On Apr 10, 2012, at 11:43 AM, Cyrille Henry wrote:
Le 10/04/2012 17:14, Hans-Christoph Steiner a écrit :
On Apr 10, 2012, at 11:08 AM, Cyrille Henry wrote:
Le 10/04/2012 17:03, Hans-Christoph Steiner a écrit :
Then it would need to include a version of [biquad~] that had 5 signal inlets for the 5 coefficients at signal rate.
yes, that would be very nice.
i somehow regret that my bq~ object is not compatible with vanilla biquad~.
You could take filterview and make bqview. The new library template makes it much easier to share C code. If you split out the various coeff calcs for the different filter types into individual, generic C functions, then put them all in libnusmuk-audio.c, it'll automatically get built into a shared library and all the objects linked to it (if you are using the most up-to-date Makefile).
Then those C functions can be made into Tcl procs, and you can replace the pure Tcl procs in filterview.tcl for doing the coeff calc.
well, there is no need for 2 almost similar object. i will certainlly depreciate bq~ once a better replacement is made...
by the way, why are you doing the work for biquad~ since you already know that it must be change to include 5 audio inlet (like bq~)? The bq~ structure look more popular than biquad~ structure. And i read somwhere that it's structure is more stable for low frequency.
why not using bq~ better than biquad~?
I know biquad~, that's the only reason. I'll leave it to others to debate which is the best approach to implementing a biquad filter.
.hc
c
.hc
kill your television
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Man has survived hitherto because he was too ignorant to know how to realize his wishes. Now that he can realize them, he must either change them, or perish. -William Carlos Williams