Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site pur-phy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H:Physics:hal
From: hal@pur-phy.UUCP (Hal Chambers)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Square Wave "experiment"
Message-ID: <1365@pur-phy.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Jul-84 13:02:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: pur-phy.1365
Posted: Tue Jul  3 13:02:05 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Jul-84 00:24:18 EDT
Organization: Purdue University Physics Dept.
Lines: 18


   Well, there's nothing like being critized for something you didn't say...
The posting of my little "square wave experiment" was simply to point out
that imperfect reproduction of a 22kHz square wave (44kHz sampling) has
nothing to do with the digitization process ITSELF.  The problems come from the
post processing of the D/A output.  I NEVER said there could be any distinction
between a square, sine, or any other periodic wave shape at half the sampling
frequency.  Since my critic and I are in complete agreement on this point I
won't elaborate.

    As for the accusation that I didn't really do the "experiment",
they can try it themselves.  There is no way to answer a person who, when
presented with facts, simply denies their existence.

Hal Chambers
Physics Dept.
Purdue Univ.
(..!pur-ee!pur-phy!hal)