LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #29   Report Post  
Old March 25th 09, 10:30 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,951
Default Noise figure paradox

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:11:48 -0700, "Joel Koltner"
wrote:

Hi Richard,

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
.. .
In other posts related to deep space
probe's abilities to recover data from beneath the noise floor, much
less cell phones to operate in a sea of congestion, I encountered the
economic objection that such methods cost too much - expense of
bandwidth.


I don't think anyone stated they cost "too much," just that there is a cost in
increased bandwidth, and bandwidth isn't free.


Um, this last statement seems to be hedging by saying the same thing
in reverse order.

Well, not having seen anything more than yet another qualification -
how much is "too much?"


Definitely depends on "the market."


It would be more compelling if you simply stated the cost for ANY
market. Qualified statements are suitable for Madison Avenue to sell
cheese, but it doesn't make for an informed cost-based decision.

That being said, back in the analog broadcast TV days (oh, wait, not all of
them are gone yet, but they will be soon), I believe that "studio quality"
NTSC is considered to be 50dB SNR (for the video), whereas people would start
to notice the noise if the received signal's SNR had dropped below 30ish dB,
and 10dB produces an effectively unwatchable pictures. This reinforces your
point that "good enough" is highly subjective depending on how the
"information" transmitted is actually used.


I would suspect that "studio quality" observes other characteristics
of the signal. A multipath reception could easily absorb a
considerable amount of interfering same-signal to abyssmal results. It
would take a very sophisticated "noise" meter to perform the correct
S+N/N.

You make a good point that the Shannon limit gives a good quantitative measure
of how you go about trading off bandwidth for SNR (effectively power if your
noise if fixed by, e.g., atmospheric noise coming into an antenna). Shannong
doesn't give any hint as to how to achieve the limits specified, although I've
read that with fancy digital modulation techniques and "turbo"
error-correcting codes, one can come very close to the limit.


The "Turbo" codes are achievable in silicon with moderate effort. A
work going back a dozen years or more can be found at:
http://sss-mag.com/G3RUH/index2.html
(consult the adjoining pages for fuller discussion)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Noise figure calculation Jason Antenna 4 February 8th 05 02:03 AM
Noise Figure Measurements Steve Kavanagh Homebrew 25 October 20th 04 05:14 AM
WTB: HP/Agilent 346A (or B) Noise Source for HP 8970A Noise Figure Meter Carl R. Stevenson Homebrew 0 January 21st 04 05:20 AM
Calculating noise figure from kTo J M Noeding Homebrew 0 September 18th 03 10:43 PM
Claculating noise figure from kTo J M Noeding Homebrew 0 September 18th 03 10:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017