Rockbox mail archive

• Next message: BlueChip: "Re: dB volume"
• Previous message: Neon John: "Re: dB volume"
• In reply to: [IDC]Dragon: "Re: dB volume"
• Next in thread: Gajdos_at_metatem.net: "Re: dB volume"
• Reply: Gajdos_at_metatem.net: "Re: dB volume"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

At 19:56 19/03/04, you wrote:
> > > To summarize: I vote for dB. :)
> >
> > Me too!
> >
> > Btw: does anybody actually use settings above 92% / 0dB?
> >
>
>I avoid it at all cost, because the distortion (clipping) is really bad.
>Once I tested with a full swing sine wave and the scope. This is where I got
>my 93% (for Aux) from, I think that was "electrically" 0dB, although today I
>learned different. Maybe I'll test again sometime.
>
>Jörg

What real tests will show is anybodies guess ...But "by the book", 92 is
correct :)

In the 3587, the volume range in 0...127, representing -114...+12dB in 1dB
steps

Each Rockbox step is therefore (127/100) == 1.27

So at 92, this resolves to (int)(1.27*92) == (int)116.84 == 116 = 0dB

You may also note that (int)(1.27*93) == (int)118.11 == 118 = 2dB

So 92=0dB and 93=+2dB ...it is not actually possible to choose +1dB with
Rockbox!

How ironic that the oveflow occurs at that point!

_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox

• Next message: BlueChip: "Re: dB volume"
• Previous message: Neon John: "Re: dB volume"
• In reply to: [IDC]Dragon: "Re: dB volume"
• Next in thread: Gajdos_at_metatem.net: "Re: dB volume"
• Reply: Gajdos_at_metatem.net: "Re: dB volume"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]