Do any developers of this software plan to add IQ processing to it?

20 views
Skip to first unread message

Ben Hutchinson

unread,
Mar 17, 2022, 3:39:47 PM3/17/22
to Analog Box
Like where each signal line contains both real and imag parts of the signal, instead of just the real parts? So you could have like a complex multiply and other similar things?

Also how about adding support for at least 48000Hz sampling? Currently only 44100Hz sampling is allowed.

Keith W Blackwell

unread,
Apr 19, 2023, 3:51:11 PM4/19/23
to Analog Box
There has really only ever been one developer, and he swore off getting sucked into it again.  But if you know assembly programming, you can take it on yourself.

The problem with adding a different sample rate is that it would completely invalidate all the math, the units conversions, the filter parameters, etc., but it might be something that can be handled at start-up/initialization time, though I doubt it could make sense to try to use any ABox2 circuit made for one sample rate in ABox2 running at a different sample rate.  It would be a huge mess.  -- Just a guess.

--
Keith

Keith W Blackwell

unread,
Apr 19, 2023, 3:56:41 PM4/19/23
to Analog Box
Oh, but as for quadrature, you can build your own modules to replace such things as oscillators so that they generate two signals 90-degrees apart (have the first oscillator output a digital ramp, and that one takes the F input, and its output goes to two normal oscillators in "Phase" input mode that take the amplitude and offset inputs, with one of the two getting its phase input offset by another constant of 0.25 (90 degrees).  But of course, each signal line only carries one signal, so you have to double everything after that.  If you wanted to, you could even build modules to compute complex math on such quadrature signals.  Do-able, but inconvenient, to say the least.  I've only done slightly-similar things for other purposes, never what you have mind here.
--
Keith

Keith W Blackwell

unread,
Apr 19, 2023, 4:25:07 PM4/19/23
to Analog Box
Oops, I should have said "constant of 0.5 (90 degrees)", not 0.25.
And sorry about taking over a year to notice your question.
--
Keith
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages