"John Phillips" <jsp5646@hotmail.com> wrote in news:ZPdTc.192847
$tH1.9754504@twister.southeast.rr.com:
> The thoughts and the jokes made me think and to get the answer that I
> needed. That is what counts plus I enjoyed the jokes.
> Thanks again,
>
> John
>
>
Jokes? Randy is an audiophile. I'm sure he has being quite serious.
Al Clark
> "Jerry Avins" <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message
> news:411cd331$0$5904$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
>> John Phillips wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks for all your comments, even the funny ones.
>>
>> I hope it's clear to you that we directed the funny ones to one
another.
>> I hope the answers directly to you were straightforward and
informative.
>>
>> Jerry
>> --
>> ... the worst possible design that just meets the specification -
almost
>> a definition of practical engineering. .. Chris
--
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com
Reply by John Phillips●August 13, 20042004-08-13
The thoughts and the jokes made me think and to get the answer that I
needed. That is what counts plus I enjoyed the jokes.
Thanks again,
John
"Jerry Avins" <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:411cd331$0$5904$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> John Phillips wrote:
>
> > Thanks for all your comments, even the funny ones.
>
> I hope it's clear to you that we directed the funny ones to one another.
> I hope the answers directly to you were straightforward and informative.
>
> Jerry
> --
> ... the worst possible design that just meets the specification - almost
> a definition of practical engineering. .. Chris Bore
> ������������������������������������������������������������������������
>
Reply by Jerry Avins●August 13, 20042004-08-13
John Phillips wrote:
> Thanks for all your comments, even the funny ones.
I hope it's clear to you that we directed the funny ones to one another.
I hope the answers directly to you were straightforward and informative.
Jerry
--
... the worst possible design that just meets the specification - almost
a definition of practical engineering. .. Chris Bore
������������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by Jerry Avins●August 13, 20042004-08-13
Allan Herriman wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:30:13 -0400, Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Paul Russell wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Frank wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Coefficients for a three tap all-pass filter:
>>>>>
>>>>>0 1 0
>>>>>
>>>>>What are the coefficients for a four tap, all-pass filter?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>0 1 0 0
>>>>
>>>
>>>0 0 1 0 works pretty good too, I hear.
>>>
>>>Paul
>>
>>
>>0 0 0 1 and 1 0 0 0 complete the set.
>
>
> 1 0 0 0 is the minimum phase version. Surely this would sound better
> than 0 0 0 1.
>
> Regards,
> Allan.
I guess so, but how much better depends on the sample rate.
Jerry
--
... the worst possible design that just meets the specification - almost
a definition of practical engineering. .. Chris Bore
������������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●August 13, 20042004-08-13
Allan Herriman <allan.herriman.hates.spam@ctam.com.au.invalid> writes:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:30:13 -0400, Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote:
>
> >Paul Russell wrote:
> >
> >> Frank wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Coefficients for a three tap all-pass filter:
> >>>>
> >>>> 0 1 0
> >>>>
> >>>> What are the coefficients for a four tap, all-pass filter?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 0 1 0 0
> >>>
> >>
> >> 0 0 1 0 works pretty good too, I hear.
> >>
> >> Paul
> >
> >
> >0 0 0 1 and 1 0 0 0 complete the set.
>
> 1 0 0 0 is the minimum phase version. Surely this would sound better
> than 0 0 0 1.
Such a filter provides crisper, cleaner highs as well as a mid-range
with more "presence." Bass response is tight and controlled. Of course,
the sound of any digital filter can be improved with Jean-Pierre-Marie
Digital-AccuPhase interconnects.
8^)
--
Randy Yates
Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications
Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
randy.yates@sonyericsson.com, 919-472-1124
Reply by John Phillips●August 13, 20042004-08-13
Thanks everyone for your thoughts. After seeing some of the them and
thinking about how the FIR filter is calculated, I realized that all I
needed to do was to make one tap a 1. We have a system at work that the
user must input a filter but I did not want a filter so I thought about what
coefficients that would remove it, delay is not an issue. I tried the 1 0 0
is it provided just what I needed.
Thanks for all your comments, even the funny ones.
John
"asish" <asishmr@sasken.com> wrote in message
news:f3f1ed51.0408130115.e8542d8@posting.google.com...
> Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:<411b7ef5$0$5893$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>...
> > Paul Russell wrote:
> >
> > > Frank wrote:
> > >
> > >>> Coefficients for a three tap all-pass filter:
> > >>>
> > >>> 0 1 0
> > >>>
> > >>> What are the coefficients for a four tap, all-pass filter?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 0 1 0 0
> > >>
> > >
> > > 0 0 1 0 works pretty good too, I hear.
> > >
> > > Paul
> >
> >
> > 0 0 0 1 and 1 0 0 0 complete the set.
> >
> > Jerry
>
> Do you want to put the filter just for delaying the input signal?
> Then all these filters will work, But if your aim of this exersice is to
> manipulate the phase of the incomminng signal then you have to go for
> the IIR structure.
Reply by asish●August 13, 20042004-08-13
Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message news:<411b7ef5$0$5893$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>...
> Paul Russell wrote:
>
> > Frank wrote:
> >
> >>> Coefficients for a three tap all-pass filter:
> >>>
> >>> 0 1 0
> >>>
> >>> What are the coefficients for a four tap, all-pass filter?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 0 1 0 0
> >>
> >
> > 0 0 1 0 works pretty good too, I hear.
> >
> > Paul
>
>
> 0 0 0 1 and 1 0 0 0 complete the set.
>
> Jerry
Do you want to put the filter just for delaying the input signal?
Then all these filters will work, But if your aim of this exersice is to
manipulate the phase of the incomminng signal then you have to go for
the IIR structure.
Reply by Allan Herriman●August 13, 20042004-08-13
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:30:13 -0400, Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote:
>Paul Russell wrote:
>
>> Frank wrote:
>>
>>>> Coefficients for a three tap all-pass filter:
>>>>
>>>> 0 1 0
>>>>
>>>> What are the coefficients for a four tap, all-pass filter?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 0 1 0 0
>>>
>>
>> 0 0 1 0 works pretty good too, I hear.
>>
>> Paul
>
>
>0 0 0 1 and 1 0 0 0 complete the set.
1 0 0 0 is the minimum phase version. Surely this would sound better
than 0 0 0 1.
Regards,
Allan.
Reply by Jerry Avins●August 12, 20042004-08-12
Paul Russell wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>
>>> Coefficients for a three tap all-pass filter:
>>>
>>> 0 1 0
>>>
>>> What are the coefficients for a four tap, all-pass filter?
>>
>>
>>
>> 0 1 0 0
>>
>
> 0 0 1 0 works pretty good too, I hear.
>
> Paul
0 0 0 1 and 1 0 0 0 complete the set.
Jerry
--
... the worst possible design that just meets the specification - almost
a definition of practical engineering. .. Chris Bore
������������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by Paul Russell●August 12, 20042004-08-12
Frank wrote:
>>Coefficients for a three tap all-pass filter:
>>
>>0 1 0
>>
>>What are the coefficients for a four tap, all-pass filter?
>
>
> 0 1 0 0
>