4 ms·

I haven’t finished this yet (only at the start of chapter 6) but The Scientist and Engineer’s Guide to Digital Signal Processing [0] has been excellent so far.

I haven’t finished this yet (only at the start of chapter 6) but The Scientist and Engineer’s Guide to Digital Signal Processing [0] has been excellent so far. DSP is one of the subjects I’ve wanted to learn for years but could never get my head around, mostly (I think) due to bad instructors and very math-heavy explanations. This book is finally demystifying it for me, with explanations that go for intuition over mathematical purity. The book is even freely available on the author’s site! I wish I’d found this years ago. 0: https://dspguide.com https://dspguide.com

the__alchemist 5y ago
Read that one too this year. Didn't like how he tried to scare the reader off from complex numbers though! Perhaps a product of the time it was written in?
- dceddia 5y ago
  Hah, maybe! I haven't gotten to that point yet. There are definitely some things that seem dated.
sanjayio 5y ago
I’ve tried to learn electrical engineering and bounce off with more advanced circuit arithmetic. It feels like DSP is a level above that. Does this digest well with someone with a CS degree?
- the__alchemist 5y ago
  Yea - way less mathematical abstractions than other DSP books. It has a more practical bent. I'm reading through Oppenheim and Schaefer's text, which is far tougher. I mean, if you're using your CS degree for Haskell, I'd recommend something like O + S instead!
- dceddia 5y ago
  Yep, I've just got the CS degree too, and same here re: EE stuff. I always thought it'd be fun to get into electronics but I couldn't get very far with it. I like that the author takes time to actually explain the concepts with words before getting into the mathy stuff, whereas it seems like a lot of books on topics like this will lead with "The <whatever whatever> is defined as <math equation with 17 symbols in it>. Thus, we can <do complex next-level thing> and <I will never explain what any of those symbols mean>"
  - sanjayio 5y ago
    Appreciate the breakdown!

the__alchemist 5y ago

Read that one too this year. Didn't like how he tried to scare the reader off from complex numbers though! Perhaps a product of the time it was written in?

dceddia 5y ago
Hah, maybe! I haven't gotten to that point yet. There are definitely some things that seem dated.

sanjayio 5y ago

I’ve tried to learn electrical engineering and bounce off with more advanced circuit arithmetic. It feels like DSP is a level above that. Does this digest well with someone with a CS degree?

the__alchemist 5y ago
Yea - way less mathematical abstractions than other DSP books. It has a more practical bent. I'm reading through Oppenheim and Schaefer's text, which is far tougher. I mean, if you're using your CS degree for Haskell, I'd recommend something like O + S instead!
dceddia 5y ago
Yep, I've just got the CS degree too, and same here re: EE stuff. I always thought it'd be fun to get into electronics but I couldn't get very far with it. I like that the author takes time to actually explain the concepts with words before getting into the mathy stuff, whereas it seems like a lot of books on topics like this will lead with "The <whatever whatever> is defined as <math equation with 17 symbols in it>. Thus, we can <do complex next-level thing> and <I will never explain what any of those symbols mean>"
- sanjayio 5y ago
  Appreciate the breakdown!