Message-ID: <41AA0CAB.5050605@usa.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:36:43 +0100
From: Alberto di Bene <dibene@usa.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <3.0.6.32.20041127113429.00c39b50@magma.ca> <000b01c4d3fc$f0716880$6507a8c0@Main> <000b01c4d3fc$f0716880$6507a8c0@Main> <3.0.6.32.20041127113429.00c39b50@magma.ca> <3.0.6.32.20041127170259.00c35f18@magma.ca>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20041127170259.00c35f18@magma.ca>
Subject: LF: Re: MSK etc and stability
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Bill de Carle wrote:

>Well, I did it a little differently, so maybe on a technicality
>you could patent it :-)
>
>  
>
Good, so you won't sue me !  :-)
Thanks for the details of your implementation. Just let me ask one 
question. You multiply
the input real signal with a phasor rotating at the same nominal 
frequency F of the signal
The output is a DC signal and a signal at +-2F (the sign depends on the 
direction of rotation
of the phasor). At this point you need a lowpass filter, which you have 
implemented
integrating the I & Q output. Wouldn't maybe a very steep FIR filter (> 
255 taps) with
a bandwidth of a 2 or 3 Hz gain you something in terms of SNR ?
Mind, I am not saying this based on some computations, it's just a 
feeling (which may, and
probably will) be wrong.

73  Alberto  I2PHD