This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Physics: Acoustics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Acoustics Taskforce.

This page needs review. To the uninitiated, it is a load of gobble-de-gook!

Seconded. Jackiespeel 16:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone explain the specific relation to the Gibbs phenomenon? The article is written asif Gibbs is 'the' cause for pre-echo, while intuitivly, it has to do more with: The specific algorith (ie, freq domain algo's might enjoy preëcho due to their packetbased nature), quantisation errors, and length of impulse respenses used. Oyd11 16:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-echo is not always an artifact. It can also be added to soumd recording by some programs which can add normal echo. As in, optionall special sound effects of echo and pre-echo. If I'm talking about something else, at least there would need to be a disambiguation page, to not confuse the two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.7.94.114 (talk) 21:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article is full of shit. Pre-echo has nothing to do with the Gibbs pheomenon. It is caused by quantization noise being spread over the transform window (Gibbs is about truncation of the spectrum, not quantisation). That's why it eventually goes away as the bit-rate increases. Jmvalin (talk) 13:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The audio file provided in this article is helpful, but maybe it should be more explicit about what it's trying to demonstrate. Is it showing mitigation of pre-echo (it is in the "Mitigation" section after all), or is just demonstrating pre-echo?

Monsterman222 (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That might not be a digital artifact at all. It's probably just the analog print-through of the magnetic tape from which the LP was mastered. 217.238.150.202 (talk) 22:29, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is confusing that pre-echo is explained as a digital phenomenon, and then the audio example is of an LP record. Intellec7 (talk) 18:00, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]