[PD] WG: Inverse bandpass filter
apvague at gmail.com
Tue Apr 22 20:07:10 CEST 2014
Thank you for that link, that's awesome.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Robert Esler <robert at urbanstew.org> wrote:
> I could be wrong, but I don't think it's quite the same thing. I believe
> the signal would be out of phase negating many of the effects of the
> filter. I would recommend using [biquad~] and in pd-extended there is a
> [notch] object which takes care of the coefficients. This sounds much
> cleaner and more notch-like to my ear than subtracting the filtered output.
> There is an explanation in Miller's book if you like unit circle math:
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 01:59:07 -0300
> From: Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [PD] WG: Inverse bandpass filter
> To: Ingo <ingo at miamiwave.com>
> Cc: pd-list <pd-list at iem.at>
> <CAEAsFmhD0HanLmv9vutcSQZjkZY69i7wMeBqQ+20S2riWYaakw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> isn't it just subtract the audio from the filtered output?
> I guess you can get inverse freq response just by that
> 2014-04-18 17:21 GMT-03:00 Ingo <ingo at miamiwave.com>:
> You could send the original signal in parallel and invert the phase by
> multiplying with -1. You might have to delay the original signal in case
> that the processed signal gets also delayed by one or more blocks.
> > Von: pd-list-bounces at iem.at [mailto:pd-list-bounces at iem.at<pd-list-bounces at iem.at>]
> Im Auftrag
> > AP Vague
> > Gesendet: Freitag, 18. April 2014 18:49
> > An: pd-list at iem.at
> > Betreff: [PD] Inverse bandpass filter
> > Is there a simple way to make [bp~] or [vcf~] have an inverse function?
> > filter out, rather than pass a changing frequency value. Is the easiest
> > way to do this with a combination of [lop~] and [hip~]?
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list