Hi Julian.
> But linearity explains only one half of the issue - that is, that you can't
> do BETTER for dynamic range than what is implied by the number of
> bits. Linearity doesn't make the most useful point that number of bits has
> NOTHING to do with the actual achieved density range performance when the
> noise level is the same as or more than the LSB. In other words number of
> bits does NOT define Dmax, it only defines what the best possible might
> be. I read most of the old "last time" posts and still didn't see any such
> useful conclusion.
And nobody, as far as I've read, is arguing that bit depth DOES define Dmax..
Of course it's possible to not fully utilise the available bit depth, or
dynamic range, of the A/D converter.
In fact it's probably desirable not to do so, since a 1 bit level change to
represent a change of 0.3D isn't of much use to anyone.
The original argument was that ANY old density range could be squeezed into any
number of bits, wasn't it?
That just isn't the case, not unless some deliberate non-linearity is
introduced into the system.
Hence the emphasis on linearity.
Regards, Pete.
