Re: [Jamin] Comments on FFT v's IIR crossover

[Jan D. <evi...@ca...>]

On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 04:02, Steve Harris wrote:
> OK, I 've been giving it some more critical listening with music and my
> monitors wound up higher.
> 
> This is more hand-wavey sutff here, rather than maths :)
> 
> When using the IIR filters on a test track (something by St. Germain) the
> volume is a bit lower, which made it sound less good, and the IIR seems to
> take some of the punch out of the bass, but I cant see anything in the
> frequency response that would cause that, so it could be related to the
> phase shift, I guess. Winding up the volume by a few dB to compensate for
> the loss in the filters made it sound OK, but still not as good as the FFT
> version.
> 
> The tight notches caused by the crossover filters dont seem to be as
> serious an issue as I thought when listening to whitenoise, I'm sure there
> are tracks that would show it up (espcially if you happened to have a
> harmonic that coincided exactly with the a high freq crossover pt. but for
> some material the IIR crossover may be OK. I still wouldn't use it for
> mastering myself though :)
> 
> I could go either way on wether its a good idea to have it as an option.
> Votes?
> 

	From what I've heard, if you can't make it near the quality of the FFT
crossover, my vote is to drop it.  Moore's Law is slowly taking care of
the overhead.

Jan