30 Jan
2005
30 Jan
'05
11:52 p.m.
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:43:55 +1100
Erik de Castro Lopo <erikd-lad(a)mega-nerd.com> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 21:22:02 -0600
"Reuben Martin" <MartinR(a)jbu.edu> wrote:
Yes, i adopted this scheme. I use the r2c and c2r versions though. Only
difference is how they store the values (they transfor N real input
values into N/2+1 complex outputs. This is 1 more than the r2hc
versions, but i can access memory in forward direction in this case w/o
reordering).
Flo
--
Palimm Palimm!
http://affenbande.org/~tapas/
Forgive my ignorance, but is there any
significant difference in the
sound produced by this complex convolve and BruteFIR's half-complex
convolve? (I'm speaking in a theoretical sense rather than comparing the
actual implementations.)
There shouldn't be. There are however significant savings (approx 50%) in
computation with the half complex version.