[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Welcome and brief update
From: |
Marshall White |
Subject: |
Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Welcome and brief update |
Date: |
Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:50:38 -0800 (PST) |
--- Daniel Rogers wrote:
> actually, it seems that I choose 40Msps from a lack of understanding of
> the amount of samples/Hz of radio frequency needed for correct digitization.
>
> That said, how is it that a 400 kHz sample rate is sufficient for a
> 107.5 MHz FM modulated signal? How is it that you can extract useful
> information when you have much muhc less that one sample per cycle.
>
> And given all this information, what is the max frequency you could
> demodulate at 40Msps?
>
> --
> Dan
>
Dan,
The answer is that you must have a "tuner" that takes the signal at 107.5 MHz
and "moves" it down
to a much lower frequency (called an IF, or intermediate frequency).
If you have a 40 MHz sampling rate, any IF less than 20 MHz should more or less
be okay.
If you had a 400 kHz sampling rate, then your IF would have to be CENTERED at
100 kHz.
Marshall
- [Discuss-gnuradio] Welcome and brief update, Eric Blossom, 2003/01/10
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Welcome and brief update, Daniel Rogers, 2003/01/10
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Welcome and brief update, Mark Smith, 2003/01/10
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Welcome and brief update, John E. Perry, 2003/01/13
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Welcome and brief update, Tanner Lovelace, 2003/01/13
- [Discuss-gnuradio] Direct Conversion vs Superheterodyne, Tanner Lovelace, 2003/01/13
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Direct Conversion vs Superheterodyne, Mark Smith, 2003/01/13
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Direct Conversion vs Superheterodyne, David Bengtson, 2003/01/13
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Direct Conversion vs Superheterodyne, Mark Smith, 2003/01/14
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Direct Conversion vs Superheterodyne, Lisa Bengtson, 2003/01/14
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Direct Conversion vs Superheterodyne, Mark Smith, 2003/01/14