On 2012-08-01, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
well, it works pretty fine. theoretically, of course, DC is constant. but
really we think of DC (or the coefficient applied to any other frequency
component) to be slowly-varying.
Or in other words, something like the stuff that happens below
On 2012-08-01, Domagoj Saric wrote:
Then there is the modification
(http://www.dsprelated.com/showmessage/80739/2.php, Andor's post) to
subtract the moving average from the _current_ sample (instead of the
one corresponding to the middle of the moving average filter) but this
supposedly
On 1.8.2012. 18:13, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
Since we seem to be starting to run in circles let me try to restate my main
question as simple as possible: does using an IIR DC filter defeat the purpose
of using a (linear phase) FIR (anti-aliasing) LPF in the same signal chain?
If not, why?
On 31.7.2012. 12:54, Wen Xue wrote:
5ms moving-average doesn't sound very right for it cuts off anything below
200Hz, no matter how much one upsamples it. However it is probably just fine
to subtract a DC measured 500ms ago from the current waveform because the DC
shouldn't change much in that
On 1.8.2012. 6:29, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
if DC is slowly varying, small displacements
of a windowed section of DC (which is what comes out of any weighted
moving-average filter) does not change it much. the difference between the IIR
vs FIR, minimum phase vs. linear phase, is just the
On 8/1/12 5:25 AM, Domagoj Saric wrote:
On 1.8.2012. 6:29, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
if DC is slowly varying, small displacements
of a windowed section of DC (which is what comes out of any weighted
moving-average filter) does not change it much. the difference
between the IIR
vs FIR,
as the
moving average output is kept below.
Xue
-Original Message-
From: Domagoj Saric
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 9:39 AM
To: music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [music-dsp] DC blocking (again :)
On 31.7.2012. 12:54, Wen Xue wrote:
5ms moving-average doesn't sound very right
On 30.7.2012. 20:51, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
i didn't have anything to do with the subtract-the-moving-average DC block
filter.
I apologize...at least I attributed too much rather than too little ;)
if you can put up with delay (which is what you must for a causal and
linear-phase
On 30.7.2012. 22:18, Theo Verelst wrote:
So: a relatively low sample rate signal (like 44.1 or 48 kS/s) can contain
easily high frequency components (and possibly transients) which during
reconstruction in the DA converter become larger than the highest sample value.
Yes, this is clear from
On 7/31/12 4:45 AM, Domagoj Saric wrote:
On 30.7.2012. 20:51, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
i didn't have anything to do with the subtract-the-moving-average DC
block filter.
I apologize...at least I attributed too much rather than too little ;)
no sweatsky. i generally try to actively
Think about sampling theory and a *lot* of tricks which influence these
measurements, I'm sure I've seen some guys in the field present stuff
with which it would be possible to mess in more ways than people count on.
So: a relatively low sample rate signal (like 44.1 or 48 kS/s) can
contain
11 matches
Mail list logo
