Joe wrote: > The Pre-emphasis definition is acceptable. The De-emphasis definition is > clearly wrong, in my opinion. ... Those definitions (in the original post from Adiu) are correct for analog transmission, such as FM radio where the added noise is the problem and it increases linearly with the modulation signal's frequency. It is common to emphasize the higher frequencies at the sender (transmitter) and reduce the higher frequencies by an equal amount at the receiver, to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. The medium, over which the signal is transmitted, doesn't distort the signal; it just adds noise. This is in contrast to digital signals on copper for example, where pre-emphasis may be applied to help overcome the waveform distortion of the medium between the sender and receiver. In that case, de-emphasis has a totally different meaning. As Michael wrote, you need to dig harder to find the right definitions that apply for the kinds of signals and media you are looking at ... which sort of means you need to know what they mean before you can find the right definitions. The definitions quoted are the traditional meanings of pre- and de-emphasis, throughout most of the 20th century. Their meanings have changed now that they have been applied differently to handle other problems. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list For help: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field List technical documents are available at: http://www.si-list.net List archives are viewable at: //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list or at our remote archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu