[music-dsp] Is beating the same thing as flanging?
theover at tiscali.nl
Fri Nov 19 13:33:48 EST 2010
"but at face value it's not right.."
Why? You would have prefered the creator of mathematics to have made the
theoretical sample reconstruction to be of a non-infinite kind, and my
tastes of what works good in all kinds of sits to be less refined and
require filters which are much shorter than I think theory dictates for
It's sampling theory, probably undergrad EE, can't change that. Fir
filters are almost always approximations (I mean per the definition and
parameters used) and any filter has phase problems, except in some very
big and mostly limited cases. Nothing I can do about that. And the
bigger issues: repeated filtering/resampling, sounds through a natural
reflective space including sampling isses, feedback through a system and
rerunning a signal multiple times through the same effect chain, are all
served by minding the accuracy of used approximations, and I think I
head what I mentioned all day long, and find that tedious that dsp is no
more scientifically advanced it appears in many cases than theory was
already in the 60s, and early Lexicons in the 70s. No fun in that IMO.
Yeah, I had my self built balanced BBD (from Tandy (radio shack)) but I
didn't use it for heavy guitar things at the time, I did a lesley
simulation with it, or noise-driven chorus, and I dare to say I was
proud to electronically construct a working compander around it, but
with one frequency band...
More information about the music-dsp