Re: The truth about decibels

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:09:09 -0700, Don Bowey <dbowey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>On 6/29/05 1:29 PM, in article 42C304B5.89046EC4@xxxxxxxxxxx, "Pooh Bear"
><rabbitsfriendsandrelations@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
>>
>>> Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> tlbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Pooh Bear wrote:
>>>>>> 1. A measuring system first used in telephony (Martin, W.H., "DeciBel --
>>>>>> the new name for the transmission unit. Bell System Tech. J. January,
>>>>>> 1929), where signal loss is a logarithmic function of the cable length.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have actually read that original paper by Martin. I have also read
>>>>> another white paper with comments similar to your own, and have tried
>>>>> (in my own circle of influence) to educate people about the proper use
>>>>> of the dB.
>>>>
>>>> The relevant 'education' is now adopted by the AES ( Audio Engineering
>>>> Society
>>>> ) who write the standards on this matter. Their standards are adopted by
>>>> bodies such as the IEC, ANSI and ISO
>>>
>>> From the reference you provided in the "3dB Bandwidth" thread:
>>>
>>> <http://www.aes.org/publications/standards/courtesy.cfm?ID=9>
>>>
>>> ...it is abundantly clear that the AES does *not* write the standards.
>>> They adopt the standards of the IEC etc. and then publish documents
>>> explaining them to their membership.
>>
>> The AES is represented on an official basis on the Working Groups.
>
>Are you *certain* of that? I bet the governing body is the AES, and the
>Working Groups work under the AES.
>
>>
>> The are also *audio specific* standards that the AES develops that are then
>> formally
>> adopted by the well known standards bodies. Not the other way round.
>
>The AES "standards" may or may not be adopted by other standards bodies.
>
>>
>> Semantics.
>
>Important, meaningful semantics.
>
>
> The AES is NOT issuing a "standard" having new definitions. What you
> have been saying is NOT CORRECT.
>
>Weasel-word around it all you want, but it won't change the facts.
>
>Don

---
Bottom line?

The AES sucks unless I care about how my XLS connector pins out
against yours.

ISTM It's basically all just wiring.

Or maybe I'm missing something...

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cohens paper on byte order
    ... > AES is intended to be used to standardize an aspect of ... > inappropriate. ... different technologies and their corresponding standards. ... AES does only a very tiny job in communication, ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Generate a one-time pad from say a 256bit key?
    ... Block ciphers have a property ... I truly believe that AES is both efficient and can ... secure and fast then sure go for it. ... etc...Serpent and RC4 are not standards. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: The truth about decibels
    ... as a recognised representative of the AES as I understand it. ... And of course I was my client company's offficial link with Plasa's Standards ... > The AES "standards" may or may not be adopted by other standards bodies. ... choose simply to adopt the industry norm. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: The truth about decibels
    ... >>> The relevant 'education' is now adopted by the AES (Audio Engineering ... >>>) who write the standards on this matter. ... The AES "standards" may or may not be adopted by other standards bodies. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Which is true?
    ... > Sometimes I'm confused about how to separate a complex sentence. ... > whether or not they are developed by voluntary consensus standards bodies. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
Quantcast