old office - on the way home). Now I know this Law is not as profound as Murphy or as edible as a Clark bar, but I claim it anyway..... -- Al Clark Danville Signal Processing, Inc. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com
Reply by ●January 31, 20042004-01-31
> well, ... after the first interpolation-by-2, >the spectrum of the first filter's output will be > > > ____ 44.1 ________ > \____|____/ | \____ > 0 | | > 22.05 88.2 > >fs = 88.2 kHz. > >---------------------------------------------------- >After the second interpolation-by-2, the >spectrum of the second filter's output will be > > > __ 44.1 ____ > \____|_______________...______/ | \________ > 0 | | 176.4 > 22.05 88.2 > >fs = 176.4 kHz. > >Yes, the fs is increasing with each stage. > > >I like Jim Thomas' idea because the filters for the >first five stages could be "half-band" filters which >are computationally efficient. > >Good Luck, >[-Rick-] >Got it. Thanks.
Reply by ●February 2, 20042004-02-02
Jon Harris wrote:> > "Rick Lyons" <r.lyons@_BOGUS_ieee.org> wrote in message > news:401af766.185204703@news.west.earthlink.net... > > On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:13:54 GMT, Al Clark <dsp@danvillesignal.com> > > wrote: > > > > (snipped) > > > > > >Poor von Hann! His window is commonly called a Hanning Window only > > >because there is also a Hamming Window. > > > > > >Of course, very few of us come up with something important that is also > > >tied to our name. I guess that I would be happy if there was a "Clarking > > >Window" ;-) > > > > Hi Al, > > don't worry, at least you have a > > candy bar named after you. > > > > That's better than the rest of us here. > > > > [-Rick-] > > Rick, you've got the "Lyons share". ;-) > All I have is the semiconductor company that is now called Intersil. > > -Jon HarrisHell, all I got was a C&W duo. Rob Judd
Reply by ●February 2, 20042004-02-02
Jerry Avins wrote:> >>Aw chucks! And here I thought a Huhn window was for watching the sky > >>fall. > > > > > > Now Jerry, I would guess a Huhn window would be something you would > > find on a chicken shack :). > > > > Andor > > Yes. And it was Chicken Little who cried, "The sky is falling! The sky > is falling!"Ah, I thought I missed some literary pointer. Who is Chicken Little?
Reply by ●February 2, 20042004-02-02
Andor wrote:> Jerry Avins wrote: > > >>>>Aw chucks! And here I thought a Huhn window was for watching the sky >>>>fall. >>> >>> >>>Now Jerry, I would guess a Huhn window would be something you would >>>find on a chicken shack :). >>> >>>Andor >> >>Yes. And it was Chicken Little who cried, "The sky is falling! The sky >>is falling!" > > > Ah, I thought I missed some literary pointer. Who is Chicken Little?A version of the story: http://www.edsanders.com/chickenlittle/ (Ignore the moral it draws. Even those with paranoia can have enemies.) Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●February 2, 20042004-02-02
an2or@mailcircuit.com (Andor) wrote in message news:<ce45f9ed.0402020001.1ca738d8@posting.google.com>...> Jerry Avins wrote: > > > >>Aw chucks! And here I thought a Huhn window was for watching the sky > > >>fall. > > > > > > > > > Now Jerry, I would guess a Huhn window would be something you would > > > find on a chicken shack :). > > > > > > Andor > > > > Yes. And it was Chicken Little who cried, "The sky is falling! The sky > > is falling!" > > Ah, I thought I missed some literary pointer. Who is Chicken Little?At the riskof starting another 'why the Americans don't speak English' thread... Chicken Little is the American version of Chicken Licken who, together with Hhenny Penny, Goosey Loosey, Turkey Lurkey and Ducky Lucky, ends up as dinner for Foxy Loxy. Ian
Reply by ●February 2, 20042004-02-02
Ian Okey wrote:> > At the riskof starting another 'why the Americans don't speak English' > thread... >First you would have to define "English" .] Is it Cockney, Valley Girl, BBC, etc etc etc ....
Reply by ●February 2, 20042004-02-02
Richard Owlett <rowlett@atlascomm.net> writes:> Ian Okey wrote: > >> At the riskof starting another 'why the Americans don't speak >> English' >> thread... >> > > First you would have to define "English" .] > > Is it Cockney, Valley Girl, BBC, etc etc etc ....Yes. -- % Randy Yates % "Watching all the days go by... %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % Who are you and who am I?" %%% 919-577-9882 % 'Mission (A World Record)', %%%% <yates@ieee.org> % *A New World Record*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
