I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger sounds in home
recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a track, and "flip the phase" of
the track. While I know what this meas technically, what does one do to
"flip the phase" on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to
use, or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

My Last Sigh wrote:
I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger sounds in home
recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a track, and "flip the phase" of
the track. While I know what this meas technically, what does one do to
"flip the phase" on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to
use, or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

What they meant to say was to flip the "Polarity". However, in the
context you mention, I don't see how that will be useful. If you are
duplicating a track, and then invert the polarity of one of the tracks,
you will effectively cancel out the entire signal if you pan them to the
same location. If you pan them to different locations, you will at least
get partial cancellation and a very strange sensation when you listen to
them.

Most software will have a function to invert the polarity. Some plugins
will also do it. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a free plug-in out
there that will invert the polarity for you.

--
Eric

Practice Your Mixing Skills
www.Raw-Tracks.com
www.Mad-Host.com

EricK wrote in
:

My Last Sigh wrote:
I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger
sounds in home recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a
track, and "flip the phase" of the track. While I know what
this meas technically, what does one do to "flip the phase"
on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to use,
or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

What they meant to say was to flip the "Polarity".

Flipping the polarity results in a 180 degree phase difference
between the two tracks. .

--
Bob Quintal

PA is y I've altered my email address.

Bob Quintal wrote:

Flipping the polarity results in a 180 degree phase difference
between the two tracks. .

Here's some reading:
http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_phase_one/


--
Eric

Practice Your Mixing Skills
www.Raw-Tracks.com
www.Mad-Host.com

this is more commonly done than these posts imply--brief delay/phase
flip. just listen to the horn tracks on any fela record and see how
good it can be. yes, your records will cancel out on mono clock
radios, and yes the spread is unnaturally wide. oh no.

jeff

Bob Quintal wrote:
EricK wrote in
:


My Last Sigh wrote:

I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger
sounds in home recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a
track, and "flip the phase" of the track. While I know what
this meas technically, what does one do to "flip the phase"
on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to use,
or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

What they meant to say was to flip the "Polarity".


Flipping the polarity results in a 180 degree phase difference
between the two tracks. .

As I understand it, phase isn't a function of amplitude but of time.
Which makes that only true for repeating waves (sine, square, etc.), and
not for complex audio waveforms. Yes? No?

Cheers,
-joe.

My Last Sigh wrote:
I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger
sounds in
home recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a track,
and "flip the
phase" of the track.

A *BAD* choice of words, even though we all know it is quite
customary.

While I know what this means technically,

It means flipping the polarity of the signal.

what does one do to "flip the phase" on a digital
recording?

You flip the polarity of the signal. There's usually a
pushbutton or an effect that does this, someplace in the
software, device driver, or whatever.

Is there a piece of hardware to use, or should I try
software, or what?

The facility for changing polarity of a channel is where you
find it. It's in some device drivers, and its a standard
effect in most DAW software.

Note that flipping the polarity is really quite different
from 180 degrees of phase shift. 180 degrees of phase shift
implies a time delay, while flipping polarity does not.

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 13:57:35 -0400, My Last Sigh wrote
(in article ):

I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger sounds in home
recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a track, and "flip the phase" of
the track. While I know what this meas technically, what does one do to
"flip the phase" on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to
use, or should I try software, or what? Thanks.



There are many ways to do that, but the result is that if the stereo track is
ever played in mono (and you'd be surprised how often that happens) the
tracks will cancel each other out.


The early Yamaha DX7 keyboards had some great sounding stereo patches that
were made this way. People couldn't figure out why the keyboard parts
disappeared entirely from the mix when they checked for mono.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 03:53:50 -0400, Joe Mama wrote
(in article ):

Bob Quintal wrote:
EricK wrote in
:


My Last Sigh wrote:

I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger
sounds in home recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a
track, and "flip the phase" of the track. While I know what
this meas technically, what does one do to "flip the phase"
on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to use,
or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

What they meant to say was to flip the "Polarity".


Flipping the polarity results in a 180 degree phase difference
between the two tracks. .

As I understand it, phase isn't a function of amplitude but of time.
Which makes that only true for repeating waves (sine, square, etc.), and
not for complex audio waveforms. Yes? No?

Cheers,
-joe.

If he's copying one to another track and playing both, the two are identical
regardless of their complexity. They will cancel.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

My Last Sigh wrote:
I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger sounds in home
recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a track, and "flip the phase" of
the track. While I know what this meas technically, what does one do to
"flip the phase" on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to
use, or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

My console has "phase invert" buttons on each channel. Most DAW systems
have something similar.

I will warn you that wide panning where you pan a track to one side and
an inverted version of the same track to the other side can give you a
very diffuse and airy sound, but when you play it back in mono it goes
away. Fun trick, but watch mono compatibility.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey wrote:

I will warn you that wide panning where you pan a track to
one side
and an inverted version of the same track to the other
side can give
you a very diffuse and airy sound, but when you play it
back in mono
it goes away. Fun trick, but watch mono compatibility.

If a just sorta diffuse sound suffices, phase shifting one
channel by +45 and the other by -45 gives you a nice diffuse
sound, and improved mono compatibility. This is easy enough
to implement in Audition - just bring up the graphic phase
shifter.

In article writes:

As I understand it, phase isn't a function of amplitude but of time.

That's correct.

Which makes that only true for repeating waves (sine, square, etc.), and
not for complex audio waveforms. Yes? No?

A repetitive, simple waveform make it easy to see and express phase
shift as a number, but no waveform is immune to phase shift.

A polarity inversion is a special case, the equivalent of 180 degrees
of phase shift at all frequencies.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

On 6/27/05 3:53 AM, in article
, "Joe Mama"
wrote:

Bob Quintal wrote:
EricK wrote in
:


My Last Sigh wrote:

I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger
sounds in home recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a
track, and "flip the phase" of the track. While I know what
this meas technically, what does one do to "flip the phase"
on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to use,
or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

What they meant to say was to flip the "Polarity".


Flipping the polarity results in a 180 degree phase difference
between the two tracks. .

At one specific frequency...

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
My console has "phase invert" buttons on each channel. Most DAW systems
have something similar.

I will warn you that wide panning where you pan a track to one side and
an inverted version of the same track to the other side can give you a
very diffuse and airy sound, but when you play it back in mono it goes
away. Fun trick, but watch mono compatibility.
--scott

I have a CD of the best of the Mamas and Papas that has some good examples
of the effect. It's kind of fun to push the mono button and hear Mama Cass's
voice dissappear.

Stuart

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 17:53:50 +1000, Joe Mama
wrote:

I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger
sounds in home recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a
track, and "flip the phase" of the track. While I know what
this meas technically, what does one do to "flip the phase"
on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to use,
or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

What they meant to say was to flip the "Polarity".


Flipping the polarity results in a 180 degree phase difference
between the two tracks. .

As I understand it, phase isn't a function of amplitude but of time.
Which makes that only true for repeating waves (sine, square, etc.), and
not for complex audio waveforms. Yes? No?

Y'all just stop it! Right now, or I'm gonna tell your mamas.

Polarity and phase are totally, completely unrelated. Rumors
otherwise are bogus. Just say no.

Don't make me stop this car.

Chris Hornbeck
"I can build you a test that will show either one. Which would you prefer
me to demonstrate?
--scott

EricK wrote in news:FODve.23237$mD6.3663
@fe07.lga:

http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_phase_one/

here is some better reading.

http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3947.htm
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3976.htm

--
Bob Quintal

PA is y I've altered my email address.

Joe Mama wrote in
u:

Bob Quintal wrote:
EricK wrote in
:


My Last Sigh wrote:

I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger
sounds in home recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a
track, and "flip the phase" of the track. While I know what
this meas technically, what does one do to "flip the phase"
on a digital recording? Is there a piece of hardware to
use, or should I try software, or what? Thanks.

What they meant to say was to flip the "Polarity".


Flipping the polarity results in a 180 degree phase
difference between the two tracks. .

As I understand it, phase isn't a function of amplitude but of
time. Which makes that only true for repeating waves (sine,
square, etc.), and not for complex audio waveforms. Yes? No?

First of all, those complex audio waveforms are made up by
adding together multiple sine waves. so are square waves (all
harmonics of the sine), and triangle waves (all odd harmonics).

Now to answer your question, Complex audio waveforms contain
repeating patterns, it's just that the patterns are complex, not
simple like a sine wave, therefore phase (technically phase
time) is applicable to audio.

Also, note that a complex audio wave has two parts, the
repeating waveform, and a much slower envelope. Both have
ampolitude and phase, as defined bi the National Institute of
Science and Technology (NIST). Their definition of phase is .

phase: 1. Of a periodic, varying phenomenon, e.g., an electrical
signal or electromagnetic wave, any distinguishable
instantaneous state of the phenomenon, referred to a fixed
reference or another periodic varying phenomenon.

http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3976.htm has further
description and examples.

One could say the positive phase of a wave versus the negative
phase and be correct, in engineering terms.

Cheers,
-joe.


Cheers.

--
Bob Quintal

PA is y I've altered my email address.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in
:

My Last Sigh wrote:
I am reading a book on studio tricks used to create bigger
sounds in
home recording. One term mentioned is to dupe a track,
and "flip the
phase" of the track.

A *BAD* choice of words, even though we all know it is quite
customary.

While I know what this means technically,

It means flipping the polarity of the signal.

what does one do to "flip the phase" on a digital
recording?

You flip the polarity of the signal. There's usually a
pushbutton or an effect that does this, someplace in the
software, device driver, or whatever.

Is there a piece of hardware to use, or should I try
software, or what?

The facility for changing polarity of a channel is where you
find it. It's in some device drivers, and its a standard
effect in most DAW software.

Note that flipping the polarity is really quite different
from 180 degrees of phase shift. 180 degrees of phase shift
implies a time delay, while flipping polarity does not.

The definition of phase does not require, nor even imply, a
delay,.

phase: 1. Of a periodic, varying phenomenon, e.g., an electrical
signal or electromagnetic wave, any distinguishable
instantaneous state of the phenomenon, referred to a fixed
reference or another periodic varying phenomenon.
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3976.htm


--
Bob Quintal

PA is y I've altered my email address.

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:29:55 GMT, Bob Quintal
wrote:

The definition of phase does not require, nor even imply, a
delay,.

phase: 1. Of a periodic, varying phenomenon, e.g., an electrical
signal or electromagnetic wave, any distinguishable
instantaneous state of the phenomenon, referred to a fixed
reference or another periodic varying phenomenon.
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3976.htm

It requires a time difference. How do you define "delay"?

Chris Hornbeck
"Untestable does not mean meaningless."
-Joe Sensor

Ty Ford wrote:
snip

As I understand it, phase isn't a function of amplitude but of time.
Which makes that only true for repeating waves (sine, square, etc.), and
not for complex audio waveforms. Yes? No?

Cheers,
-joe.


If he's copying one to another track and playing both, the two are identical
regardless of their complexity. They will cancel.

Regards,

Ty Ford



Yeah, thanks, but that was completely not what I was talking about.

Cheers,
joe.

Mike Rivers wrote:
In article writes:


As I understand it, phase isn't a function of amplitude but of time.


That's correct.


Which makes that only true for repeating waves (sine, square, etc.), and
not for complex audio waveforms. Yes? No?


A repetitive, simple waveform make it easy to see and express phase
shift as a number, but no waveform is immune to phase shift.

Sorry, I don't think I explained myself very well. What I was getting
at was that, as far as I can figure, a polarity inversion is, in
practice, the same as 180° of phase shift for repeating waves. As in:
if you were to duplicate a track with a 'repeating' type of waveform and
zoom in and look at the two, the comparison of the two tracks would look
(and sound) the same (excepting the first 1/2-period of the wave)
regardless of whether you shift the phase 180° or invert the polarity.
With a complex waveform I wouldn't think this to be the case.

A polarity inversion is a special case, the equivalent of 180 degrees
of phase shift at all frequencies.


I'm not getting this: probably because I'm having trouble not thinking
in terms of a DAW, where if I were to duplicate, say, a kick drum, and
invert the duplicates polarity, it would 'look' (and I dare say, sound)
very different than any type of phase shift I can imagine. In order to
visualize this, would I have to imagine splitting the kick drum up into
all it's composite frequencies, shifting the phase of each one 180°, and
then putting it all back together again? Even still, I can't see how
that could be analogous to polarity inversion, because that doesn't
introduce any kind of delay. Or is it just that it's not really the
same process, but the result is the same?

Aaaaahhhh. My head hurts.

Cheers,
-joe.

Scott Dorsey wrote:
snip
I will warn you that wide panning where you pan a track to one side and
an inverted version of the same track to the other side can give you a
very diffuse and airy sound, but when you play it back in mono it goes
away. Fun trick, but watch mono compatibility.
--scott


Diffuse and airy? That's the understatement of the year. It makes my
head feel inside-out.

Cheers,
-joe.

Bob Quintal wrote:


The definition of phase does not require, nor even imply, a
delay,.

phase: 1. Of a periodic, varying phenomenon, e.g., an electrical
signal or electromagnetic wave, any distinguishable
instantaneous state of the phenomenon, referred to a fixed
reference or another periodic varying phenomenon.
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3976.htm



Fair enough, but I think the term 'phase SHIFT' does imply, and even
requires, delay.

That definition would allow for use of the term 'phase invert' though,
wouldn't it? I was always taught that was erroneous.

You learn something new every day.

Cheers,
-joe.

In article writes:

Fair enough, but I think the term 'phase SHIFT' does imply, and even
requires, delay.

It certainly implies delay.

That definition would allow for use of the term 'phase invert' though,
wouldn't it? I was always taught that was erroneous.

No. There are a couple of terms for known amounts of phase shift from
a reference point. "inveraion" is 180 degrees, "quadrature" is 90
degrees. You can do either (or any other amount of phase shift) with a
fixed amount of delay, but only for one frequency.

Poliarity inversion of a repetitive waveform looks like 180 degrees of
phase shift regardless of the frequency, but it really isn't.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

What I was getting
at was that, as far as I can figure, a polarity inversion is, in
practice, the same as 180° of phase shift for repeating waves. As in:
if you were to duplicate a track with a 'repeating' type of waveform and
zoom in and look at the two, the comparison of the two tracks would look
(and sound) the same (excepting the first 1/2-period of the wave)
regardless of whether you shift the phase 180° or invert the polarity.
With a complex waveform I wouldn't think this to be the case.

They would look the same if you picked the right "window" of time for
both. But if you picked the same window of time for both, one would be
going positive at the same time as the other was going negative. And
for a waveform that's symmetrical in time, you won't hear a difference
when listening to one waveform at a time. But sum them and they'll
cancel (you'll certainly hear that).

However if you have non-symmetrical waveforms, not only can you see a
difference in the appearance of the waveform, but there are cases
where the difference is quite audible. If you have a DAw program that
can generate a waveform, try generating a minute or so of a 20 Hz
sawtooth. Import that into your DAW and listen to it. Then invert the
polarity and listen again. You'll hear a difference. If you don't have
a convenient way to generate a waveform, you can download a short
demonstration file that has a few seconds of such a sawtooth, then the
polarity inverts. You'll be able to hear the change on just about any
speakers.

http://www.recordingmag.com/download...opolarity.html

A polarity inversion is a special case, the equivalent of 180 degrees
of phase shift at all frequencies.

I'm not getting this: probably because I'm having trouble not thinking
in terms of a DAW, where if I were to duplicate, say, a kick drum, and
invert the duplicates polarity, it would 'look' (and I dare say, sound)
very different than any type of phase shift I can imagine.

This is true, but if you were to duplicate a simple waveform and
invert the polarity, it would look exactly like a 180 degree phase
shift. It's really difficult to visualize phase shift on a complex
waveform because, other than for special cases, the phase shift of
each frequency that makes up that complex waveform will be different.
However, a polarity inversion is absolute. At any given time, what was
going positive, becomes negative by the same amount. This is what will
happen if in invert the polarity or shift the phase of a single
frequency (which is a sine wave, and only a sine wave) by 180 degrees.

As far as the sound of an inverted kick drum, you can certainly
try that and listen for yourself. A kick drum is a good example of the
kind of waveform that can sound different in opposite polarity, and in
fact, it's often a good idea to try inverting the polarity of the kick
drum to see which way it sounds best in the context of the mix. In
real life, when you have leakage between mics on a drum kit, inverting
the polarity also changes the phase relationship of leakage, which can
have its own effect on the sound of the drum kit.

But that's a digression.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

"Bob Quintal" wrote in message
news:1120004997.1fd22f6facd992dbb44507a6afff2396@t eranews
"Arny Krueger" wrote in
:

Note that flipping the polarity is really quite different
from 180 degrees of phase shift. 180 degrees of phase
shift
implies a time delay, while flipping polarity does not.

The definition of phase does not require, nor even imply,
a
delay,.

phase: 1. Of a periodic, varying phenomenon, e.g., an
electrical signal or electromagnetic wave, any
distinguishable
instantaneous state of the phenomenon, referred to a fixed
reference or another periodic varying phenomenon.
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3976.htm

How we read abstract definitions of a word in a term is not
binding on the meaning of the entire term.

An audio signal exists in the time-amplitude domain. We know
for sure that:

(1) Phase shift always changes audio signals.
(2) Phase shift need not change the over-all amplitude of an
audio signal.

Therefore, phase shift must change the timing of an audio
signal.

;-)

Chris Hornbeck wrote in
:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:29:55 GMT, Bob Quintal
wrote:

The definition of phase does not require, nor even imply, a
delay,.

phase: 1. Of a periodic, varying phenomenon, e.g., an
electrical signal or electromagnetic wave, any distinguishable
instantaneous state of the phenomenon, referred to a fixed
reference or another periodic varying phenomenon.
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3976.htm

It requires a time difference. How do you define "delay"?

Chris Hornbeck
"Untestable does not mean meaningless."
-Joe Sensor

Read the definition above. instantaneous figures in the
definition, to either a different (fixed) reference OR to
another periodic varying waveform.

I'll give you another example to chew on, take two different
sine waves, one of 50 Hz the second 55Hz. at some instantaneous
time, the two frequencies will be in phase, and add, at other
instants, they'll be out of phase, and cancel. There is no delay
involved in that example.


--
Bob Quintal

PA is y I've altered my email address.

On 6/29/05 7:36 PM, in article
1120088168.1c753c32c5d8d4991ecc87142d33b707@terane ws, "Bob Quintal"
wrote:

Chris Hornbeck wrote in
:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:29:55 GMT, Bob Quintal
wrote:

The definition of phase does not require, nor even imply, a
delay,.

No it doesn't, but the TOPIC at hand, VARYING PHASE, -does-!



phase: 1. Of a periodic, varying phenomenon, e.g., an
electrical signal or electromagnetic wave, any distinguishable
instantaneous state of the phenomenon, referred to a fixed
reference or another periodic varying phenomenon.
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-027/_3976.htm

It requires a time difference. How do you define "delay"?

The difference between one instantaneous moment and another.



Chris Hornbeck
"Untestable does not mean meaningless."

But 'repeatable' does.

What ever happened to Carver's Sonics Challenge from a while back?

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:36:07 GMT, Bob Quintal
wrote:

It requires a time difference. How do you define "delay"?

Read the definition above. instantaneous figures in the
definition, to either a different (fixed) reference OR to
another periodic varying waveform.

The question was meant rhetorically, to encourage thought.

I'll give you another example to chew on, take two different
sine waves, one of 50 Hz the second 55Hz. at some instantaneous
time, the two frequencies will be in phase, and add, at other
instants, they'll be out of phase, and cancel. There is no delay
involved in that example.

There is no "phase" in this example. Perhaps a standard
text would be the better place to start, rather than newsgroup
postings, which (particularly true in this issue) can be
marginal.

Good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck
"Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief" -F&S

SSJVCmag wrote in
:

On 6/29/05 7:36 PM, in article
1120088168.1c753c32c5d8d4991ecc87142d33b707@terane ws, "Bob
Quintal" wrote:

The definition of phase does not require, nor even imply, a
delay,.

No it doesn't, but the TOPIC at hand, VARYING PHASE, -does-!

The original poster used the term Flipping phase, not varying
phase.

--
Bob Quintal

PA is y I've altered my email address.

Chris Hornbeck wrote in
:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:36:07 GMT, Bob Quintal
wrote:

I'll give you another example to chew on, take two different
sine waves, one of 50 Hz the second 55Hz. at some
instantaneous time, the two frequencies will be in phase, and
add, at other instants, they'll be out of phase, and cancel.
There is no delay involved in that example.

There is no "phase" in this example. Perhaps a standard
text would be the better place to start, rather than newsgroup
postings, which (particularly true in this issue) can be
marginal.

There is phase in that example. That you cannot understand that
is your loss.

Good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck
"Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief" -F&S

--
Bob Quintal

PA is y I've altered my email address.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:37:00 GMT, Bob Quintal
wrote:

There is phase in that example. That you cannot understand that
is your loss.

Bummer.

Chris Hornbeck
"taking the cure, so I can be quiet,
wherever I want, so leave me alone.
You outta be proud, that I'm getting
good marks." -Elliott Smith

On 6/30/05 7:34 PM, in article
1120174445.e17f546d469f474db5e809897a6b064d@terane ws, "Bob Quintal"
wrote:

SSJVCmag wrote in
:

On 6/29/05 7:36 PM, in article
1120088168.1c753c32c5d8d4991ecc87142d33b707@terane ws, "Bob
Quintal" wrote:

The definition of phase does not require, nor even imply, a
delay,.

No it doesn't, but the TOPIC at hand, VARYING PHASE, -does-!

The original poster used the term Flipping phase, not varying
phase.

Nice Bob. Really nice. As many would easily and correctly predict, a
question about 'flipping phase' will indeed prompt both a conversation to
POLARITY issues, as well as the correct terminology as to when why and how
to use PHASE or POLARITY, which combines the two into describing what PHASE
really is and why it's related to TIME when you vary it.
Thus the topic at hand is indeed varying phase.

Can we move on now?
Thanks

Chris Hornbeck wrote in
:

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:37:00 GMT, Bob Quintal
wrote:

There is phase in that example. That you cannot understand
that is your loss.

Bummer.

browse the thread in aapls titled dodgy shipboard power and see
Phil Allison correctly diagnose the problem as one where two
different frequencies are sometimes in phase and other times out of
phase.

--
Bob Quintal

PA is y I've altered my email address.