day, December 24, 2005 2:11 pm
Subject: Re: [Flexradio] on filtering in general
> Hi All > > I was going to bite my tongue on this one, but I've got to weigh > in. I think Gerald is very very correct. If anyone should be an > audiophile on the list it should be me. But "
Hi All
I was going to bite my tongue on this one, but I've got to weigh in. I think
Gerald is very very correct. If anyone should be an audiophile on the list it
should be me. But "I Aint". I come from a background with $200,000.00 SSL
mixers and $80,000.00 Studer tape decks and the like (those
At 04:30 PM 12/23/2005, Gerald Youngblood wrote:
Jim,
I think we are in violent agreement that the bulk of the specialized audio
processing should be outside PowerSDR. We want to provide basic audio
processing that will be useful to most of our customers. I believe that
basic EQ functionality
L PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Lux
> Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 9:55 AM
> To: flexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> Subject: [Flexradio] on filtering in general
>
> The discussion about Tx Eq brings up an interesting system
> architecture issue. The audio process
The discussion about Tx Eq brings up an interesting system architecture
issue. The audio processing should really be distinct from the "radio IF
processing", with some convenient interface exposed. That is, the SDR
software should really just be exposing a logical baseband audio interface,
an
5 matches
Mail list logo