I guess I have to find a way to implement it and test it. By the way, I'm testing max's hilbert~ with olli's - find picture attached.
is this a good way to test it by the way? Seems Max's is more accurate 2016-06-23 22:40 GMT-03:00 Matt Barber <[email protected]>: > Not sure. I've used csound's a lot in ambisonic decoding and it's always > worked well. > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> olli's seems easier for me to code, and better than csound's huh? >> >> thanks >> >> 2016-06-23 11:27 GMT-03:00 Matt Barber <[email protected]>: >> >>> csound's hilbert transform is also 6th-order. Code here: >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/csound/csound/blob/2ec0073f4bb55253018689a19dd88a432ea6da46/Opcodes/ugsc.c >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 9:16 AM, katja <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Attached is a zip with test patch for [olli~] and [hilbert~] so you >>>> can compare and also check with different sample rates. It seems that >>>> Olli's coefficients are optimized to work well from 20 Hz up at 44K1 >>>> sample rate, and Pd's built-in from 80 Hz up. They both work at other >>>> samples rates too, but with different range. >>>> >>>> Since the coefficients for x[n-2] and y[n-2] are non-zero in the >>>> biquads, the maximum phase shift is as large as in any 2nd order >>>> section, therefore I think the four sections together are 8 order >>>> equivalent indeed. >>>> >>>> By the way, the abstraction in my first response wasn't completely >>>> vanilla-compatible, this is fixed in current attachment (for anyone >>>> else interested). >>>> >>>> Katja >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:24 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > Awesome, I can code it based on that :) but which order is it? >>>> > >>>> > I see it has 4 biquads, but it doesnt look like an 8th order because >>>> some >>>> > coefficients are zeroed out, so I'm confused. >>>> > >>>> > Another question, does it work at any sample rate? This question is >>>> also >>>> > aimed to pd's hilbert~ abstraction by the way. >>>> > >>>> > cheers >>>> > >>>> > 2016-06-22 17:27 GMT-03:00 katja <[email protected]>: >>>> >> >>>> >> Hi, Olli Niemitalou has coefficients published for a higher order >>>> >> 'hilbert transformer' on http://yehar.com/blog/, attached is [olli~] >>>> >> abstraction based on it. >>>> >> >>>> >> Katja >>>> >> >>>> >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres >>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >> > Howdy, I'm working on a frequency shifter object (via single >>>> sideband >>>> >> > modulation / complex modulation). >>>> >> > >>>> >> > In Max they have a so called "6th order hilbert transformer with a >>>> >> > minimum >>>> >> > of error". In Pd, the hilbert~ abstraction is 4th order. I'm >>>> copying the >>>> >> > pd >>>> >> > abstraction for now, but I was hoping to use such a higher order >>>> filter >>>> >> > and >>>> >> > also use- but I can't find a source for such a formula. Any help >>>> finding >>>> >> > it? >>>> >> > >>>> >> > thanks >>>> >> > >>>> >> > _______________________________________________ >>>> >> > [email protected] mailing list >>>> >> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>> >> > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >>>> >> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> [email protected] mailing list >>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
