On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:28:36 -0700 davidrclark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > From your web page, it *appears* that you are using the sinc method > developed by Julius Smith of Stanford. Basically yes. > Smith's method is very > fast, but not as accurate as FFT/overlap with large windows. Without > Kaiser windowing, it wouldn't have seen the light of day due to the > truncation effects. I do use a Kaiser but unlike JOS, I optimize the beta value for a number of factors that the JOS paper seems to neglect. > I need something that preserves the phase and > other information as accurately as possible between the channels, > not a small-windows approximation. SRC preserves phase. > I need a guarantee of accuracy, > and I simply didn't have the time to fully investigate the sinc > method with Kaiser and other windows. I have been meaning (at least since I first released SRC) to write up some documentation on how SRC is tested, but I've been a little busy doing other things :-). > That was probably a longer answer than you anticipated, but I hope > I answered your question. Yes, thanks very much. Erik -- +-----------------------------------------------------------+ Erik de Castro Lopo nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Yes it's valid) +-----------------------------------------------------------+ `If you want a vision of the future, it is a wireless broadband network feeding requests for foreign money-laundering assistance into a human temporal lobe, forever. With banner ads.' -- John M. Ford
