Connect with us

Audio Sampling Question

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by Henry VIII, Jul 21, 2007.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Henry VIII

    Henry VIII Guest

    Hi All,

    I'm sampling high-fidelity analog audio at 44.1 kHz with a 16-bit ADC. The
    analog audio is noise-free for the purposes of this question.

    The ADC data stream goes to a microprocessor that compares the data in
    blocks of multiple samples to a previously stored set of data. When the ADC
    output data matches the stored data, the microprocessor generates an output
    pulse. Some amount of processing time "X" is needed to recognize a match
    and generate the pulse.

    My question, again assuming zero analog noise, is: what is the time
    uncertainty of the output pulse? In other words, if I split the same analog
    audio into two of these circuits in parallel, how much could their output
    pulses differ in time? Is the answer simply the clock frequency accuracy?

    Thanks is advance.
     
  2. What method is being used th compare the data to the previously stored
    set?
     
  3. I'm not expert but I do know that some ADC's are several clocks behind in
    there samples.
     
  4. Nico Coesel

    Nico Coesel Guest

    No, it depends on how well the analog front ends of the ADCs are
    matched. If the matching isn't near perfect, you'll have different
    phase shifts.
     
  5. Guy Macon

    Guy Macon Guest

    There are several possible sources of variation. How bad each one
    is depends on your hardware and possibly on the nature of the signal.

    Are the analog filters identical? A slight difference in phase
    shift will introduce an error. Even if you use the same analog
    input and compare measurements at different times there could be
    variations due to temperature.

    Are the ADCs on a common clock? If they use two different clock
    sources there could be an error of up to half the sample rate.

    Does the microprocessor have any other tasks that could delay it
    getting a sample?

    How do you define "matches the data?" No ADC is perfectly
    repeatable when the input signal is right on the edge of two
    digital output values.

    Finally, why the "assuming zero analog noise" simplification?
    how about the many other ways such a system is imperfect?
     
  6. whit3rd

    whit3rd Guest

    The 'compare' operation can do more than just set a bit; you
    can measure the time delay (phase shift) due to the sampling
    clock being asynchronous to the input signal, and your
    microprocessor can know exactly how long to delay its
    'recognize' signal output. So the jitter is the microprocessor
    time-slice (not necessarily the same as a single clock cycle).

    If your operation is a simple comparison, the 44 kHz clock can
    be up to +1/2 cycle or down to - 1/2 cycle different from the
    reference case, so the jitter would be related to the sample
    clock.

    And, of course, some signals (like a steady sine wave) would
    trigger an output once per cycle, so a single 'match' can
    result in thousands of outputs; the uncertainty there is very
    large (they are all true matches, but only one is 'right' in
    some targeted sense).
     
  7. Assuming randomlike signal

    dT = q /(sqrt(T * Fs) *Slew)

    q - quantization step
    T - signal duration
    Fs - sample rate
    Slew - average slew rate

    Vladimir Vassilevsky
    DSP and Mixed Signal Consultant
    www.abvolt.com
     
  8. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    That'll depends on the comparison algorithm in your microprocessor.

    Graham
     
  9. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    Most modern audio ADCs don't require a front end filter.

    Graham
     
  10. neon

    neon

    1,325
    0
    Oct 21, 2006
    assuming no noise or even quantising noise two system operating in parallel wil be equal to except for the components time difference. I will sugest to yuo that because of the difference thy will never agree on pulse output. you must increase the clock into the mega for any acuracy or close to it.
     
  11. Nico Coesel

    Nico Coesel Guest

    Sorry, but that can't be true. There has to be some sort of filtering
    somewhere (even if it comes for free because of the bandwidth of the
    pre-amplifier).
     
  12. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    It is true. They have no analog front end filter.

    It's done digitally internally AIUI. And don't be silly about preamp bandwidths.
    Most modern audio op-amps have GBPs of 10MHz

    Graham
     
  13. Nico Coesel

    Nico Coesel Guest

    If you are sampling, then you'll need to get rid of the frequencies
    which are above fs/2 otherwise you will get aliasing problems. Thats a
    law of physics like gravity.
     
  14. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    Onboard digital filter.

    The ADC oversamples. That's how they avoid aliasing. It digitally filters at the
    oversampled rate and then downsamples to 44.1kHz.

    No analogue front end filter's required so no issues with filter component tolerances.
    The digital filters match perfectly of course.

    Graham
     
  15. Phil Allison

    Phil Allison Guest

    "Nico Coesel"
    "Eeysore PITA Fool"

    ** The A to D sampling rates used in audio are typically 96 kHz, 192kHz or
    even higher when Sigma Delta modulation is used.

    Plus all audio signals are band limited to not much over 20 kHz by the use
    of microphones and their associated pre-amps.

    Makes the use of dedicated, audio band limiting filters redundant in most
    cases.



    ........ Phil
     
  16. Guy Macon

    Guy Macon Guest

    I hate to be the one to break this to you, but you are
    suffering from a fundamental misconception as to how
    digital sampling of analog signals actually works.

    *No* digital technique can act as an antialiasing filter.
    It's impossible. By the time the digital filter gets the
    information, a vital piece of information -- whether the
    signal is an alias or not -- has been lost.

    Oversampling is simply sampling at a higher rate, thus
    moving the need for antialiasing higher in frequency.
    It also allows an analog filter that interferes with
    the highest portion of the signal more, because the
    frequencies being affected are still higher than the
    signal of interest. The digital filter takes out these
    higher-than-the-signal frequencies but cannot perform
    the anti-aliasing function. That is and always will
    be, an analog function.
     
  17. Tom Bruhns

    Tom Bruhns Guest

    Sorry, Graham, that's not quite true. Because the sampling is at a
    high frequency in a delta-sigma converter, typically a couple MHz, the
    alias filtering can be very "gentle", but it IS necessary if there's
    any chance of high frequencies getting through otherwise. Frequencies
    near the sampling frequency will alias quite nicely down to audio.
    Things get a little more complicated if you want to use various sample
    rates on the ADC; there's a little fifth-order antialias filter in the
    HP E1433A four-channel digitizer (which can be programmed over a 5:1
    range of sample rates, as I recall). The filter isn't anything
    special, just fixed-value parts, but even so, typically the channels
    match to within a very few nanoseconds.

    On the other hand, with respect to the OP's question, how do you know
    the samples will be at the correct times, and not off by an arbitrary
    fraction of a sample from the reference samples? And how do you know
    the clock rate is identical? In other words, just HOW do you compare
    one digitization with another? I'm not saying it's impossible, it's
    just not trivial. One should NOT expect to get a set of samples that
    have nominally the same values as a previous set of samples of the
    same passage; they could be entirely different.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  18. boB K7IQ

    boB K7IQ Guest

    I'm remembering that a 64X oversampling Delta-Smegma A-D converter
    needs a single order R-C LPF with a cut of around 3dB at the sample
    frequency. Not ~much~ filtering, but a teeny bit.

    boB
     
  19. Tom Bruhns

    Tom Bruhns Guest

    No, not true. It's only a problem if the aliased frequencies fall
    within the band of interest. In a delta-sigma converter (used almost
    universally for audio these days), the sampling is typically at some
    MHz, and a digital filter wipes out everything above 20kHz
    (generally). So it's only frequencies within 20kHz of the sampling
    rate or its harmonics that alias to frequencies which fall within the
    passband of the digital filter.

    A specific example: a delta-sigma converter that oversamples at 64
    times the output rate, which is 44.1ksamples/sec. 64*44.1kHz =
    2.8224MHz. 2.8224MHz - 20kHz = 2.8024MHz. Obviously, normal audio
    transducers shouldn't be putting out any significant signals up there,
    but if you want to claim alias protection to some level in the event
    that users DO put in some high frequencies, you only need to provide a
    rolloff that starts somewhere above 20kHz and drops to the desired
    point by 2.8MHz--a much easier task than in the "old days" of
    converters that sample directly at 44.1kHz. Instead of needing a high-
    order (e.g. 11th) elliptical filter that cuts off by 24.1kHz, you can
    get about 90dB protection from a third order Butterworth that's only
    down 0.1dB at 20kHz.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  20. You have no clue what your talking about... what a suprise!!!


    The oversampling is to reduce the complexity of the analog filtering. You
    get aliasing no matter what unless you can be 100% sure that your signal's
    bandwidth is 1/2 the sampling rate. If there is any spurious noise then that
    will be reflected back onto the first nyquist zone and degrade the signal.

    By oversampling, say, 64 times, then we have 64x as much room to roll off
    the highs. Then we can digitally use a FIR low pass that removes all the
    noise above the signal itself.

    Since the gain of a simple low pass filter is rolls off about 6dB every
    octave, every time you double the bandwidth(sampling rate) of the sampler vs
    the bandwidth of the signal you get a 6dB roll off of the max frequency
    which means you reduce all higher frequencies that normally would be aliased
    by k*6dB.

    If the bandwidth of the signals you are working with is B and you oversample
    it k times, then any aliasing will be below -k*6dB. Of course now your
    working with a signal that has a much larger bandwidth than what you
    actually need so you downsample to reduce it back down to the original
    bandwidth. Thats not before you digitally filter the signal to remove all
    the frequencies between B and k*B so they do not get aliased by into the
    signal. Its called decimation.

    Obviously this is just another example of you talking about your ass. Maybe
    one day you'll get a clue and actually learn something or at the very least
    clean the bullshit comming from your mouth.

    Jon
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-