[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
>From tothl Wed Jun 23 16:29:32 +0200 1999 remote from inf.u-szeged.hu
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 16:29:32 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Toth Laszlo <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Cepstrum computation
Received: from inf.u-szeged.hu by inf.u-szeged.hu; Wed, 23 Jun 1999 16:29 MET
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Paul Boersma wrote:
> I use the Praat fft, and don't get into trouble, since it is scaled so that
> its output is expressed in true spectral density, i.e. Pascal/Hertz.
This Praat fft must be magic. I give you a series of numbers, don't tell
anything about how its amplitude/sampling rate is related to the real world,
and it gives back values in Pascal/Hertz??
By the way, something I never understood: Let's suppose I have an auditory
model (software) and nice articles about how the model behaves for speech
signals at a given SPL. I have a PC with a soundcard. My software gets a
series of samples as input. No SPL's, just a series of integers. One turn
on the mike-preamp's knob, and the amplitude of the samples is different. One
move in the soundcard's mixer program, and the amplitude of the samples is
different. One multiplication with a constant, and the amplitude of the
samples is different. So, even if my talker talks at a nice 70dB SPL
normal conversational level, as he's supposed, is there any way I can
relate the absolute power of the signal to the amplitude of my samples?
I'm afraid not.
Hungarian Academy of Sciences * "In our life there's if
Research Group on Artificial Intelligence * In our beliefs there's lie
e-mail: email@example.com * In our business there's sin
http://www.inf.u-szeged.hu/~tothl * In our bodies there's die"