Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "isw" wrote in message ... In article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Keith Dysart" wrote in message ps.com... On Jul 3, 2:07 pm, Keith Dysart wrote: On Jul 3, 12:50 pm, John Fields wrote: On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:03:36 -0700, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "John Smith I" wrote in message ... Radium wrote: snip Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave. What would it look like on an oscilloscope? snip What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | | | --------+--------------------+-------+------+---- 100kHz 0.9MHz 1MHz 1.1MHz Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added to a 0.9 MHz sine wave. What would that look like on an oscilloscope? snip Tricky!!! It looks like AM but it isn't, it's just the phases sliding past each other slowly and algebraically adding which creates the illusion. What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | -----------------------------+--------------+---- 0.9MHz 1.1MHz -- JF But if you remove the half volt bias you put on the 100 kHz signal in the multiplier version, the results look exactly like the summed version, so I suggest that results are the same when a 4 quadrant multiplier is used. And since the original request was for a "1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave" I think a 4 quadrant multiplier is in order. ...Keith- Ooops. I misspoke. They are not quite the same. The spectrum is the same, but if you want to get exactly the same result, the lower frequency needs a 90 degree offset and the upper frequency needs a -90 degree offset. And the amplitudes of the the sum and difference frequencies need to be one half of the amplitude of the frequencies being multiplied. ...Keith You win. ![]() When I conceived the problem I was thinking cosines actually. In which case there are no phase shifts to worry about in the result. I also forgot the half amplitude factor. While it might not be obvious, the two cases I described are basically identical. And this situation occurs in real life, i.e. in radio signals, oceanography, and guitar tuning. The beat you hear during guitar tuning is not modulation; there is no non-linear process involved (i.e. no multiplication). Isaac In short, the human auditory system is not linear. It has a finite resolution bandwidth. It can't resolve two tones separted by a few Hertz as two separate tones. (But if they are separted by 100 Hz they can easily be separated without hearing a beat.) Two tones 100 Hz apart may or may not be perceived separately; depends on a lot of other factors. MP3 encoding, for example, depends on the ear's (very predictable) inability to discern tones "nearby" to other, louder ones. The same affect can be seen on a spectrum analyzer. Give it two frequencies separated by 1 Hz. Set the resolution bandwidth to 10 Hz. You'll see the peak rise and fall at 1 Hz. Yup. And the spectrum analyzer is (hopefully) a very linear system, producing no intermodulation of its own. Isaac |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|