30 Sep
2010
30 Sep
'10
5:28 p.m.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 06:57:07AM -0700, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>> Perhaps an easier way to do this in the
future is to just present your
>> evidence up front instead of trashing other peoples hard work with vague
>> off hand and out of context remarks.
>
> Where did I do that ?
Here's the greatest hits:
"It's a good example of textbook DSP being applied blindly
and without understanding the consequences. "
Quoted out of context. This was about the FFT-based filtering,
not Jamin in general, and it is simply true. I could mention
quite a few other examples of the same. Coding algorithms from
a textbook or a web page, no matter the quality of the coding
or the amount of it, doesn't make one a DSP engineer, let alone
an experienced one. DSP engineers are supposed to be able to
understand and analyse DSP algorithms and find out where or how
a problem originates. The history of this problem clearly shows
that this did not happen.
"But it's a kludge, and a solution to a
problem that shouldn't exist in the first place."
Even more out of context. This referred to the way the quite
apparent problems with the initial version of the FFT-based
filtering have been 'solved'. Not by fixing the algorithm,
which would have been easy, but by hiding the errors at the
expense of multiplying the CPU load by at least a factor of
four. It's like trying to fix wallpaper falling off a damp
wall by adding a few new layers. And that *is* a kludge.
"As said, there are two issues with the EQ. The
first is that the
implementation is subobtimal and introduces artefacts that have
to be (and are to some extent) hidden by changes added after the
initial release. The second is that this type of filtering allows
and invites to do things that do indeed 'destroy' the sound from
a purist POV, while adding nothing useful from any other POV."
What here is 'off hand, vague and out of context' ??
and I suppose this was just plain vindictiveness
"Don't know where you get this, but I assume it's not the result
of your own intellectual efforts and so I can just say 'bullshit'
(the pure liquid variety actually).
I have no reason at all to vindictive towards Niels (to whom I
replied). He's reading a lot on the web and posting a lot of
links. Some of the stuff out there *is* pure bullshit, that
is not Niels' fault nor did I suggest it was. He asked for my
opinion on this and got a straight answer that was very
obviously not intended to hurt him. If it did I do apologize
(to Niels). If it hurts the authors of said BS I don't care,
they know they are spreading BS and have taken the risk.
Ciao,
--
FA
There are three of them, and Alleline.