26 Sep
2010
26 Sep
'10
10:06 p.m.
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 11:40:08AM -0700, Niels Mayer wrote:
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 4:12 AM,
<fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
No.
The reason is that step (5), multiplication in
the
frequency domain, is equivalent to convolution in the
time domain. And the convolution of two signals of N
samples (T1 and T2) has lenght 2*N-1. This means that
this result is wrapped around in step (6) since the
inverse FFT produces only N samples.
Doesn't this also apply to basic digital "mixing" of audio signals --
and appears to be the fundamental difference in both
sound and
algorithm between "analog summing bus", where each digital output in
the mix is sent to an independent DAC, getting full 24 bit resolution
per and full samplerate per signal, and then summing that in the
analog domain. This effectively multiplies the bitrates of all the
sources and is the equivalent to the "convolution of C-number of
signals of N samples (T1 and T2) has length C*N-1"
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 won't even comment on the rest, as I'd have to be at least
as rude :-)
Ciao,
--
FA
There are three of them, and Alleline.