thanks for the reply. I am quite sure it is conv command. I step through the code and it takes 1min and 14s for a sequence of length 2048e3 in a 1.2 GHz cpu. Do you think this is resonable?
"Matt J" wrote in message <firstname.lastname@example.org>... > "Balachander Narasimhan" <email@example.com> wrote in message <firstname.lastname@example.org>... > > Hi, > > > > I have a long sequence to be convolved with a filter. The conv command is too slow for this. What is the alternative here? > > > Do an FFT-based convolution? > > Failing that, why do you think that there should be a better alternative to conv? Is there some structure in this filter/sequence that can be exploited? > > If the sequence is long, it may not be CONV that is failing. You simply have a large computation to perform.