On 30 Aug., 16:47, Rune Allnor <all...@tele.ntnu.no> wrote:> On 30 Aug, 16:09, Steve Underwood <ste...@dis.org> wrote: > > > Youngsters. Huh. > > Well, opinions are divided on that particular matter. > Not long ago I was told I am half-antique; I was born > before Armstrong walked on the moon...Sheesh Rune, you are older than me! :-)
Professional Exams for Digital Signal Processing!?
Started by ●August 28, 2007
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
On Aug 30, 1:16 am, Rune Allnor <all...@tele.ntnu.no> wrote:> On 29 Aug, 21:34, "Brian Byrne" <brian.byrn...@mail.dcu.ie> wrote: > > > Based on you information, I think its worth while to consider the whole DSP > > area as two components: > > 1.) Theory of signals & System , DSP Processing techniques, programming DSP > > concepts > > I might agree... > > > via Matlab. > > No way. I have no reason to suggest there was any malice > involved when the mathworks designed their signal processing > toolbox in ancient pre-history, but they did a poor job. > Whenever I encountered students who knew DSP from > matlab, I had a hard time de-teaching that stuff out of them > so I could teach practical DSP.oh come now, Rune! you haven't been enlightened to the fact that X(1) is the DC component? just let go to the dark side. it's all easier. r b-j
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
Rune Allnor wrote:> On 30 Aug, 16:09, Steve Underwood <ste...@dis.org> wrote: > >> Youngsters. Huh. > > Well, opinions are divided on that particular matter. > Not long ago I was told I am half-antique; I was born > before Armstrong walked on the moon...You don't rate antique status unless you remember when crystals had (cat's) whiskers. (I do. I just turned 75.) Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
On Aug 30, 7:09 am, Steve Underwood <ste...@dis.org> wrote:> Scott Seidman wrote: > > Rune Allnor <all...@tele.ntnu.no> wrote in news:1188451007.296145.109460 > > @r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > > >> Whenever I encountered students who knew DSP from > >> matlab, I had a hard time de-teaching that stuff out of them > >> so I could teach practical DSP. > > > You don't KNOW DSP from Matlab, you learn DSP, and you implement it in > > Matlab. I learned DSP, implemented much of it with my own code in ASYST, > > and some years later started doing work in Matlab-- and it was tons easier. > > Youngsters. Huh. In my day we built DSP systems from the gate level up. > And, no namby pamby modeling tools to try it out first. :-) > > > > > So, can you give any good examples of how the Matlab signals toolbox (or > > base system) conceptually screws up DSP? I know that there's a small issue > > with how Matlab scales ffts that's off the "regular" definition by a factor > > of N or something like that, but its small. I trust you're not going to > > start a tirade about zero-indexing. > > > If you mean that owning matlab and the signal processing toolbox does not > > imply that you have all the conceptual tools necessary to use and > > understand DSP techniques, I fully agree. > > SteveI started signal processing with Fortran, C and Basic but I find Matlab easier to use. I've used Matlab for modeling systems and specifying them. It can be convenient to have an executable specification. The problem came with programmers who tried to make their code look like the Matlab code. If they had the same information as equations, they took the time to consider what the most efficient implementation structure would be. But that problem was solved with a little discussion. Matlab is like any other tool: use it for what it can do and be aware of what it can't. That awareness is seldom stressed in curricula. Complicated tools can help the productivity of knowledgeable users but aren't universally good educational tools. Matlab provides good visualization, but thinking that the way Matlab does something has any relationship to how something should be applied to your particular application is often a mistake. Dale B. Dalrymple http://dbdimages.com
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
"Jerry Avins" <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message news:N6CdnUDyUbVQUkjbnZ2dnUVZ_qainZ2d@rcn.net...> Brian Byrne wrote: >> Thanks for that information. > > Among the skills that will help you find a job that you want is better > command of written English, especially if you're a native-born anglophone. > For one example, there should be no space between a punctuation mark and > the word immediately preceding it: >Ceart go leoir ! Ceapim go bhfuil tu an a mhaith ar fad i Bearla.!!! Thats my native tongue , Gaeilge . Thats Irish to you if you don't understand Gaeilge very well. I get your point but I think you are missing mine. Im looking to advance DSP skills. Getting my email questions grammatically corrected on comp.dsp is a little embarrassing . Employers like tact also Jerry. Being excessively anal in regard to English punctuation is about a million miles from any normal office's culture regarding communications skills. Ask me , I know.>> Ideally , I want to ... > > Some words composed of two parts are (depending on the sense) written as > one word. "Worthwhile" is one of those. >Try to concentrate on the content of email and the actual questions being asked rather than being side tracked with your own command of English punctuation.>> Based on you information, I think its worth while to consider the whole >> DSP area as two components: >> 1.) Theory of signals & System , DSP Processing techniques, programming >> DSP concepts via Matlab. >> >> 2.) Actual programming of DSP devices , FPGA, & ASIC's based on >> fundamentals in point 1. >> >> It would be nice to actually gain some credit for the effort of becoming >> proficient in the DSP theory area. >> This makes it easier to apply for relevant jobs !. >> >> Hopefully, my home work in DSP will somehow be communicated to a > > "Homework" is another. >Read my point above.>> prospective employer getting me the (interview! &) job Im looking for !. > > Skill at using language requires attention to detail and logical thought. > Those same skills advance technical work. While there is no assurance that > someone with good language skills will show competence in another field > (or that poor language skill shows poor competence) the correlation is > high enough for employers to judge on that basis. >Trying to correlate my capacity to program devices using C++ and DSP mathmatical techniques with my blatent disregard and indifference to trivial English punctuation is at best a sad task. But one you can muse over if you must.> Good luck with your studies. >Thanks . Consider my response above.> Jerry > -- > Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. > ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
>>Note that bit7 represents the inversion of the direction, whereas bit6corresponds to the direction of the inversion." So on, so forth. Laughing so hard I almost fell off my chair. Welcome to the chipset! Cheers Markus
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
Scott Seidman wrote:> Richard Owlett <rowlett@atlascomm.net> wrote in > news:13dbpjsb8gd5vea@news.supernews.com: > > >>In my VERY personal opinion the IEEE got too fascinated with academic >>credentials. The result is a registered PE is qualified to build bridges >>but need never have used an IC. > > > > Boy, I'm just not seeing the link between building bridges and academics. > An academic with no practical experience isn't qualified to build a bridge. > > I get your point, but your example is off the mark. > >No. I was on the mark. If a EE wants PE after his name he is tested on structures, no electronics -- at least back in 60's when I was in school.
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
On Aug 30, 9:09 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> Rune Allnor wrote: > > On 30 Aug, 16:09, Steve Underwood <ste...@dis.org> wrote: > > >> Youngsters. Huh. > > > Well, opinions are divided on that particular matter. > > Not long ago I was told I am half-antique; I was born > > before Armstrong walked on the moon... > > You don't rate antique status unless you remember when crystals had > (cat's) whiskers. (I do. I just turned 75.) > > JerryWell, I guess that I don't rate as antique, even though the junior engineers wonder what I'm talking about when I mention having built circuits using germanium diodes, pentodes, or DPDT relays. I do recall an engineer over at another lab bench being excited about something called "signal processing" because a multiplier could now fit inside one single bipolar logic chip. The problem with MATLAB is that a DSP engineer should know about trade-offs, about which MATLAB sometimes gives misleading impressions, resulting in a mismatch when time comes to fit a solution into a given number of gates, wires, pins, pipe stages, clock cycles, bytes of memory, or mW, etc. There are, however, a few companies working on tools to convert other types of higher level mathematical model or algorithm descriptions into gates. Not sure what quality level those tool have reached yet though. Anyone here used them? IMHO. YMMV. -- rhn A.T nicholson d.0.t C-o-M
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
Richard Owlett <rowlett@atlascomm.net> wrote in news:13def00f5i84g13 @news.supernews.com:> > No. I was on the mark. If a EE wants PE after his name he is tested on > structures, no electronics -- at least back in 60's when I was in school. >That might very well be true, but what does that have to do with academic credentials? -- Scott Reverse name to reply
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
"Ron N." <rhnlogic@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1188512412.280315.215900 @q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com:> > The problem with MATLAB is that a DSP engineer should > know about trade-offs, about which MATLAB sometimes > gives misleading impressions, resulting in a mismatch > when time comes to fit a solution into a given number > of gates, wires, pins, pipe stages, clock cycles, > bytes of memory, or mW, etc. >So it comes down to what your cost function is? I can't think of a tool out there that will optimize to the correct cost function without being told what it is. Some will make assumptions-- and the user might not even be aware of what those assumptions are. At least Matlab generally provides documentation. -- Scott Reverse name to reply
