In Reply to: Well, no... posted by real_jj on June 13, 2006 at 12:35:37:
Tis easy enough to come up with a test regimen to examine what I look for..perhaps that is needed?
jj: ""
Now, signal dependent delay is also easily looked at as IM distortion, if you think about it, it's phase modulation, which creates distortion, eh? ""Perhaps it's IM. I am wondering if it can actually be called that, as the modulation products of amplitude based time shift is a rather unique entity, being related to the change in current slew rate of both signals..not an easy analytical nut to crack..
Measurement of this at low impedance levels at outputs is not going to be easy, the field storage for normal low z loads is a bitch to overcome, non inductive resistors are crap in that regard.
Cheers, John
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Well, no... - jneutron 13:51:11 06/13/06 (10)
- phase distortion - real_jj 20:10:02 06/13/06 (9)
- Re: phase distortion - jneutron 06:25:15 06/14/06 (8)
- Well, actually, a fourier transform HAS to be able to detect them all... - real_jj 19:11:39 06/14/06 (7)
- Re: Well, actually, a fourier transform HAS to be able to detect them all... - jneutron 13:08:47 06/15/06 (6)
- Ahh, I see what you mean... there's a math error. - real_jj 13:41:14 06/15/06 (5)
- Re: Ahh, I see what you mean... there's a math error. - jneutron 14:02:41 06/15/06 (4)
- Yes, but you're missing the point.... - real_jj 14:30:30 06/15/06 (3)
- Actually, it's far more interesting than that - jneutron 06:23:52 06/16/06 (2)
- Well, I can only suggest that you look at each waveform in a simulation... - real_jj 14:22:56 06/16/06 (1)
- been there, done that. - jneutron 05:49:18 06/19/06 (0)