| Author
|
mix balance: RMS vs Peak
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Aug 9, 2007 13:27
|
erm...
"but imagine that you have equal parts at 5dbs and 10dbs then you'll get 7,5dbs."
i got this wrong. it would be about 7,90
7,905(7) = sqr ((5^2+10^2)/2)
avs@ you can, a square wave like trip- said
as the same peak as rms.
but im not sure digital stuff will measure it correctly because as you say square waves are impossible in digital because of the finite sample rate.
  roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
AvS
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
464
Posted : Aug 9, 2007 23:04
|
I'm still sure thats impossible. I bet its the computer that measures it in a wrong way or the peak and RMS are to close to the same value so it just gives the same result even though there not quite the same. Or the computer knows how a square wave theoreticly look like and measures that.
Perfect square waves are also imposible in the real world. If i was possible objects would have to be able to teleport them self from one position to another plus you eardrums would have to do the same!
A sound with the same Peak and RMS value would be the same as no sound at all. Man this is getting philosophical. |
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Aug 9, 2007 23:24
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-08-09 23:04, AvS wrote:
Perfect square waves are also imposible in the real world. If i was possible objects would have to be able to teleport them self from one position to another plus you eardrums would have to do the same!
A sound with the same Peak and RMS value would be the same as no sound at all. Man this is getting philosophical.
|
|
yeap this gets a bit philosophical.
i wouldn't be so sure of what can or cant really happens in the real world.... hehehe
supposedly in the real world the transition from 1 to -1 (as it would be represented digitally) in a square wave happens in a infinitely fast period of time, in my comprehension of the subject, but i can be wrong 
computers take advantage of the fact that our ears are not that good, or cant easily recognize the differences.
i think a saw wave also has the same limitations when represented digitally: it goes gradually from -1 to 1 and then jumps to -1 again.
i happen to thread in a VST developers malling list and most swear it doesnt make a difference
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
AvS
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
464
Posted : Aug 9, 2007 23:42
|
"supposedly in the real world the transition from 1 to -1 (as it would be represented digitally) in a square wave happens in a infinitely fast period of time, in my comprehension of the subject, but i can be wrong"
Very true and this it the big problem in the real world.
I square wave would have to make a speaker membrane be at one position (in) and in the next moment it would have to be at the out position. This transition from one place to another has to happen without the membrane moving at all!
So the membrane, and your eardrums, are at first at one place and then text moment at another place. But no movement has actually happened at all!
Impossible. |
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : Aug 9, 2007 23:57
|
well, tele-transportation has already been achieved in labs around the world, so that phenomenon can actually happen in nature
but back to more palpable arguments: i agree that it cant be reproduced in a speaker.
roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
AvS
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
464
Posted : Aug 10, 2007 00:06
|
But even with teleportation i dont think a square wave is a sound. I mean nothing is moving.
I think from this you can conclude that there is no sound that has the same peak and rms value. |
|
|
|
astrotec
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
193
Posted : Aug 10, 2007 00:38
|
|
you guys are chattin some statistical shit here. |
|
|
|
