![]() ![]() Terms, in fact it's a good example of how you should not allow everything This in no way means you shouldnt allow yourself to think in other This is still theĬase until you move to different applications such as signal measurement. General signal processing so the practice was to find the 3db pointīecause in those arenas power means everything. History dictates many practices like this. I've edited this post about 12 times so far because I thought I found an answer to something and put it in the post which raised another question, but it turns out to be wrong so I removed it. I'm starting to see why the one forum member finds decibels to be too vague (was it Duffy?).or rather people are too vague when using it. Why was it defined in terms of power rather than amplitude (rather than 0.707% of the original amplitide, or half the original amplitude?) Wouldn't have that been more useful/practical? You don't say "I want the power in the signal to drop by half." So why does it seem that we seem to speak power-wise for such situations? For example, the cutoff frequency is defined as the -3dB point for POWER.not amplitude. But as far as many filters go, aren't we often more interested in the amplitude rather than the power? For example, you might say "if the frequency doubles I want the amplitude to drop by half". If you are interested in power, that's great and all. However, a 3dB increase (x2) in amplitude results in a 6dB increase (x4) in power. Just like power, a 3dB increase in amplitude still respresents a doubling of the amplitude. Filter-wise.Does anyone know how to convert a slope of dB/decade to dB/octave?Īnother thing that just occured to me, I always just took for granted than 3dB represented doubling the power and that 6dB was doubling the amplitude.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |