Timeline for Transform minimum phase FIR into linear phase FIR
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 11, 2017 at 9:24 | history | edited | Matt L. |
edited tags
|
|
| Aug 21, 2016 at 11:30 | comment | added | keith | @robert bristow-johnson, the question was just a what-if type thing that popped into my head while doing something else. I think my previous comment implied I had some use case in mind and was going to crack on and start designing filters that way :-) | |
| Aug 20, 2016 at 21:12 | comment | added | robert bristow-johnson | so what are you gonna do? design your original FIR using the $\sqrt{\cdot}$ of the target frequency response (anticipating that it will get squared) and with half of the length that you want your implemented target to have? | |
| Aug 20, 2016 at 21:00 | comment | added | keith | @robert bristow-johnson, yep that's the way I had interpreted Matt's answer and is probably going to be the easiest to implement given h[n] are the FIR coefficients. | |
| Aug 20, 2016 at 20:23 | comment | added | robert bristow-johnson | BTW, Keith, being that you're accepting squaring the frequency response magnitude, if you convolve your original $h[n]$ with the time-reversed copy $h[-n]$, you will get a symmetric impulse response (so it's phase linear) with frequency response that is the square of the magnitude of what you had started with. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 13:22 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | reading this again, ... yes, you're right! | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 13:03 | comment | added | keith | @Marcus Müller, I mentioned in my question I'd be happy if the magnitude gets squared. Matt's answer gives a solution where the magnitude gets squared which I kind of thought there would be way to do (so the question felt reasonable to me). The thing I cared about which I feel is implicit in the question is not redesigning anything. I wanted to know how to do it simply for the sake of knowing, need anyone have a better reason :-) | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 12:57 | vote | accept | keith | ||
| Aug 19, 2016 at 10:04 | answer | added | Matt L. | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 9:08 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | that is a tricky question! So the problem I have with your question is: You want to replace one filter (minimal phase, MP) with a different filter (linear phase, LP). So, per definition of "different", LP and MP can't be identical in every aspect. So what are the aspects of MP that you want LP to have? What are the things you don't care about? It might also be very worthwhile to explain why you want to do this, instead of e.g. designing the LP from scratch. | |
| Aug 19, 2016 at 9:04 | history | edited | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Aug 19, 2016 at 8:55 | history | asked | keith | CC BY-SA 3.0 |