Yes, essentially you do have the inherent delay involving a window of samples in addition to the compute time.
On Sat, Mar 7, 2020, 5:40 PM Spencer Russell <s...@media.mit.edu> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 7, 2020, at 6:00 AM, Zhiguang Eric Zhang wrote: > > Traditional FIR/IIR filtering is ubiquitous but actually does suffer from > drawbacks such as phase distortion and the inherent delay involved. FFT > filtering is essentially zero-phase, but instead of delays due to samples, > you get delays due to FFT computational complexity instead. > > > I wouldn’t say the delay when using FFT processing is due to computational > complexity fundamentally. Compute affects your max throughput more than > your latency. In other words, if you had an infinitely-fast computer you > would still have to deal with latency. The issue is just that you need at > least 1 block of input before you can do anything. It’s the same thing as > with FIR filters, they need to be causal so they can’t be zero-phase. In > fact you could interchange the FFT processing with a bank of FIR band pass > filters that you sample from whenever you want to get your DFT frame. > (that’s basically just a restatement of what I said before about the STFT.) > > -s > _______________________________________________ > dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list > music-dsp@music.columbia.edu > https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
_______________________________________________ dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list music-dsp@music.columbia.edu https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
