Last week we started to look at the problem of azimuth alignment on olden compact cassette tape drives, and how this misalignment affects the sound. Let’s now have a look at how azimuth affects the frequencies.
While reading on compact cassette readers (as part of a preliminary study on digitizing archives) I found out that azimuth, or the angle made between the tape and the reading is a considered a big issue, the best case being an azimuth of exactly 90°. I could not, however, quite find what was the effect of varying that angle, even if pretty much everyone agrees that it somehow lessen the tape’s high frequency response. Let’s see how, exactly.
This week, let’s discuss dithering, a technique based on error diffusion used in print and computer graphics to soften the effects of harsh color quantization. There are many types of dithering (sometimes called halftoning, despite techniques not being all of the same type), some optimized for monochrome or color screen printing, some merely convenient to use in computer graphics.
When we quantize an image to a very small number of colors, all kind of artifacts appear: false contours resulting from two too different colors that aught to be smoothly faded, noticeable color changes, etc. Dithering tries to alleviate this problem by mixing colors using random-looking dot patterns, replacing color resolution by sampling aliasing. Despite the image being composed of dots of very different colors, we still perceive the color mix, and that effect, while not adding any objective quality to the image, does augment the perceived quality of the image.
We’re all looking for documentation, books, and papers. Sometimes we’re lucky, we find the pristine PDF, rendered fresh from a text processor or maybe LaTeX. Sometimes we’re not so lucky, the only thing we can find is a collection of JPEG images with high compression ratios.
Scans of text are not always easy to clean up, even when they’re well done to begin with, they may be compressed with JPEG using a (too) high compression ratio, leading to conspicuous artifacts. These artifacts must be cleaned-up before printing or binding together in a PDF.
Let’s say we want to mix three channels onto two because the communication device has only two available channels but we still want to emulate a three channel link. If we can afford coding, then it’s not a problem because we can build our own protocol so add any number of channels using a structured data stream. But what if we cannot control the channel coding at all? In CDs, for example, there’s no coding: there are two channels encoded in PCM and a standard CD player wouldn’t understand the sound if it was encoded otherwise.
The solution is to mix the three channels in a quasi-reversible way, and in a way that the two channels can be listened to without much interference. One possible way is to mix the third channel is to use a phase-dependant encoding. Early “quadraphonic” audio systems did something quite similar. You can also use a plain time-domain “mixing matrix” to mix the three channels onto two. Quite expygeously, let us choose the matrix:
This week, a more mathematical topic. Sometime ago, we—friends and I—were discussing the fidelity of various signals, and how many bits were needed for an optimal digitization of the signal, given known characteristics such as spectrum and signal-to-noise ratio.
Indeed, at some point, when adding bits, you only add more power to represent noise in the signal. There’s a rule of thumb that say that for every bit you add, you can represent a signal with more of signal to noise ratio. Let me show you how you derive such a result.