Arpiben Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 On 10/17/2019 at 3:53 AM, pkane2001 said: In case you want to do some really extreme testing with a 64-bit version of the multitone file, I generated one to see what that would look like. The phases are not exactly as produced by AP but the frequencies are. I didn't try to guess the algorithm they used for phase. Instead, I just used a common one (Shapiro-Rudin). Here's a comparison between the AP 32-bit and my 64-bit files. I dithered the 64-bit file at 70 bits something you can do with floating point numbers. Of course, the AP file is in blue: Hi Paul, I have been generating ( for fun and learning purposes) multi tones with low crest factor ( Golay_Rudin_Shapiro, Newman, Schroeder, Kitayoshi, etc...). The point is I didn't succeed yet retrieving the algorithm for matching the frequencies of AP file. In principle, it should not be so difficult but I am struggling... Do you mind sharing how did you generate them? Here are some phases : Newman: Schroeder: Kitayoshi: Link to comment
TomCapraro Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 33 minutes ago, Arpiben said: @TomCapraro Please, can you share your spectrum settings since I am also having correct harmonic levels with Kaiser & Dirichlet? Rgds Arpiben 1 Link to comment
TomCapraro Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 This is instead the report with Kaiser setting Comparison THD = -28,26dB H1 (1000Hz) = 0,32dB H3 (3000Hz) = -27,07dB H5 (5000Hz) = -40,77dB H7 (7000Hz) = -68,04dB H9 (9000Hz) = -85,74dB Link to comment
Arpiben Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 16 minutes ago, TomCapraro said: Now we are phase aligned 😊. I am getting your results. Comparison THD = -26,07dB H1 (1000Hz) = -1,78dB H3 (3000Hz) = -102,16dB H5 (5000Hz) = -70,5dB H7 (7000Hz) = -94,43dB Link to comment
TomCapraro Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 10 minutes ago, Arpiben said: Now we are phase aligned 😊. I am getting your results. Comparison THD = -26,07dB H1 (1000Hz) = -1,78dB H3 (3000Hz) = -102,16dB H5 (5000Hz) = -70,5dB H7 (7000Hz) = -94,43dB Aren't they weird? Link to comment
Arpiben Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 6 minutes ago, TomCapraro said: Aren't they weird? Yes from my point of view, but I am not THD expert. It seems that algorithm calculates the difference between Ref&Comp harmonic at first glance. But there is probably some power density calculation within a specified bandwidth which might be tricked...No idea. Paul will help us 😉 Link to comment
esldude Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 Okay, using Blackman Harris 7 I get this. Comparison DR = 52.2dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -28.44dB H1 (1000Hz) = -2.73dB H3 (3000Hz) = -32.77dB H5 (5000Hz) = -52.18dB H7 (7000Hz) = -89.33dB H9 (9000Hz) = -118.18dB Using Hann the 3rd harmonic level is clearly wrong. Comparison DR = 48.55dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -26.06dB H1 (1000Hz) = -4.5dB H3 (3000Hz) = -105.85dB H5 (5000Hz) = -73.23dB H7 (7000Hz) = -97.13dB Using Dirichlet no H3 is listed. There is one there in the spectrum at about -27 db. Comparison DR = 31.52dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -41.64dB H1 (1000Hz) = -9.61dB H5 (5000Hz) = -53.17dB H7 (7000Hz) = -71dB This is Nutall: Comparison DR = 53.53dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -26.69dB H1 (1000Hz) = -3.39dB H3 (3000Hz) = -39.42dB H5 (5000Hz) = -77.8dB This is Kaiser: Comparison DR = 51.07dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -28.26dB H1 (1000Hz) = -2.41dB H3 (3000Hz) = -29.8dB H5 (5000Hz) = -43.5dB H7 (7000Hz) = -70.78dB H9 (9000Hz) = -88.49dB Here is Flat top windowing. Comparison DR = 50.84dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -26.73dB H1 (1000Hz) = -2dB H3 (3000Hz) = -29.37dB H5 (5000Hz) = -51.41dB H7 (7000Hz) = -106.46dB ON music I typically use blackman-harris 7 or Hann. And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted October 26, 2019 Author Share Posted October 26, 2019 11 hours ago, Arpiben said: Hi Paul, I have been generating ( for fun and learning purposes) multi tones with low crest factor ( Golay_Rudin_Shapiro, Newman, Schroeder, Kitayoshi, etc...). The point is I didn't succeed yet retrieving the algorithm for matching the frequencies of AP file. In principle, it should not be so difficult but I am struggling... Do you mind sharing how did you generate them? Here are some phases : Newman: Schroeder: Kitayoshi: Hi Arpiben, As I mentioned, I didn't succeed (or tried) to match the phase of the AP file. I was primarily interested in getting a reasonably low crest multi-tone sample generated in 64 bits instead of the AP 32. The algorithm I used was Shapiro-Rudin. I've been thinking about adding a Generator option to DW for a while to create various test tones, but thought it would be more of a feature just for me and not that useful to anyone else Maybe I'll do that anyway, since I have the code already written, but only used during testing. -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
Arpiben Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 3 minutes ago, pkane2001 said: Hi Arpiben, As I mentioned, I didn't succeed (or tried) to match the phase of the AP file. I was primarily interested in getting a reasonably low crest multi-tone sample generated in 64 bits instead of the AP 32. The algorithm I used was Shapiro-Rudin. Hi Paul, But at least you got the frequencies right , not yet my case. AP's frequencies aren't equally spaced.😉 Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted October 26, 2019 Author Share Posted October 26, 2019 3 hours ago, esldude said: Okay, using Blackman Harris 7 I get this. Comparison DR = 52.2dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -28.44dB H1 (1000Hz) = -2.73dB H3 (3000Hz) = -32.77dB H5 (5000Hz) = -52.18dB H7 (7000Hz) = -89.33dB H9 (9000Hz) = -118.18dB Using Hann the 3rd harmonic level is clearly wrong. Comparison DR = 48.55dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -26.06dB H1 (1000Hz) = -4.5dB H3 (3000Hz) = -105.85dB H5 (5000Hz) = -73.23dB H7 (7000Hz) = -97.13dB Using Dirichlet no H3 is listed. There is one there in the spectrum at about -27 db. Comparison DR = 31.52dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -41.64dB H1 (1000Hz) = -9.61dB H5 (5000Hz) = -53.17dB H7 (7000Hz) = -71dB This is Nutall: Comparison DR = 53.53dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -26.69dB H1 (1000Hz) = -3.39dB H3 (3000Hz) = -39.42dB H5 (5000Hz) = -77.8dB This is Kaiser: Comparison DR = 51.07dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -28.26dB H1 (1000Hz) = -2.41dB H3 (3000Hz) = -29.8dB H5 (5000Hz) = -43.5dB H7 (7000Hz) = -70.78dB H9 (9000Hz) = -88.49dB Here is Flat top windowing. Comparison DR = 50.84dB Comparison THD+N = -27.32dB Comparison THD = -26.73dB H1 (1000Hz) = -2dB H3 (3000Hz) = -29.37dB H5 (5000Hz) = -51.41dB H7 (7000Hz) = -106.46dB ON music I typically use blackman-harris 7 or Hann. Blackman Harris 7 is a safe choice. Kaiser seems to want more samples for proper analysis. It is one of the better side-lobe rejecting windows in DW, but it doesn't work (right) if the FFT size is equal to the number of samples in the file. EDIT: To clarify, it's not a property of the Kaiser window. It's the property of how it was implemented in DeltaWave (and so must be my error somewhere!) -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted October 26, 2019 Author Share Posted October 26, 2019 1 minute ago, Arpiben said: Hi Paul, But at least you got the frequencies right , not yet my case. AP's frequencies aren't equally spaced.😉 The frequencies are just the exact middle frequency of the corresponding FFT bin for FFT size of 65536. Arpiben 1 -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted October 26, 2019 Author Share Posted October 26, 2019 10 hours ago, Arpiben said: Yes from my point of view, but I am not THD expert. It seems that algorithm calculates the difference between Ref&Comp harmonic at first glance. But there is probably some power density calculation within a specified bandwidth which might be tricked...No idea. Paul will help us 😉 The value computed by DW is THD+N. The algorithm is pretty simple: find the frequency with the largest amplitude, then apply a notch filter to remove it. What remains is the harmonic distortion and noise. Of course, this will only work for a simple sine wave test signal, anything more complex will require more complex filters. -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
TomCapraro Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 Here, I like it. Exact results are obtained. The signal is a 1000hz tone but with a periodic FFT 64 function activated (it is generated with REW) The FFT window is the Dirichlet. Sine_1000_96k_Float_LR.wav reccc.wav pkane2001 1 Link to comment
modmix Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 On 10/26/2019 at 12:14 AM, esldude said: So how do you get that display to come up in Deltawave. Must be a key or hidden menu I missed. would like to learn that, too. Ulli Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted October 27, 2019 Author Share Posted October 27, 2019 2 hours ago, modmix said: would like to learn that, too. Ulli That THD legend overlay doesn’t exit yet but can be easily added if you think it’ll help. -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
modmix Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 Might be usefull in some cases, yes. Would like to have it. TIA Ulli Link to comment
rando Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 @pkane2001 How many keyboard shortcuts are there for this program? For us dumkoffs that use it for actual musical comparisons and probably a few interested in the direction it is currently headed. Since your payoff here is feedback. When you consider taking this market I wonder if you will be able to wrap up all the progressive thinking being applied back into a simple format. I really like the idea of being able to overlay/hide items that don't require (or possible do) graphing by some unintrusive means. Very politely I would like to add I feel the addition of additional charts requiring arrowing was a small step backwards in design. Perhaps assignable charts is an option that would for instance allow hiding spectogram on bit perfect files to make room for a specific chart or three on the far end. You've done an admirable job of fighting clutter in the options panel and in the main program up until scrolling was introduced, IMO. Just a thought I hope doesn't cause you (much) grief. Link to comment
esldude Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 5 hours ago, modmix said: would like to learn that, too. Ulli Currently that info is in the bottom of the results page if you have simple waveforms checked in the settings. And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted October 27, 2019 Author Share Posted October 27, 2019 4 hours ago, rando said: @pkane2001 How many keyboard shortcuts are there for this program? For us dumkoffs that use it for actual musical comparisons and probably a few interested in the direction it is currently headed. Since your payoff here is feedback. When you consider taking this market I wonder if you will be able to wrap up all the progressive thinking being applied back into a simple format. I really like the idea of being able to overlay/hide items that don't require (or possible do) graphing by some unintrusive means. Very politely I would like to add I feel the addition of additional charts requiring arrowing was a small step backwards in design. Perhaps assignable charts is an option that would for instance allow hiding spectogram on bit perfect files to make room for a specific chart or three on the far end. You've done an admirable job of fighting clutter in the options panel and in the main program up until scrolling was introduced, IMO. Just a thought I hope doesn't cause you (much) grief. Just to make sure that you are aware (and I know it's not obvious) but you can already show/hide the charts as needed. You can do this directly from the settings screen or from the View->Tabs menu. Any charts that are hidden will not clutter the screen, and what's more, will not be computed saving processing time and making everything quicker. Does this help? or rando 1 -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
Arpiben Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 On 10/26/2019 at 11:56 PM, pkane2001 said: The frequencies are just the exact middle frequency of the corresponding FFT bin for FFT size of 65536. Here are the frequencies used by AP's 32 tones test (192 kHz sampling/FFT 65536). IMHO, the distribution is not so obvious .😉 Rgds. Link to comment
TomCapraro Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 I keep making tests. Second test.👍 pkane2001 1 Link to comment
TomCapraro Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 Very good indeed. I understand that below -110dB does not detect more harmonics, after all at those levels you can not even define distortion. I also use gain alignment so that the comparison positions it at 0dBFS. pkane2001 1 Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted October 27, 2019 Author Share Posted October 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Arpiben said: Here are the frequencies used by AP's 32 tones test (192 kHz sampling/FFT 65536). IMHO, the distribution is not so obvious .😉 Rgds. Seems like some fraction of a decade increment (actually, looks like 1/10 of a decade): Arpiben 1 -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 28, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 28, 2019 7 hours ago, rando said: @pkane2001 How many keyboard shortcuts are there for this program? For us dumkoffs that use it for actual musical comparisons and probably a few interested in the direction it is currently headed. Since your payoff here is feedback. When you consider taking this market I wonder if you will be able to wrap up all the progressive thinking being applied back into a simple format. I really like the idea of being able to overlay/hide items that don't require (or possible do) graphing by some unintrusive means. Very politely I would like to add I feel the addition of additional charts requiring arrowing was a small step backwards in design. Perhaps assignable charts is an option that would for instance allow hiding spectogram on bit perfect files to make room for a specific chart or three on the far end. You've done an admirable job of fighting clutter in the options panel and in the main program up until scrolling was introduced, IMO. Just a thought I hope doesn't cause you (much) grief. Unless I am forgetting some there are only two hidden features. One is once you are looking at a spectrum, you can hold the shift key and click. Then move the pointer to a portion of the spectrum which will show frequency and DB level. Releasing leaves it there and you can do additional such pointers. In post 1047 (a couple up thread) you can see where Tom has done this for several points. The other is holding down the scroll wheel and clicking lets you select an area to zoom in on a graph. You can do that for a certain part of the graph and it will scale automatically. Or you can do it along the edge of either axis to only change the one axis. Also if you didn't know, you can simply place the mouse in a graph and roll the scroll wheel to zoom in or out or place the mouse pointer along either edge axis and scroll the zoom in or out for that axis. Oh and you can put the mouse pointer in a graph and click and hold. This lets you grab the graph and move around within it if you wish. Also the same along either axis. If I forgot any, maybe others will add to my list. rando and pkane2001 1 1 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
esldude Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Arpiben said: Here are the frequencies used by AP's 32 tones test (192 kHz sampling/FFT 65536). IMHO, the distribution is not so obvious .😉 Rgds. I think I posted a link to a post on ASR in the last few days. As well as those frequencies, they are set to different phases I assume to reduce peak levels. And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now