Subject: From: at <tothlINF.U-SZEGED.HU> Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 16:29:00 MET
>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 <tothl(at)inf.u-szeged.hu> X-Sender: tothl(at)csilla To: auditory(at)lists.mcgill.ca Subject: Re: Cepstrum computation In-Reply-To: <9906231534.ZM4071(at)fonsg9.hum.uva.nl> Message-ID: <Pine.SV220.127.116.110623155342.3607A-100000(at)csilla> MIME-Version: 1.0 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 Content-Length: 1526 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. Laszlo Toth Hungarian Academy of Sciences * "In our life there's if Research Group on Artificial Intelligence * In our beliefs there's lie e-mail: tothl(at)inf.u-szeged.hu * In our business there's sin http://www.inf.u-szeged.hu/~tothl * In our bodies there's die"