Re: Estimation of inter-sample peaks

[Mark]

>
> > But, as you mention, such examples are contrived. However, this
> > phenomenon also occurs in practice, a guy at TC wrote an interesting
> > AES paper about that is downloadable from their website:

>>http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/nielsen_lund_2003_overload.pdf. >



good paper

I am crosspostig this thread to rec.audio.pro

Mark

[davew]

I think the conclusion to this is that the worst possble transient
signal which could possibly be constructed is a sinc pulse
corresponding to a bandwidth of fs/2 but mis-sampled by half a
sample. If it were sampled exactly, it would simply be a unit sample
and therefore the peak value would correspond with the sample instant,
so no difference.

So I believe that the expression for worst case difference between a
sample value and the inter-sample peak is given by:

sinc(pi/2) = 2/pi = 3.92dB

For periodic signals this doesn't apply.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 06:42:28 -0800 (PST), davew
> wrote:

>I think the conclusion to this is that the worst possble transient
>signal which could possibly be constructed is a sinc pulse
>corresponding to a bandwidth of fs/2 but mis-sampled by half a
>sample. If it were sampled exactly, it would simply be a unit sample
>and therefore the peak value would correspond with the sample instant,
>so no difference.
>
>So I believe that the expression for worst case difference between a
>sample value and the inter-sample peak is given by:
>
>sinc(pi/2) = 2/pi = 3.92dB
>
>For periodic signals this doesn't apply.

Jim Lesurf has produced the "Wave from Hell", which is periodic and
has an intersample peak of 5dB. It is out there somewhere on the web.

d