Linear PCM audio: 44.1 KHz sample-rate, monaural, 22,050-bits-per-second

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Radium, Jul 23, 2007.

  1. Radium

    Radium Guest

    On Jul 20, 6:08 pm, Oli Charlesworth <> wrote
    http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/msg/0eef9d996e79f473?hl=en& :

    > This makes no sense.
    > How can
    > you describe 44100
    > samples with a single
    > bit?


    Well, one-bit-per-44,100-cycles is what I was originally looking for.
    However, as some posters have stated, all I would hear in 1-bit-per-
    cycle would resemble a square wave "tick tock". New stuff is learned
    everyday.

    So how about decreasing the amount of bits-per-cycle so that the bit-
    rate becomes 20,000-bits-per-second? After all the human auditory
    system perceives up to 20 KHz so covering the entire human audio
    frequency range would require at least 20-kilobits-per-second.

    In a sample rate of 44,100-cycles-per-second, this would best be done
    at 1-bit-every-2-cycles. This would give a bit-rate of 22,050-bits-per-
    second. That's obviously above 20kbits-per-second but only slightly.

    Couldn't the bit-rate be less than the sample-rate if some information
    in each sample is thrown away? Could this data-reduction be done
    linearly?

    With each 44,100-cycles-per-second, discard half the information, and
    you get 22,050-bits-per-second. Discard 1 bit for every two cycles. I
    could be incorrect though. If so, please assist me.

    To all:

    I have a neurological disability called Asperger's Syndrome.

    I would like to give you some information about my disability. The
    reason I am posting this message about Asperger's is to help avoid any
    potential misunderstandings [though it's probably too late].

    I have been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome (AS). AS is a
    neurological condition that causes significant impairment in social
    interactions. People with AS see the world differently and this can
    often bring them in conflict with conventional ways of thinking. They
    have difficulty in reading body language, and interpreting subtle
    cues. In my situation, I have significant difficulty with natural
    conversation, reading social cues, and maintaining eye contact. This
    can lead to a great deal of misunderstanding about my intent or my
    behavior. For example, I may not always know what to say in social
    situations, so I may look away or may not say anything. I also may not
    always respond quickly when asked direct questions, but if given time
    I am able express my ideas.

    On Usenet, the text-equivalent of my disability is probably noticed. I
    do apologize profusely, for any inconvenience it causes.

    Thank you very much in advance for your understanding, cooperation,
    and assistance.


    Regards,

    Radium
     
    Radium, Jul 23, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Radium

    Jordan Guest

    Radium wrote:
    >
    > So how about decreasing the amount of bits-per-cycle so that the bit-
    > rate becomes 20,000-bits-per-second? After all the human auditory
    > system perceives up to 20 KHz so covering the entire human audio
    > frequency range would require at least 20-kilobits-per-second.
    >


    Hi Radium

    You need double the sampling rate to reproduce an analogue waveform,
    according to Nyqvist theorem.
     
    Jordan, Jul 23, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jordan wrote:
    > Radium wrote:
    >>
    >> So how about decreasing the amount of bits-per-cycle so that the bit-
    >> rate becomes 20,000-bits-per-second? After all the human auditory
    >> system perceives up to 20 KHz so covering the entire human audio
    >> frequency range would require at least 20-kilobits-per-second.
    >>

    >
    > Hi Radium
    >
    > You need double the sampling rate to reproduce an analogue waveform,
    > according to Nyqvist theorem.


    Correct. The 20k sampling rate would yield a maximum of 10k waveforms,
    which for older folks and people with hearing damage would pretty much
    cover the audio spectrum.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=, Jul 23, 2007
    #3
  4. Radium

    GHalleck Guest

    Rôgêr wrote:

    > Jordan wrote:
    >
    >> Radium wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> So how about decreasing the amount of bits-per-cycle so that the bit-
    >>> rate becomes 20,000-bits-per-second? After all the human auditory
    >>> system perceives up to 20 KHz so covering the entire human audio
    >>> frequency range would require at least 20-kilobits-per-second.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Hi Radium
    >>
    >> You need double the sampling rate to reproduce an analogue waveform,
    >> according to Nyqvist theorem.

    >
    >
    > Correct. The 20k sampling rate would yield a maximum of 10k waveforms,
    > which for older folks and people with hearing damage would pretty much
    > cover the audio spectrum.


    True, but only if there was a sharp cutoff at 10 KHz, which is not the
    case. The overtones above 10 KHz, which is normally present in analog,
    would be lost under digital at a 20,000-bit sampling rate.

    Even today, the music industry regrets having set the 44.1 KHz sampling
    rate as the standard. If the musicians and listeners had their way, the
    sampling rate would have been much higher, perhaps 68 KHz, just to match
    the quality of analog releases.
     
    GHalleck, Jul 23, 2007
    #4
  5. Radium wrote:
    > On Jul 20, 6:08 pm, Oli Charlesworth <> wrote
    > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/msg/0eef9d996e79f473?hl=en& :
    >
    >> This makes no sense.
    >> How can
    >> you describe 44100
    >> samples with a single
    >> bit?

    >
    > Well, one-bit-per-44,100-cycles is what I was originally looking for.
    > However, as some posters have stated, all I would hear in 1-bit-per-
    > cycle would resemble a square wave "tick tock".


    Not necessarily. In modern signal processing, signals are decomposed
    into components by an analysis phase, say, by Fourier Transforms (while
    more often in its special case of the Discrete Cosine Transform, for a
    lot of good theoretical and practical reasons) or by other means like
    wavelet transforms. The signal is then separated into its components
    and it is the information about the components that is coded.

    A complex sound wave might be the result of adding two basic frequencies
    with given amplitudes. One would then code the frequency and amplitude
    of these two frequencies to represent the signal. If the description is
    "I have frequency F1 with amplitude A1 combined with F2 with A2, over
    1 second", the number of bits per sample is very, very, low, achieving
    a high compression ratio.

    In the real world, however, sound waves are the results of a great
    number of frequency/amplitude and they are not totally periodic.
    Algorithms will decompose the signal into the component frequencies,
    code each to a certain precision, thus yielding an acceptable
    reconstruction at decompression. The efficiency of the compression
    therefore depends on how you decompose the signal and how smart you are
    about selectively destroying precision so that the signal is compressed
    to a certain amount of bits.


    Best,

    S.
     
    Steven Pigeon, Jul 23, 2007
    #5
  6. Radium

    Phil Carmody Guest

    Radium <> writes:
    > On Jul 20, 6:08 pm, Oli Charlesworth <> wrote
    > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/msg/0eef9d996e79f473?hl=en& :
    >
    > > This makes no sense.
    > > How can
    > > you describe 44100
    > > samples with a single
    > > bit?

    >
    > Well, one-bit-per-44,100-cycles is what I was originally looking for.
    > However, as some posters have stated, all I would hear in 1-bit-per-
    > cycle would resemble a square wave "tick tock". New stuff is learned
    > everyday.


    Nonsense. You can digitise anything, such as the human voice
    using a 1-bit signal wave. I forget the name of the technique
    now, something like delta modulation. I did it back on my ZX
    Spectrum in the early 80s. Basically, if the gradient of the
    signal is negative output a 0, and if it's positive output a
    1. It's crummy, but it's recognisable.

    The only reason you'd get a 'tick-tock' is if you were trying
    to digitise something that vaguely resembled a 'tick-tock' sound.

    Phil
    --
    "Home taping is killing big business profits. We left this side blank
    so you can help." -- Dead Kennedys, written upon the B-side of tapes of
    /In God We Trust, Inc./.
     
    Phil Carmody, Jul 23, 2007
    #6
  7. Steven Pigeon wrote:

    > Not necessarily. In modern signal processing, signals are decomposed
    > into components by an analysis phase, say, by Fourier Transforms (while
    > more often in its special case of the Discrete Cosine Transform, for a
    > lot of good theoretical and practical reasons) or by other means like
    > wavelet transforms. The signal is then separated into its components
    > and it is the information about the components that is coded.
    >
    > A complex sound wave might be the result of adding two basic frequencies
    > with given amplitudes. One would then code the frequency and amplitude
    > of these two frequencies to represent the signal. If the description is
    > "I have frequency F1 with amplitude A1 combined with F2 with A2, over
    > 1 second", the number of bits per sample is very, very, low, achieving
    > a high compression ratio.
    >
    > In the real world, however, sound waves are the results of a great
    > number of frequency/amplitude and they are not totally periodic.
    > Algorithms will decompose the signal into the component frequencies,
    > code each to a certain precision, thus yielding an acceptable
    > reconstruction at decompression. The efficiency of the compression
    > therefore depends on how you decompose the signal and how smart you are
    > about selectively destroying precision so that the signal is compressed
    > to a certain amount of bits.


    Me too.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=, Jul 23, 2007
    #7
  8. Radium

    Don Pearce Guest

    On 23 Jul 2007 12:51:07 +0300, Phil Carmody
    <> wrote:

    >Nonsense. You can digitise anything, such as the human voice
    >using a 1-bit signal wave. I forget the name of the technique
    >now, something like delta modulation. I did it back on my ZX
    >Spectrum in the early 80s. Basically, if the gradient of the
    >signal is negative output a 0, and if it's positive output a
    >1. It's crummy, but it's recognisable.


    Sort of right. What happens is this. The 1/0 digital signal is used to
    charge or discharge a capacitor. At each time tick, the voltage on
    that capacitor is compared to the level of the audio signal. If it is
    too low, a 1 will charge it up a bit, and if it is too high a 0 will
    drain a little charge from it, keeping it matched exactly to the
    audio. The resulting stream of 1s and 0s describes the audio signal.

    d

    --
    Pearce Consulting
    http://www.pearce.uk.com
     
    Don Pearce, Jul 23, 2007
    #8
  9. Radium

    Pete Fraser Guest

    "Phil Carmody" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    >
    > Nonsense. You can digitise anything, such as the human voice
    > using a 1-bit signal wave. I forget the name of the technique
    > now, something like delta modulation. I did it back on my ZX
    > Spectrum in the early 80s. Basically, if the gradient of the
    > signal is negative output a 0, and if it's positive output a
    > 1. It's crummy, but it's recognisable.


    It's only crummy if you don't sample fast enough.
    Many audio A/D converters work like this.
     
    Pete Fraser, Jul 23, 2007
    #9
  10. Radium

    Karl Uppiano Guest

    "Pete Fraser" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Phil Carmody" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>
    >> Nonsense. You can digitise anything, such as the human voice
    >> using a 1-bit signal wave. I forget the name of the technique
    >> now, something like delta modulation. I did it back on my ZX
    >> Spectrum in the early 80s. Basically, if the gradient of the
    >> signal is negative output a 0, and if it's positive output a
    >> 1. It's crummy, but it's recognisable.

    >
    > It's only crummy if you don't sample fast enough.
    > Many audio A/D converters work like this.


    Practically all of the current Sigma/Delta (or Delta/Sigma) converters do
    this. They are sometimes called MASH converters or 1-bit converters. If the
    1-bit converter sample fast enough (in the MHz range) that resolution is not
    lost at the maximum slew-rate (which can be calculated from the slope of the
    desired maximum input frequency at full scale amplitude), then it is
    theoretically capable of arbitrarily high resolution (i.e., quality). The
    output of this converter is then numerically transformed into a 16-bit or
    24-bit PCM datastream at the selected sample rate (e.g., 44.1KHz or
    whatever).

    A well-made Sigma/Delta converter can be made more reliable than the older
    successive approximation register (SAR) converters, because of the
    difficulty of trimming SAR resistors or capacitors to the exacting precision
    needed for 16 or 24 bit audio (all 24 voltage references must be accurate to
    about 3 millionths of a percent for 24 bit accuracy to 1/2 LSB - impossible,
    even if hand trimmed - and it wouldn't stay that way for long!). A 1-bit
    converter, on the other hand, only requires one coarsely-trimmed voltage
    reference, and accurate timing, which is much easier to achieve with careful
    circuit layout.

    http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/1870
     
    Karl Uppiano, Jul 24, 2007
    #10
  11. Radium

    Jasen Betts Guest

    On 2007-07-23, Phil Carmody <> wrote:
    > Radium <> writes:
    >> On Jul 20, 6:08 pm, Oli Charlesworth <> wrote
    >> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/msg/0eef9d996e79f473?hl=en& :
    >>
    >> > This makes no sense.
    >> > How can
    >> > you describe 44100
    >> > samples with a single
    >> > bit?

    >>
    >> Well, one-bit-per-44,100-cycles is what I was originally looking for.
    >> However, as some posters have stated, all I would hear in 1-bit-per-
    >> cycle would resemble a square wave "tick tock". New stuff is learned
    >> everyday.

    >
    > Nonsense. You can digitise anything, such as the human voice
    > using a 1-bit signal wave. I forget the name of the technique
    > now,


    delta-sigma.

    > something like delta modulation. I did it back on my ZX
    > Spectrum in the early 80s. Basically, if the gradient of the
    > signal is negative output a 0, and if it's positive output a
    > 1. It's crummy, but it's recognisable.


    I recall hearing speech from the games "Ghost Busters" and "Freedom
    Fighter"

    In the 90s modplay would overlay wav files an play them out the PC
    speaker (which is also one-bit).

    Bye.
    Jasen
     
    Jasen Betts, Jul 24, 2007
    #11
  12. Radium

    Willem Guest

    Jasen wrote:
    ) On 2007-07-23, Phil Carmody <> wrote:
    )> Nonsense. You can digitise anything, such as the human voice
    )> using a 1-bit signal wave. I forget the name of the technique
    )> now,
    )
    ) delta-sigma.
    )
    )> something like delta modulation. I did it back on my ZX
    )> Spectrum in the early 80s. Basically, if the gradient of the
    )> signal is negative output a 0, and if it's positive output a
    )> 1. It's crummy, but it's recognisable.
    )
    ) I recall hearing speech from the games "Ghost Busters" and "Freedom
    ) Fighter"
    )
    ) In the 90s modplay would overlay wav files an play them out the PC
    ) speaker (which is also one-bit).

    But that's a different technique. You can program the PC speaker to putput
    a square wave with a programmed phase width and a high frequency, and then
    vary the phase width you get different samples.


    SaSW, Willem
    --
    Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
    made in the above text. For all I know I might be
    drugged or something..
    No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
    #EOT
     
    Willem, Jul 24, 2007
    #12
  13. Radium

    Guest

    On Jul 24, 9:01 am, Willem <> wrote:

    >You can program the PC speaker to putput


    LOL. Willem, I wanna 'putput' you into a jar, display it to the masses
    and say "This, folks, is why we can't have nice things!"
     
    , Jul 24, 2007
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Al Dykes
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,228
    Tony Spadaro
    Dec 29, 2003
  2. Linear PCM audio

    , Nov 4, 2006, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    476
  3. Don and Liz Campbell

    1 Frame per second frame capture rate

    Don and Liz Campbell, Mar 24, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    386
  4. peggy83

    bits per pixel VS bits per channel

    peggy83, Oct 10, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    927
    Scott W
    Oct 10, 2006
  5. Radium
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,710
    dadiOH
    Jul 18, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page