Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: An experiment

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: An experiment
From: wolf_dl4yhf <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:08:17 +0200
Authentication-results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: [email protected] does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=[email protected]
Delivered-to: [email protected]
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
Hi Edgar,

Similar results here, not too spectacular for such a strong signal. The signal was very narrow-band filtered so perhaps the reassigned spectrogram looks poorer than it should be (if there was sufficient 'background noise').

Anyway zooming into the frequency axis shows good frequency resolution..



.. especially considering that the FFT frequency bin width was 62 Hz, the read out resolution is much better (almost 1 Hz).

FFT parameters used for the above analysis: Hann window, 128 point FFT.

Effect of FFT settings with fs= 8.00000 kHz:
Width of one FFT-bin: 62.5000 Hz
Equiv. noise bandwidth: 93.7500 Hz
Max freq range: 0.00000 Hz .. 4.00000 kHz
FFT window time (length): 0.016 s
FFT window overlap: 75.0 %

I adjusted the contrast and brightness so that the residual noise (or is it 'filter ringing') also leaves a trace on the spectrogram.

There was a short "pop" audible in the recording, visible in the center dot of the "s" at the bottom which shows that the time resolution is also ok.


Cheers,
   Wolf .


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>