"Ultimately I think "resonant" is a general descriptive term for filters, that shouldn't be interpreted as a detail of implementation."I guess you have a point there, and I was also driving to this conclusion."It sounds like the Resonz UGen in supercollider is exactly what Julius Smith is talking about in that description of the two-pole filter."Actually, the Resonz UGen is a Two Pole / Two Zero filter, which is very more closely related to [cyclone/reson~].A Two-Pole only filter (no zeros) like the one Julius is describing is actually what the [bp~] object is!"But then there's the other supercollider filter UGens with "resonant" in the name, which seem more like what Martin was describing - RLPF (resonant low-pass filter) for example is a low-pass filter where you can adjust the resonance near the cutoff. "Yep, and this is also much like the [cyclone/lores~] object in Pd. Check that patch I sent for more detailed info on these filters.I've always assumed that a filter, in order to be called a "resonant filter" or a "resonator" - being it a low pass, a high pass or a band pass -, needed to boost/add gain to a particular cutoff frequency (in the case of lowpass and highpas - which is the case for [lores~] or RLPF) or add gain to some center frequency (in the case of a bandpass) - which is also called "resonant frequency".The quote from Julius in that link - where he says "A resonator is a recursive filter that boosts signal amplitude at a particular frequency" - is in line with my assumption.But the concept of resonance in physics, in its utmost purity according to wikipedia, is that it "is the tendency of a system to oscillate with greater amplitude at some frequencies than at others". Meaning that it doesn't really have to add gain to something, but only favor a frequency amongst others... In this context, a bandpass - in general - is a "resonator"...But it'd be cool if I could find a definitive word about this in the filter literature!Cheers2015-01-13 13:16 GMT-02:00 Brian Fay <ovaltinevortex@gmail.com>:Ultimately I think "resonant" is a general descriptive term for filters, that shouldn't be interpreted as a detail of implementation.It sounds like the Resonz UGen in supercollider is exactly what Julius Smith is talking about in that description of the two-pole filter.But then there's the other supercollider filter UGens with "resonant" in the name, which seem more like what Martin was describing - RLPF (resonant low-pass filter) for example is a low-pass filter where you can adjust the resonance near the cutoff. I haven't played with this too much myself, but I'm guessing with the right Q value you could drive this to self-oscillation?On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote:I'm pending to say that there is no real distinction between "Resonant filter" and a "resonator", and a "bandpass" can be implicitly thought of as a resonator. Here's what I also found in Julius' websitePass the mouse cursor over the "Resonator" over the title "First-Order Complex Resonators" to see the popup (also attached).cheers2015-01-13 1:20 GMT-02:00 Martin Peach <chakekatzil@gmail.com>:I was looking at circuit diagrams for analog synthesizers recently and noticed that the "resonance" control is nothing more than feeding some fraction of the output back to the input. With more feedback oscillation occurs at the cutoff frequency for any type of filter, highpass, bandpass or lowpass.MartinOn Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote:Nice I give an impression to be an expert, but filters is just something I've actually recently started studying :)> I'm wondering if by "resonant" filter you mean the> same thing as "resonator" filter?Now you got me... good question, and I'm not sure, haha. The link looks nice btw, will definitely check it. Thanks.So now I'm even more confused. Is "resonant filter" and "resonator" two different concepts? Maybe I'm having trouble with the english nomenclature and everything.To be honest and more detailed about the issues I'm encountering, I ask this based on another topic I was discussing with Julius Smith in the Supercollider list, but it went dead and I got no replies. In it I was asking if the object "Resonz" should really be called a "Resonant filter", because it was just a bandpass filter in my opinion. Then Julius was mentioning how "A resonator is a special case of a passband filter having a nearly zero-width passband."I see he used the term "resonator" and not "Resonant Filter" (as Resonz is described). So yeah, now I'm more confused... is resonator the same as resonant or what?But anyway, we can bring the discussion into the Pd world, and talk about the [reson~] object, as I will do later on.I was googling and saw how the term resonant filter could be used to describe a regular bandpass filter. And how the bandpass' center frequency could also be called "resonant frequency". So they might be used in the same way... (accurately or not).Now here is my opinion. Just like a resonant low pass filter (the [lores~] object in Pd), the concept of resonance in a filter relates to how it adds gain around the resonant frequency.In the Audio-EQ-Cookbook (link: http://www.musicdsp.org/files/Audio-EQ-Cookbook.txt ) that presents formulas for biquad coeficients you have two different bandpass filters, lets call them BPF1 and BPF2. So, BPF2 has "constant 0 dB peak gain", meaning it doesn't affect anything arounf the center frequency. Now BPF1 says it has "constant skirt gain, peak gain = Q", meaning that the Q or bandwidth controls the gain of the filter. I consider BPF2 to be a regular bandpass filter, whereas BPF1, which adds gain for narrower bandwidths, seems to be a "resonant" one... (which makes me think Resonz shouldn't be described as resonant filter, as it's just a bandpass, or "BPF2").Oh, there's another term around, the "ringing" filter, which seems to be another term for resonant filter. In SuperCollider they have Ringz, which was supposed to be the same as Resonz object (or a resonant filter for that matter), but they are different like the two different kinds of bandpass in the EQ Cookbook (Ringz = BPF1 / Resonz = BPF2).Coming into the Pd world we can talk about the [reson~] object. As the name implies, it is a resonant filter. But the helpfile says it is a "Bandpass filter" (damn). Funny enough, in Max, the [reson~] object is said to be indded a Resonant Bandpass Filter. So maybe we should update [reson~]'s help file in Pd... But the deal is: [reson~] is actually a bandpass like BFP2 or Resonz, but it has a separate parameter for the gain. Meaning it works basically as a bandpass filter, where changing the Q doesn't affect the gain. But you can also give it a boost or a cut with the gain parameter. By giving it a boost it would behave in a way that I'm considering to be an actual "resonant" filter.Now let me go ahead and share a patch that I'm writing for my computer music classes. It's about several filters that can be obtained with biquad. So I present Pd's vanilla filters such as [lop~], [hip~] and [bp~]. I also present externals like [lores~] and [reson~] and I do present all the filters from the Audio Eq Cookbook as well. It's in portuguese, and part of a big series of examples, but what the hell...By the way, I was also able to implement Resonz and Ringz as [biquad~] in Pd, but I don't have it on this example (but to hell with supercollider already, hehe).So there you can check the behaviour and differences that I've pointed. For [reson~], I have two separate parameters, one is for "Q", and the other one, which is originally "gain", I'm calling the "resonance" parameter. Much like the resonance parameter in [lores~]...As for the Cookbook filters, BPF2 is what I'm calling a regular "bandpass", and it has a parameter of "Q". As for BPF1, I'm calling it a "resonant filter", and it has a parameter of "resonance" instead of "Q" (but the idea is that more Q gives more gain/resonance).I hope I'm clear in the midst of so much detail and information. It's just a stupid doubt on the nomenclature of filters, but this kind of issue can be quite a pain in the ass, and the subject of many confusions.So, in short, I still keep my original question: Are bandpass and resonant filters the same? Or is there a difference between calling one a resonant and not a bandpass? Moreover, what about a resonator? Is my assumption on how to call one a bandpass and a resonant correct or it doesn't have anything to do with the official literature? And how about what Julius Smith had to say?Cheers2015-01-12 20:03 GMT-02:00 Brian Fay <ovaltinevortex@gmail.com>:Based on your posts in this group, you definitely know more about filters than I do, so I don't really have an answer to this question - but I'm wondering if by "resonant" filter you mean the same thing as "resonator" filter?The paper that is linked in the article has some details on the mathematical implementation of the filter, but that's mostly mumbo-jumbo to me.
I saw something interesting earlier today about using resonator filters as control sources for FM synthesis: http://tai-studio.org/index.php/projects/sound-programming/complexres/On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote:Hi, are bandpass and resonant filters the same? Or is there a difference between calling one a resonant and not a bandpass?thanks
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list