It is what you are not able to refute. The reason is because it is correct. Not because I says so. Though I do say so. But because it is the math that says so. It is the math that makes it correct.
No. You are saying it based on their article and others such as Wikipedia and an O'Reilly book.
You do not speak for them. You speak for yourself. You are citing what they have said in general articles as basis for your attempted failed refutes.
Really? What math in that document do you say I should be using for signed 16-bit two's compliment linear PCM dynamic range instead of what I'm using?
You are the one here discussing it. Not them. You are using their document as basis for your claims. Yes I say their document has some incorrect statements. And I have provided basis for that claim. Where is your basis for what you are using from their document in support of your potion that shows it to be correct? Oh yeah. It usually starts with something like divide by zero. Almost forgot about. ;)
They don't have to say it is a generalizing document with information that is not correct. It is self evident by what is and is not in the document.GuidoK wrote: ↑17 Nov 2019 04:44As analog doesn't say that its a generalizing document with information that is not correct, you take it upon you to speak for them. They're your words, aren't they?
That you don't realize this is why this topic derails. As I'm writing this I wonder why I'm still here...
Yes the document has incomplete and incorrect information. It is so whether I say so or not. It is what the document contains and does not contain that makes it so. It is self evident.
It derails because of you using generalized information as though it is complete and accurate. And based on that post divide by zero nonsense. And then want to argue that the generalized documents you based it on says thus and so.
Possibly you are still here to keep the discussion deflected and derailed away from the case that has been laid out, and supported, that you have not been able to refute. Perhaps that is easier than accepting reality that the dynamic range is 90db instead of what generalized writings and marking propaganda has led people (maybe including yourself) to believe.