Talk:Audio signal processing/Archive 1

Not a telecommunications stub
I agree that this is a stub, but it's not about telecoms. Can't find a more appropriate stub category though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JanCeuleers (talk • contribs).
 * Indeed. Somehow there are no stubs at all for engineering topics. I am thinking of organizing a new stub category for electrical engineering. --Zvika 08:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * There is (Category:Electronics stubs).  This category is large enough (between 500 and 600) to accomodate a split if a sub-topic of electrical engineering would be appropriate, though that subordination would likely to draw some criticism based on a lack of full consensus on the exact meaning of 'electrical engineering'.  The  (Category:Telecommunications stubs) is already a sub-category of this category. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 11:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * IMO, neither electrical engineering nor telecom is a sub-category of electronics. Electronics deals with hardware, and many electrical engineers (myself included) deal entirely with software, or even with the theory behind the software. I think there should be an EE-stub category, in which signal processing stubs and telecom stubs would both be sub-categories. Compare Category:Electrical engineering and Category:Signal processing which is a sub-category. --Zvika 16:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Not all telecommunications-related topics (and therefore not all com-stubs) are to do with technology. There are many other aspects to telecommunications, including economics, regulations, services, etc. Sorry to be adding to the problem. JanCeuleers 17:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Article improvements
The original article does not explain the concept of audio signal processing. I introduce the classical concepts of audio compressor, expander and limiters, slope, attack /release time, etc

The broadcast processors section gives the WIKI readers the last information about the technology behind the concepts of loudness and improving FM coverage.--Albert-Kraft (talk) 23:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have reverted the material, because it was yet another blatant attempt to promote the work of Oscar Bonello (he was referenced 4 times in your addition). You have already been warned about this, so please stop!  Oli Filth(talk 00:09, 22 March 2009 (UTC)