On March 18, 2013 11:58:48 PM Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 07:43:32PM -0400, Tim E. Real wrote:
> > Ah, I may have answered my own question when I said:
> > "(One cannot simply wait for the current data value to be 'zero' because
> >
> > for example with a perfect square wave signal the 'current' value will
> > never approach zero, hence the zero-crossing detection requirement.)"
>
> The analog waveform always 'approaches' zero - it's bandlimited and hence
> continuous - it just may not happen at a sample point. In fact the chance
> that it happens exactly at a sample point is zero.
>
> > So having no choice but to apply the volume at this cross point the
> > popping
> >
> > noise might still be heard. I guess that's what Fons meant by
> > 'reduced'...
> > and what Paul meant by... bogus. Right?
>
> Imagine a signal slowly passing through zero, e.g. a low frequency
> sine wave. If you switch gain at an arbitatry point there will be
> a 'step', having a 1/F spectrum (just like a square wave). If you
> switch at a zero crossing there will be 'sharp corner', and this
> has a 1/(F^2) spectrum (like a triangular wave). So instead of a
> sharp click there will be something more like a 'thump'. The only
> real solution is to never switch the gain, but change it smoothly.
>
> Caio,
Cool. Got it. And the response to James. Thanks very much.
It is here at the mixing stage that I want to limit control motions.
All our controller graphs are sample-accurate and it's possible to
deliberately draw sudden changes, also it's possible to suddenly
change a GUI slider or knob's position.
Tim.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Tue Mar 19 04:15:03 2013
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 19 2013 - 04:15:03 EET