5 ms·
Agreed - I read this bit in the article: > generating a filter curve for a 300Hz slope, both channels were divided (A/B) against that curve as defining a para
by thrtythreeforty 2y ago
Agreed - I read this bit in the article:
> generating a filter curve for a 300Hz slope, both channels were divided (A/B) against that curve
as defining a parametric EQ band. If you just generally want to invert a measured impulse response, then yeah, you don't know the underlying transfer function.
- Sesse__ 2y agoWell, immediately after that, they say they inverted the entire curve (through a naïve 1/|X| and then un-FFT, presumably) and saved it as an impulse response. I think the 300Hz slope is to _keep_ the rolloff in that area, so that the system doesn't try to boost bass by 40 dB and just end up clipping madly. Since these operations sort-of commute, it is easier to understand if you invert the order of operations: 1. Invert the spectrum (ideally through something less sensitive to noise than what's done here). Now you have an impulse response that will, in theory, give you a perfectly flat frequency response. 2. Apply a 300 Hz slope. Now you gave up some of that flatness, but you have something that's physically realizable without murdering your speakers.
- manawyrm 2y agoExactly correct, that was my thought process while doing it. I tried it without that 300 Hz slope first of course, but that did try to murder my speakers. :)
- thrtythreeforty 2y agoNow I understand, makes sense!