Book: The Art of VA Filter Design 2.1.2
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1607 posts since 12 Apr, 2002
I'm glad it's considered on-topic. Still not sure, if there is a need for a discussion and respectively a dedicated topic, though. If anyone feels like they'd like to ask a question, or start some discussion, please let me know here, I'll create a separate topic then (which the first post being the announcement, so that it can be updated with each new revision, should any come).
-
- KVRAF
- 7899 posts since 12 Feb, 2006 from Helsinki, Finland
I would like to provide comments on this book, but I did look at it and it appears to be the kind of math book that doesn't work with my brain. Traditional math books generally seem to fall roughly into two (somewhat) distinct styles, where one is very dry and to the point and you spend a month reading a single page, but if you'll get through it you probably learned a ton 'cos the information density is very high. The other style is more "intuitive" I guess, guiding the reader towards understanding the subject through examples, but there's a lot more text to go through. This text of your seems more in the latter category.
Some people have strong opinions about which style is better, but I think there's probably some fundamental variation in how we learn such that one kind of material works for one person and other type of material works for another person. I find myself pretty firmly in the camp that prefers the "dry and to the point" style (and not just with math).
What I want to comment on though is that writing about intuition seems a bit ambitious, because I think it's not just the way we learn, but more generally the way we think that makes "intuitive" vary quite a bit from one person to another. Basically when I got to 1.1, the moment I see the quadratic rewritten on page 19, my brain builds the pattern "extract a binomial expansion + left overs" and none of the rest of the chapter makes much sense ("why are we graphing these things when we could just use algebra")... but I don't think this is a problem with the book, I think it's more likely just the differences in how we think... and because I recognize this text is not a good fit for my thought patterns, I'm afraid I can't really comment on it meaningfully.
As for on-topic though.. I don't see a problem with math books here given that we kinda tend to need a bit of math sometimes for DSP.
Some people have strong opinions about which style is better, but I think there's probably some fundamental variation in how we learn such that one kind of material works for one person and other type of material works for another person. I find myself pretty firmly in the camp that prefers the "dry and to the point" style (and not just with math).
What I want to comment on though is that writing about intuition seems a bit ambitious, because I think it's not just the way we learn, but more generally the way we think that makes "intuitive" vary quite a bit from one person to another. Basically when I got to 1.1, the moment I see the quadratic rewritten on page 19, my brain builds the pattern "extract a binomial expansion + left overs" and none of the rest of the chapter makes much sense ("why are we graphing these things when we could just use algebra")... but I don't think this is a problem with the book, I think it's more likely just the differences in how we think... and because I recognize this text is not a good fit for my thought patterns, I'm afraid I can't really comment on it meaningfully.
As for on-topic though.. I don't see a problem with math books here given that we kinda tend to need a bit of math sometimes for DSP.
-
- KVRAF
- 2245 posts since 25 Sep, 2014 from Specific Northwest
What math?
1. Collect samples.
2. Run samples through Magic Function.
3. ?
4. Profit!
I'm sort of neither of those. I can follow dense, dry math up until the hand-waving part, which tells me that the speaker doesn't understand that of which is being spoken. I don't like long drawn out explanations that carry you on a long journey from A to Z, but tend to skip out on several important letters along the way that provide context. And reasons.
Normally, I just put a problem on the back burner inside my brain and let it cook. The cooking time can vary from minutes to months, but one day, I just wake up and mostly understand it.
As for the Book, it is incredibly on topic, I don't understand how anybody could doubt it. It's an objective fact!
1. Collect samples.
2. Run samples through Magic Function.
3. ?
4. Profit!
I'm sort of neither of those. I can follow dense, dry math up until the hand-waving part, which tells me that the speaker doesn't understand that of which is being spoken. I don't like long drawn out explanations that carry you on a long journey from A to Z, but tend to skip out on several important letters along the way that provide context. And reasons.
Normally, I just put a problem on the back burner inside my brain and let it cook. The cooking time can vary from minutes to months, but one day, I just wake up and mostly understand it.
As for the Book, it is incredibly on topic, I don't understand how anybody could doubt it. It's an objective fact!
I started on Logic 5 with a PowerBook G4 550Mhz. I now have a MacBook Air M1 and it's ~165x faster! So, why is my music not proportionally better? 
