Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Reg -
It looks like I saw your post before Airy, so I'll respond. (Note: I sometimes have difficulty telling when some of the posters here are really looking for answers, and when they are just trying to bait each other. I am going to start by assuming that you are in the former category.) More below... "Reg Edwards" wrote in message ... "Airy R.Bean" wrote - The better a mixer is, the higher is IP3 for the outputs of the mixer. ========================== From a circuit operational point of view, could you please summarise in what way a high IP3 makes a better mixer? A higher IP3 simply means that the hypothetical mixer can handle bigger signals before it produces a given level of 3rd order IM distortion products. Whether or not that makes it a "better" mixer would depend on many other specifications, such as noise figure, loss/gain, bandwidth, and even size and power consumption. Am I correct in assuming the device need not be a mixer? Could it be an amplifier? If you're asking whether other components such as amplifiers can have IP3 specifications, the answer is definitely yes. In which case some of the better or worse parameters would just become meaningless. I can't figure out what you're trying to say in this last sentence. But correct and relevant specifications are never "meaningless." (At least I can't think of any such pathological examples.) ---- Reg. |