where is the single complex pole, and is a scale factor. In the time domain, the complex one-pole resonator is implemented as
Since the impulse response is the inverse z transform of the transfer function, we can write down the impulse response of the complex one-pole resonator by recognizing Eq.(B.6) as the closed-form sum of an infinite geometric series, yielding
These may be called phase-quadrature sinusoids, since their phases differ by 90 degrees. The phase quadrature relationship for two sinusoids means that they can be regarded as the real and imaginary parts of a complex sinusoid.
By allowing to be complex,
The frequency response of the complex one-pole resonator differs from that of the two-pole real resonator in that the resonance occurs only for one positive or negative frequency , but not both. As a result, the resonance frequency is also the frequency where the peak-gain occurs; this is only true in general for the complex one-pole resonator. In particular, the peak gain of a real two-pole filter does not occur exactly at resonance, except when , , or . See §B.6 for more on peak-gain versus resonance-gain (and how to normalize them in practice).
where and are constants (generally complex). In this ``parallel one-pole'' form, it can be seen that the peak gain is no longer equal to the resonance gain, since each one-pole frequency response is ``tilted'' near resonance by being summed with the ``skirt'' of the other one-pole resonator, as illustrated in Fig.B.9. This interaction between the positive- and negative-frequency poles is minimized by making the resonance sharper ( ), and by separating the pole frequencies . The greatest separation occurs when the resonance frequency is at one-fourth the sampling rate ( ). However, low-frequency resonances, which are by far the most common in audio work, suffer from significant overlapping of the positive- and negative-frequency poles.
To show Eq.(B.7) is always true, let's solve in general for and given and . Recombining the right-hand side over a common denominator and equating numerators gives
The solution is easily found to be
where we have assumed im, as necessary to have a resonator in the first place.
Note that the inverse z transform of a sum of one-pole transfer functions can be easily written down by inspection. In particular, the impulse response of the PFE of the two-pole resonator (see Eq.(B.7)) is clearly
The BiQuad Section