The importance of crossover steepness - Page 15 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > PC Based

PC Based Computer music servers, crossovers, and equalization

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 30th July 2012, 02:01 PM   #141
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by CopperTop View Post
Yes, sorry. What is the best description? "Gaussian-derived"?
No, because that conflicts with the "Gaussian-derived" highpass section.

My vote is for "higher-order Gaussian-like". It's a mouthful, but at least it's not ambiguous.

Quote:
Edit: I enclose the results for Gaussian-derived (not too late to change that wording) at 2.0 (indicated as "Gaussian"), 3.0 and 4.0. Even the difference between a true 2.0 and the previous example of order 1.98 (or was it 2.02?) is noticeable.
Thank you. It really shows how "special" the true Gaussian response is. Interestingly enough, in the higher-order Gaussian-like cases, the impulse response does not appear to be significantly better than what you call the "standard" filters, which are approximations to classical filters like Butterworth and Bessel.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2012, 02:02 PM   #142
diyAudio Member
 
steph_tsf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Apology my gross ignorance. How do you manage to get preshoot and ringing, with negative values, on your so-called "Gauss" lowpass ?

Here is the code I'm using for generating a Gauss FIR and I don't understand how to enhance it for getting preshoot and ringing.

Gauss = Me.FIR2_Box1.Text
FIR2_coeff(m) = 1
For i As Integer = 1 To n
arg = i / Gauss
val = Math.Exp(-arg * arg)
FIR2_coeff(m + i) = val
FIR2_coeff(m - i) = val
Next

Steph
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2012, 06:05 PM   #143
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by steph_tsf View Post
How do you manage to get preshoot and ringing, with negative values, on your so-called "Gauss" lowpass ?
In post #72, gberchin provided this information, which is what I have been using:

Quote:
The equation for the frequency response magnitude of a Gaussian lowpass filter is:
exp{+[|f/fc|^2]*ln(1/2)},
where |f/fc| means "absolute value". (I hope that I didn't mess that up; I worked it quickly on some scrap paper.) The highpass filter will be 1 minus the lowpass filter.

For higher-order "Gaussian-like" filters of order "N", the lowpass filter is:
exp{+[|f/fc|^N]*ln(1/2)}. Again, the highpass filter will be 1 minus the lowpass filter. I believe that the corresponding highpass filter will have an "Nth-order" slope.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th July 2012, 08:34 PM   #144
diyAudio Member
 
steph_tsf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by CopperTop View Post
In post #72, gberchin provided this information: magnitude of a Gaussian lowpass filter is: exp{+[|f/fc|^2]*ln(1/2)}
Now I understand, thanks. I'm attaching the corresponding design form.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg iDFT XO CGn (order 2.0 - true Gauss).jpg (184.3 KB, 130 views)
File Type: jpg iDFT XO CGn (order 4.0).jpg (179.6 KB, 118 views)
Attached Files
File Type: zip iDFT XO CGn.zip (218.4 KB, 12 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2012, 10:54 PM   #145
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Any experts on patents here?

Just looking at the Neville Thiele patent for crossover filter with notched response:
http://www.pat2pdf.org/patents/pat6854005.pdf

Claim 19 says the following
Quote:
19. A method of tuning a filter system including a low pass filter having a response which rolls off towards a crossover frequency and a high pass filter having a complementary response which rolls off towards said crossover frequency such that the combined amplitude response of said filters is substantially constant at least in the region of said crossover frequency, said method including the steps of:
selecting a filter topology capable of realizing a low pass complex transfer function defined by a first numerator and a first denominator;
selecting a filter topology capable of realizing a high pass complex transfer function defined by a second numerator and a second denominator;
setting the second denominator so that it is substantially the same as the first denominator; and
setting the squared modulus of the sum of the first and second numerators so that it is substantially the same as the squared modulus of the first or second denominator.
I wasn't too bothered, because it's basically an analogue type implementation. But then claim 35 says
Quote:
35. A method according to claim 19 wherein said low and high pass filters include digitally implemented filters.
I always wonder about this sort of thing. If we were to pursue our numerical iterative optimisation thing, and blundered into such a filter simply because it met the criteria we had set (for frequency response roll-off, overshoot, ringing duration, latency etc.) I presume we would be infringing said patent if we allowed it out into the wild..? (If not, there wouldn't be much use in patenting anything, as obviously our story about the computer having found the filter 'by accident' could just be us retro-fitting a story to having copied Thiele's filter.)

But supposing, instead, we sold a program, or an electronic box, with a user interface that allowed the user to specify basically any filter they wanted. How would the patent work with that sort of thing? Would the program have to mask out certain no-go areas that were covered by patents?

I'm just curious.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2012, 04:41 PM   #146
puppet is offline puppet  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: The Dells, WI
gberchin ... noticed that you had stated a relationship w/EV. I'm curious, if you know, as to how well their Bessel filters (2,3,4th order) found in the DX34A series digital processors approximate the idealized Gaussian filter(s)?
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 12:13 AM   #147
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by puppet View Post
gberchin ... noticed that you had stated a relationship w/EV. I'm curious, if you know, as to how well their Bessel filters (2,3,4th order) found in the DX34A series digital processors approximate the idealized Gaussian filter(s)?
Puppet; sorry for the huge delay in response, but I stopped following this thread when it looked like it ended last July.

In answer to your question: If EV is still using the Bessel filters that I designed for the DSP56K processor family, then they are textbook implementations of analog Bessel filters converted to digital by means of the bilinear transform, with prewarping to match the analog prototypes at the -3 dB frequencies. Their precision and accuracy are very close to the maximum possible in a 24-bit context because extended-precision is used for the internal calculations. So, basically, they are about as good an approximation to Gaussian filters as 24-bit Bessel filters can be.

If EV has changed processors (or implementations), then I am unable to speak to what might be there.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2013, 12:53 PM   #148
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
iDFT XO CGn does not work as it can not write to c:/iDFT_XO_CGn.txt
Creating a file with permission and ownership changes nothing as win7 won't allow it.
It is also bad practice to write there as EVE online found out when they modified autoexec.bat (which was their launch script) but accidentally took c:/ one instead.
Attached Images
File Type: png iDFT_XO_CGn.png (12.4 KB, 42 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2013, 01:54 PM   #149
diyAudio Member
 
steph_tsf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_Web View Post
iDFT XO CGn does not work as it can not write to c:/iDFT_XO_CGn.txt
See revision in : iDFT-based XOs (FIR)
post #1
post #6
The file gets written in a more suitable directory.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2013, 03:48 PM   #150
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Thanks, didn't see that thread. I was using the version posted above in #144
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Capacitor tolerance importance for high end crossover filters? garrettba03 Parts 2 11th February 2012 01:52 PM
Importance of layout robmil Solid State 8 12th April 2011 07:09 PM
The Importance of Being Biased Nelson Pass Pass Labs 74 26th July 2007 01:58 PM
Importance of building your own crossover? patchwork Multi-Way 23 3rd January 2007 09:46 AM
Importance of Heatsinking dumdum Solid State 16 4th February 2004 02:02 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:11 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2