[John O'Flaherty]

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 21:46:25 -0500, Randy Yates
wrote:

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

In article , Randy Yates wrote:

If dBFS is defined as

dBFS = 20 * log_10(XRMS / (RMS value of full-scale sine wave),

where XRMS is the RMS value of the digital data stream, and you're
generating a "digital square wave," then you are wrong. The digital
square wave can go to +3dBFS as defined above.

dBFS has not got a damn thing to do with sine waves or reference levels
or anything in the analogue world.

Again, I'm not asking how it's not defined, I'm asking how it is
defined.

You guys have danced around this one all day. It's getting humorous.

It has ONLY to do with how far a digital level is below the point at
which the digital value reaches full scale (all bits on).

If you know what it means, and you're literate, then you should be able
to come up with a precise definition. I haven't seen one yet.

The problem is that dB is defined as a unit of power, usually applied
to signals with some time duration. Obviously, a square wave at full
scale of a converter has more power than, say, a sine wave or a 1%
duty cycle signal at full scale. So, how can one define dBFS so it
represents how the figure is actually used? How about "a signal at 0
dBFS is one whose instantaneous power reaches but never exceeds the
instantaneous power associated with full scale of the converter"?
Modifying your formula above,
dBFS = 20 * log_10(peak signal voltage / converter maximum voltage)

--
John