![]() |
|
What's wrong with ringing?
I often see texts that imply or state outright that ringing in time-domain
audio waveforms, usually associated with time-domain discontinuities, is to be avoided. I wonder what is the basis for this. For example, if you take a perfect square wave with all of its harmonics, and mathematically remove all of those above a certain point you will see a waveform with ringing. I think this is referred to as Gibbs' Phenomenon. However far from being a problem, assuming you do have to band-limit a signal, the presence of ringing (in this case, anyway) seems to show: - perfect removal of all frequencies above a certain point; and - perfectly preserved amplitude and phase relationships amongst the remaining frequency components. As long as a filter perserves all human-audible frequencies I cannot see an objection (to this form of ringing, at least). The only argument I can think of for objecting is the possibility that the non-linear behaviour of the ear may result in specific audibility issues which wouldn't be heard with fully linear hearing. Indeed, I do see articles that cast doubt on the audibility of ringing. For example http://www.stereophile.com/reference/106ringing/. So is ringing a bad thing per se? Or are there specific forms that cause problems? -- John Phillips |
What's wrong with ringing?
In article , John Phillips
wrote: I often see texts that imply or state outright that ringing in time-domain audio waveforms, usually associated with time-domain discontinuities, is to be avoided. I wonder what is the basis for this. The argument seems to be primarily about 'pre' ringing. See below. For example, if you take a perfect square wave with all of its harmonics, and mathematically remove all of those above a certain point you will see a waveform with ringing. I think this is referred to as Gibbs' Phenomenon. The distinction I think people have latched onto is that if you use one of the familiar types of analogue LP filter, then any ringing tends to occur after the transitions of the square-wave. This tends to be interpreted as a 'causal' requirement. That the filter can't react to the transition until it occurs. Although this interpretation is rather shakey since it is quite possible for the entire pattern to have been delayed in transit though the filter, so any 'pre' transition ringing may be entirely causal - even with an analogue system. However far from being a problem, assuming you do have to band-limit a signal, the presence of ringing (in this case, anyway) seems to show: - perfect removal of all frequencies above a certain point; and - perfectly preserved amplitude and phase relationships amongst the remaining frequency components. Well, ringing visible on something like a scope can be removed if you allow the slope/shape of the LP filter to be fairly gradual. See, for example, the work by Peter Craven in JAES. The results can remain time symmetric, but the cost is a fairly gentle filter that then either cuts the HF inband and/or passes rubbish out of band. I note though that Meridian have now used a filter that gets all the ringing post transitions. Suspect this was based on Peter Craven's work. The downside it a tendency to phase spread, I assume. As long as a filter perserves all human-audible frequencies I cannot see an objection (to this form of ringing, at least). The only argument I can think of for objecting is the possibility that the non-linear behaviour of the ear may result in specific audibility issues which wouldn't be heard with fully linear hearing. Indeed, I do see articles that cast doubt on the audibility of ringing. For example http://www.stereophile.com/reference/106ringing/. See also the articles on this on audiomisc in the 'hearing' section which also considers hearing nonlinearity in this context. FWIW I am less than convinced ringing is audible in time symmetric filters. It seems to be another of the popular ideas in audio for which I've not personally found any reliable evidence. But given hearing nonlinearities, it might be audible. So I would not totally dismiss the idea from what I know at present. Slainte, Jim -- Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
What's wrong with ringing?
"John Phillips" I often see texts that imply or state outright that ringing in time-domain audio waveforms, usually associated with time-domain discontinuities, is to be avoided. I wonder what is the basis for this. ** So you have no idea that overshoot and ringing on a square wave trace is generally synonymous with a HF peak in the response curve ? That is why folk get so anxious and all worked up about it. Even when you produce a response curve and show there is minimal or simply no peak there in the case of sharp roll off HP filter, it is impossible to convince all the neurotic, anxiety ridden, eye believing, ear disbelieving, dim witted, pedantic rote learners they are wrong. The world of hi-fi audio is chock full of ******s - not experts. BTW: the listening test described in that Stereophile article ( drivel really) is highly flawed. ...... Phil |
What's wrong with ringing?
"Phil Allison" Correction: ** So you have no idea that overshoot and ringing on a square wave trace is generally synonymous with a HF peak in the response curve ? That is why folk get so anxious and all worked up about it. Even when you produce a response curve and show there is minimal or simply no peak there in the case of sharp roll off LP filter, it is impossible to convince all the neurotic, anxiety ridden, eye believing, ear disbelieving, dim witted, pedantic rote learners they are wrong. The world of hi-fi audio is chock full of ******s - not experts. BTW: the listening test described in that Stereophile article ( drivel really) is highly flawed. ..... Phil |
What's wrong with ringing?
"John Phillips" wrote
in message I often see texts that imply or state outright that ringing in time-domain audio waveforms, usually associated with time-domain discontinuities, is to be avoided. I wonder what is the basis for this. These texts seem to be promulgating a misapprehension. The misapprehension seems to be that all reproduced square waves with ripples in or around them, have those ripples because of ringing. Just because a reproduced square wave has ripples in or around it, is not evidence of ringing. Ringing is a very specific thing - it is a resonance. It is what a good bell does - it resonates. It is true that if you reproduce a square wave through a resonant circuit, there will be ripples in the reproduced signal. The fallacy is the false idea that all reproduced square waves with ripples in or around them are due to ringing. For example, if you take a perfect square wave with all of its harmonics, and mathematically remove all of those above a certain point you will see a waveform with ringing. I think this is referred to as Gibbs' Phenomenon. Actually, there is no ringing. There are no rising variations from flat frequency response. There is nothing added or accentuated in the reproduced signal. However far from being a problem, assuming you do have to band-limit a signal, the presence of ringing (in this case, anyway) seems to show: - perfect removal of all frequencies above a certain point; and - perfectly preserved amplitude and phase relationships amongst the remaining frequency components. Agreed. The actual problem is one of a poor word choice - we call those ripples ringing because they resemble a different situation that is properly called ringing. As long as a filter preserves all human-audible frequencies I cannot see an objection (to this form of ringing, at least). Agreed. The only argument I can think of for objecting is the possibility that the non-linear behaviour of the ear may result in specific audibility issues which wouldn't be heard with fully linear hearing. Just because someone hypothesizes such a problem, does not mean that it exists. Reliable evidence in this area would come from a properly-done listening test. In fact properly-done listening tests don't confirm the hypothesis that this problem exists. Indeed, I do see articles that cast doubt on the audibility of ringing. For example http://www.stereophile.com/reference/106ringing/. The article presents some apparently correct facts, but then fails to reach a reasonable conclusion because it perpetuates an audiophile myth: "But even in the earliest days of domestic digital audio there were dissenting voices. Many hi-fi writers, myself included, were thoroughly underwhelmed by our initial experiences of Compact Disc, and so were some influential audio professionals, such as Doug Sax." Doug Sax was an expert and influential vinyl mastering engineer. He has an obvious source of prejudice and bias in his life. The practical death of the LP as a dominant form of media severely reduced the need for skills that he had devoted much of his life to. This is not a technical problem, it is a life's strategy problem. It is not a music industry problem, it is a career-choice problem for one man. "Over a period of some years the intensity of this opposition to CD decreased somewhat, but many commentators and ordinary audio consumers concluded that there was something fundamentally amiss with 16/44.1 and 16/48 audio. Many of them voted with their feet, continuing to prefer the sound of the "obsolescent" LP." This is an almost completely false statement. By 2006 when he article was written, nearly 99% of the market for LPs had disappeared. Where once nearly 100% of all music lovers bought LPs, now nearly 100% of all music lovers bought music in some other music delivery format. In fact the overwhelming majority of commentators and ordinary audio consumers had abandoned the LP by 2006. Outside of the bizarre world of high end audio, and the very serious but tiny and shrinking world of collectors of legacy recordings, nobody much cared much about the LP format at all. The subsequent commercial failure of the SACD and DVD-A formats underscored how little people cared about these alleged problems. So is ringing a bad thing per se? Or are there specific forms that cause problems? |
What's wrong with ringing?
John Phillips wrote: I often see texts that imply or state outright that ringing in time-domain audio waveforms, usually associated with time-domain discontinuities, is to be avoided. I wonder what is the basis for this. Ringing on square wave inputs may be a sign of maginal stability. Graham |
What's wrong with ringing?
On 2008-07-07, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , John Phillips wrote: For example, if you take a perfect square wave with all of its harmonics, and mathematically remove all of those above a certain point you will see a waveform with ringing. I think this is referred to as Gibbs' Phenomenon. The distinction I think people have latched onto is that if you use one of the familiar types of analogue LP filter, then any ringing tends to occur after the transitions of the square-wave. This tends to be interpreted as a 'causal' requirement. That the filter can't react to the transition until it occurs. Although this interpretation is rather shakey since it is quite possible for the entire pattern to have been delayed in transit though the filter, so any 'pre' transition ringing may be entirely causal - even with an analogue system. This is one of the issues I see. Nothing is, in practice, acausal. The fact that in the square wave Gibbs Phenomenon example something appears to happen before the transition is nothing at all to do with acausality. There are differences in time-domain behaviour between difital and analogue filters but I ask myself whether applying "conventional wisdom" learned from the analogue case to the digital case is rather flawed. ... snip ... I note though that Meridian have now used a filter that gets all the ringing post transitions. Suspect this was based on Peter Craven's work. The downside it a tendency to phase spread, I assume. Yes. I saw that from Meridian and asked myself if it was marketing or engineering. ... snip ... See also the articles on this on audiomisc in the 'hearing' section which also considers hearing nonlinearity in this context. OK I will look. FWIW I am less than convinced ringing is audible in time symmetric filters. It seems to be another of the popular ideas in audio for which I've not personally found any reliable evidence. But given hearing nonlinearities, it might be audible. So I would not totally dismiss the idea from what I know at present. Agreed. -- John Phillips |
What's wrong with ringing?
On 2008-07-08, Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Phillips" wrote in message I often see texts that imply or state outright that ringing in time-domain audio waveforms, usually associated with time-domain discontinuities, is to be avoided. I wonder what is the basis for this. These texts seem to be promulgating a misapprehension. The misapprehension seems to be that all reproduced square waves with ripples in or around them, have those ripples because of ringing. Just because a reproduced square wave has ripples in or around it, is not evidence of ringing. Ringing is a very specific thing - it is a resonance. It is what a good bell does - it resonates. It is true that if you reproduce a square wave through a resonant circuit, there will be ripples in the reproduced signal. The fallacy is the false idea that all reproduced square waves with ripples in or around them are due to ringing. Exactly. Someone has applied the "conventional wisdom" of the analogue world in an inappropriate way to the digital world. The word "ringing" seems now to be overloaded with incompatible meanings. It is actually used nowadays to describe an observed phenomenon, but an incorrect inference seems then to be drawn about a cause called "ringing" which isn't clearly present. -- John Phillips |
What's wrong with ringing?
In article , Eeyore
wrote: John Phillips wrote: I often see texts that imply or state outright that ringing in time-domain audio waveforms, usually associated with time-domain discontinuities, is to be avoided. I wonder what is the basis for this. Ringing on square wave inputs may be a sign of maginal stability. Key phrase here is "may be". I recall reading in the past more than one review of a power amp where the writer assumed that 'ringing' on a square wave was a sign of marginal stability. Whereas in many cases it simply showed that the amp included a series inductor on its output to ensure safe and stable operation into naster RF loads. Another example where it was possible for writers to jump to conclusions based upon limited understanding. My impression is that it has been common for digital filtering in domestic items like CD players to use FIR arrangements. Stability should not be a problem for these. But may be more of an issue for IIR designs. Indeed, if I recall correctly, some of the high order delta-sigma modulator (i.e. ADC) arrangements published by Sony and Philips for DSD/SACD had potential instability unless used correctly. Slainte, Jim -- Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
What's wrong with ringing?
"Arny Krueger" These texts seem to be promulgating a misapprehension. The misapprehension seems to be that all reproduced square waves with ripples in or around them, have those ripples because of ringing. Just because a reproduced square wave has ripples in or around it, is not evidence of ringing. ** The term "ripples" refers to cyclic variations in the gain of a ( LP) filter in the pass or stop bands. Various classes of filter have either none, one or the other or both. Wiki has some good info on this. Ringing is a very specific thing - it is a resonance. ** Not true. The term " ringing " has more than one meaning in electronics. It mostly refers to any visible overshoot and oscillation pattern with a step input to a circuit - whether or not related to an actual peak in the pass band gain. ...... Phil |
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:29 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk