If I may go back to the fundamentals of this thread started by
@Keith_W's wonderful/amazing top three posts under the title of
"Understanding the state of the DSP market",,,
We have so many choices of fully-automated DSP solutions, semi-automated ones, and also almost-manual ones; the internal-DSP procedures would be sometimes a kind of complete-black-box or semi-black-box, but many of us tend to do not care about such black-box-ness. Even I myself do not fully understand (which is far beyond my mathematical and technical knowledge/skills) what my beloved DSP software "EKIO"
(IIR filters in cascade of 2nd-order stransposed direct form II biquad sections done using 64-bit floating points, ref. here) is actually doing internally.
I believe, therefore, each of us using DSP software/hardware, should have
our/your own fully understandable and "validated" objective methods/procedures, in outside of DSP software, for the effects of the DSP implementations; otherwise, we may easily fall into endless spirals of DSP pit-holes/dark-tunnels.
At least in my case, as I repeatedly shared on this thread and other places,
primitive "validated" analysis of
recorded tone-burst (wave-shape) air-sound, as well as
objective analysis of recorded air-sound's "sound energy distributions", both to be performed outside of DSP software, are critically important.
We can easily have so many theoretical and/or in-brain/on-desk discussions under the title of this wonderful thread, but many of such discussions would possibly "sound hollow" in case you/we have no
out-of-DSP independent objective validation methods/procedures...