Okay. Now I see where I went wrong. One-bit can either be on or off. Nothing in between. Sorry. PaavoJumppanen@iname.com (Paavo Jumppanen) wrote in message news:<yvi8yl77hlo.fsf@jpff.cs.bath.ac.uk>...> Simple question: What is or how do you make a fractional bit? Digital > systems are quantized. One bit implies quantising to two levels On or > Off. What are the quantization levels of a fractional bit and how > would you represent it?
Bit-resolution decrease for internet
Started by ●December 3, 2003
Reply by ●January 5, 20042004-01-05
Reply by ●January 5, 20042004-01-05
Radium wrote:> 1 Hz sampling rate would equate to .5 Hz. 1-bit/sec, however would > not. Bit/time is the bit-rate. Sample rate is different from bit-rate. > It is also important to know the difference between *bit-resolution* > and *bit-rate*. > > If in a wave file, the bit-resolution is made to equal 1 /(sampling > rate X number of channels), then the bit-rate will definitely be > 1-bit/second. If the sample rate is 44,100 Hz in a stereo (2-channel) > wave file of this type, the bit-resolution would be 1/(44100 x 2)-bit > or 1/88200-bit. > > Bit-rate = sample-rate X bit-resolution X numbers of channels > > Multiply the 44100 X 2 X 1/88200 and you get 1! > > 44100 Hz X 1/88200-bit X 2 channels = 1 bit per second > > 1 minute of this file would comsume only 60 bits of disk space. It > would definitely work for the internet. Unlike conventional MP3s and > WMAs, the high-frequency content of the PCM music will be restored due > to the high sample rate. >Excellent. Just to complete the analysis though, would you care to calculate (approximately) what the SNR would be for such an encoding ? Paul
Reply by ●January 5, 20042004-01-05
Radium wrote: ...> 44100 Hz X 1/88200-bit X 2 channels = 1 bit per second1/88200 bit is such a small part of a whole bit that it's hard to tell it's there; you might as well leave it out. Then you could transmit your file with no bits at all and reconstitute the music with a Hieronymus Machine�. The patent�, granted in 1949, has expired by now. Note that, shortly after Hieronymus patented his machine, it was discovered that it worked just as well when most of it was replaced by a mere schematic of the relevant parts. I myself showed that a schematic of a transistor amplifier gave precisely the same results as the schematic of the original tube amplifier. Jerry _____________________________ 1 http://www.cheniere.org/books/excalibur/typical_hieronymus_detector.htm 2 http://www.algonet.se/~johnnyfg/freenrg/hieronym/hieronym.htm -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●January 5, 20042004-01-05
Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message news:<yvi1xqe1r9y.fsf@jpff.cs.bath.ac.uk>...> Radium wrote: > > ... > > > 44100 Hz X 1/88200-bit X 2 channels = 1 bit per second > > 1/88200 bit is such a small part of a whole bit that it's hard to tell > it's there; you might as well leave it out. Then you could transmit your > file with no bits at all and reconstitute the music with a Hieronymus > Machine�. The patent�, grantedYou must be joking?!> in 1949, has expired by now. Note that, > shortly after Hieronymus patented his machine, it was discovered that it > worked just as well when most of it was replaced by a mere schematic of > the relevant parts. I myself showed that a schematic of a transistor > amplifier gave precisely the same results as the schematic of the > original tube amplifier.In a brilliant and equilibristic discourse, no doubt. As I understand, you used to work as a techinician? Today, any carreer-oriented engineer would better make sure to display such a momentuous conribution to technology and humankind on the front sheet of his CV... there you missed a wide open opportunity for an academic carreer, Jerry...> Jerry > _____________________________ > 1 http://www.cheniere.org/books/excalibur/typical_hieronymus_detector.htm > 2 http://www.algonet.se/~johnnyfg/freenrg/hieronym/hieronym.htmFrom the bottom of the page of your reference 1: The Hieronymus machine has been built by many persons, and it works for those who are not negative. [...] This is what psychotronics is all about. It's the a template for the most concise summary of Matched Field Processing for Source Localization I have ever seen. Perhaps the current use of the term "psychoacoustics" should be abandoned, and the term (or better, the term "psycho acoustics") be reserved for MFP/SL... Rune
Reply by ●January 5, 20042004-01-05
Rune Allnor wrote: ...> In a brilliant and equilibristic discourse, no doubt. As I understand, > you used to work as a techinician? Today, any carreer-oriented engineer > would better make sure to display such a momentuous conribution to > technology and humankind on the front sheet of his CV... there you missed > a wide open opportunity for an academic carreer, Jerry...To set the record straight, I h the service manager of a HiFi boutique then, living by my wits at first, getting eight hours of work done in 18 hours of effort. Eventually, I learned my trade. Then I indeed became a technician after taking RCA Institutes T3 course along with my Eskimo friend. After, I worked for Andrea Radio (FADA* emerged from bankruptcy in the depression) in the development lab. Eventually my boss kicked me out, saying that as I was doing the work of an engineer, I ought to get a degree and be paid like one. I did what he said, and in a few years my annual salary went from $5,720 as a technician to $7,920 as a Member of the Technical Staff of a prestigious laboratory. Those were the days! Jerry ______________________ FADA had stood for Frank A. DeAndrea. -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●January 6, 20042004-01-06
Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message news:<3ff9c617$0$6761$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>...> Rune Allnor wrote: > > ... > > > In a brilliant and equilibristic discourse, no doubt. As I understand, > > you used to work as a techinician? Today, any carreer-oriented engineer > > would better make sure to display such a momentuous conribution to > > technology and humankind on the front sheet of his CV... there you missed > > a wide open opportunity for an academic carreer, Jerry... > > To set the record straight,I'm sure you understood that my slightly ironic twist was directed at the reverend Mr Hieronymus and not at you. Still, I know of people who would have made sure to publish and use results such as yours for all their worth and not care to point out the "obvious" spoof. Just relax, I will restrain myself from embarking on yet another rant rage. Was that Hieronymus patent really granted? If so, that makes anything Monty Python ever had to offer fall straight to the ground as completely uninteresting plain mainstream everyday life in the middle of Suburbia. Rune
Reply by ●January 6, 20042004-01-06
Rune Allnor wrote: ...> I'm sure you understood that my slightly ironic twist was directed at > the reverend Mr Hieronymus and not at you.That was obvious. ...> Was that Hieronymus patent really granted? ...Patented Sept. 27, 1949 2,482,773 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE 2,482,773 DETECTION OF EMANATIONS FROM MATERIALS AND MEASUREMENT OF THE VOLUMES THEREOF Thomas G. Hieronymus, Kansas City, Mo. Application October 23, 1946, Serial No. 705,028 13 Claims. (Cl. 250-372) Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●January 8, 20042004-01-08
Radium wrote:> Okay. Now I see where I went wrong. One-bit can either be on or off. > Nothing in between. Sorry. > > PaavoJumppanen@iname.com (Paavo Jumppanen) wrote in message news:<yvi8yl77hlo.fsf@jpff.cs.bath.ac.uk>... > > Simple question: What is or how do you make a fractional bit? Digital > > systems are quantized. One bit implies quantising to two levels On or > > Off. What are the quantization levels of a fractional bit and how > > would you represent it?If you want in between bits then why not try analogue?! Tom
Reply by ●January 12, 20042004-01-12
Tom wrote:> > Radium wrote: > > >>Okay. Now I see where I went wrong. One-bit can either be on or off. >>Nothing in between. Sorry. >> >>PaavoJumppanen@iname.com (Paavo Jumppanen) wrote in message news:<yvi8yl77hlo.fsf@jpff.cs.bath.ac.uk>... >> >>>Simple question: What is or how do you make a fractional bit? Digital >>>systems are quantized. One bit implies quantising to two levels On or >>>Off. What are the quantization levels of a fractional bit and how >>>would you represent it? > > > If you want in between bits then why not try analogue?! > > TomIs this silly season? It's hard to send analog signals over the internet without digitizing them first. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
