Steve Harris wrote: >On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 03:13:28 +0100, Tim Goetze wrote: >> >Blackman-Harris has the best sidelobe rejection, which is probably what we >> >> just to make sure we're talking about the same thing: ... >I have: ...
the difference between the two is next to nothing, mostly a DC offset. i'll use yours for the next FTs. is that 'Harris' as in 'S.W.Harris'? ;) >Well, I think its best to develop with maximum wuality, then when its >working, work out how much we can reduce the CPU cost and still have it >sound good. agree. though it's always good to keep in mind what is costly and what is quick when choosing an implementation approach. >> good god. know an alternative source for calculating the >> coefficients? Bill? > >I have some text books that will have it in, I can compare that to NR. after some NR 5-10 reading, it looks to me like harmonic_gen is missing the work pcshft() from the book text is performing, yet its output seems well-scaled. it just occurred to me that it may be feasible to skip the coefficient calculation in realtime by simply storing these instead of harmonic amplitude tables. makes lerping difficult though. tim
