On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 09:50:32AM +0100, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 22:51 +0200, fons@email-addr-hidden wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 12:19:33AM -0700, Niels Mayer wrote:
> >
> > > The big issue with having the full 144dB range is that the "business"
> > > end of the slider is all at the top,
> >
> > I've never seen a real fader that has any practical resolution
> > below -80 dB: the next tick, 5mm or so down, is 'Off'. And most
> > don't even go down that much.
>
> I'm sure most people on here know this, but the decibel scale is a
> relative logarithmic scale.
I'm sure most people know that. And what is supposed to follow from
this ? Most faders will be calibrated +10 or +15 dB at the top, so
if the last tick is -80 dB, that means a range of 95 dB. More than
that is pretty useless. The 144 dB range of the chip just reflects
the fact that the gain is set by a 24-bit integer value, that's all.
> Saying "-80dB" means that whatever went in
> was attenuated by 80dB, or 1x10E8
1e8 in power, 1e4 in amplitude.
- if you put in a 1V signal, a 0.01µV signal will result.
0.1 mv actually.
Ciao,
-- FA There are three of them, and Alleline. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-devReceived on Sun Aug 15 16:15:01 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 15 2010 - 16:15:02 EEST