On 6/24/14 6:00 AM, Urs Heckmann wrote:
You're right.
I've been worked up ever since people post those silly and ignorant stabs like
this:
On 09.04.2014, at 19:12, robert bristow-johnson<r...@audioimagination.com>
wrote:
if there is feedback, there must be at least one sample of delay, despite
claims of zero-delay feedback i have read here on music-dsp and at other places.
it's a technical fact in a causal environment. y[n] is a function of
y[n-1], y[n-2]... and x[n], x[n-1], x[n-2] ...
what's the next claim we'll be hearing about? that we can get feedback
of -1 or -2 samples "delay"? why not? it's just more extrapolation.
It occurrs that the topic triggers an immense resistance with those who have
stakes in DF-anything.
i never brought up DF-anything in this thread. i *did* respond to it a
little bit (mostly just to direct the discussion back to the topic). i
regret that i responded to it. this thread has nothing to do with
DF-anything.
It occurrs that no proof is enough to stop those people from stabbing.
"no proof" is what we're seeing.
Therefore I see no benefit in discussing the topic any further.
it's one way to settle an unsupported claim.
--
r b-j r...@audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
--
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
