On 23 June 2014 12:37, robert bristow-johnson <r...@audioimagination.com> wrote: > Andy and Urs, i have been making consistent and clear points and challenges > and the response is not addressing these squarely. > > let's do the Sallen-Key challenge, Andy. that's pretty concrete.
With respect Robert, I have really tried to address your points, please go and read all the links I've posted so that you get a better picture of what I am saying. > you pick the circuit (i suggested the one at wikipedia) so we have a common > reference. then you pick an R1, R2, C1, C2 (or an f0 and Q, i don't care). > let's leave the DC gain at 0 dB. then we'll have a common and unambiguous > H(s). In the LTI case, with enough precision, then any implementation structure (if done properly) will result in the same output. There is no question here, I have already state this any number of times. If we want to now look at how things differ in the time varying case, which is what I was talking about, then we can continue. Otherwise I have a feeling that people reading this thread will be getting bored with the repetition of these posts (I know I am). -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
