Multiplier square or sinewave input

T

Terry Osbourne

Jan 1, 1970
0
I would like to use an Analog Devices MLT04 to multiply a complex
subaudio signal by 1KHz.

The result will be viewed on a spectrum analyzer.

What I am hoping to see is relative amplitudes of the major frequency
components within the subaudio, transposed by a factor of 1,000.

Can anyone tell me if it matters whether or not I use a 1KHz square or
sinewave for this purpose, and, if so, why?

Many thanks,

Terry Osbourne
 
P

Phil Allison

Jan 1, 1970
0
"Terry Osbourne"
I would like to use an Analog Devices MLT04 to multiply a complex
subaudio signal by 1KHz.

The result will be viewed on a spectrum analyzer.


** Wot - a real one, or just some audio analysis software on your PC ?

What I am hoping to see is relative amplitudes of the major frequency
components within the subaudio, transposed by a factor of 1,000.


** Multiplying two frequencies produces an output at two new frequencies at
the sum and difference of the two originals.

Eg:

1000 Hz multiplied by 10Hz results in a signal with components at 990Hz &
1010 Hz.

1000 Hz multiplied by 1 Hz results in a signal with components at 999Hz
and 1001 Hz.

So your analyser will need better than 1 Hz resolution around 1000 Hz to
sort it out.


Or did you imagine a linear multiplier IC was a " frequency multiplier "
????

I think you did.


Can anyone tell me if it matters whether or not I use a 1KHz square or
sinewave for this purpose, and, if so, why?


** Spectral analysis would be simplified if the fixed frequency is a sine
wave - otherwise there will be similar products around 3 kHz, 5 kHz , 7kHz,
11 khz etc to get rid off.

A square wave can be converted to a good sine by a steep low pass filter set
at or to cut off just above the fundamental frequency - with say 18 db
octave slope or better.






......... Phil
 
B

Ban

Jan 1, 1970
0
Terry said:
I would like to use an Analog Devices MLT04 to multiply a complex
subaudio signal by 1KHz.

The result will be viewed on a spectrum analyzer.

What I am hoping to see is relative amplitudes of the major frequency
components within the subaudio, transposed by a factor of 1,000.

Can anyone tell me if it matters whether or not I use a 1KHz square or
sinewave for this purpose, and, if so, why?

Many thanks,

Terry Osbourne

What we want won't work wery well. :-(
If you want to record very low frequency signals with the soundcard, you can
use a similar technique. No multiplier needed, just an opamp and a 1kHz
square wave generator. Chopp your signal with that squarewave with a phase
inverter and record also the squarewave with the other channel. You can then
retrieve your original signal and with some audio software(Audacy) you can
pitch-shift to any ratio and even listen to it.
 
T

Tom Bruhns

Jan 1, 1970
0
I would like to use an Analog Devices MLT04 to multiply a complex
subaudio signal by 1KHz.

The result will be viewed on a spectrum analyzer.

What I am hoping to see is relative amplitudes of the major frequency
components within the subaudio, transposed by a factor of 1,000.

Can anyone tell me if it matters whether or not I use a 1KHz square or
sinewave for this purpose, and, if so, why?

Many thanks,

Terry Osbourne

What's normally done in a dynamic signal analyzer (aka FFT spectrum
analyzer) is to digitize the signal, and then multiply digitally by
sine and cosine to shift the frequency. Do a search for "image
rejection mixer." Of course, since you want to look at LOW
frequencies, you wouldn't need to do that. If you can simply digitize
the signal in its frequency range, you can use an FFT to look at the
spectral components. You may wish to use windowing to keep artifacts
from the abrupt edges of the sampled block from spreading throughout
the FFT'd spectrum.

If you want to use a multiplier to move the spectrum up to a range
where you can look at it with a spectrum analyzer that won't go to low
enough frequency, you can do that, but be aware that just multiplying
gives you both sum and difference frequencies. If you use a square
wave, if it's a perfect square wave, you'll have images of the spectrum
at the (say 1kHz) fundamental, and at all odd harmonics (3kHz, 5kHz,
7kHz, ...) If your signal of interest is narrow-band enough, that
won't matter. You can insure it is narrow band enough if you
low-pass-filter it before feeding it to the multiplier. You need to do
that anyway, so that other frequency components don't alias into places
you don't want them. If you use a square wave, you might as well use a
frequency mixer instead of a multiplier. They tend to be cheaper. If
you decide to filter a square wave to make it sinusoidal, use a low
pass filter that has steeper cutoff than Phil's suggested 18dB/octave;
that won't attenuate the 3rd harmonic much at all. It can be easier to
just use a bandpass filter for a single fixed frequency. You can also
just filter the OUTPUT of the mixer/multiplier. But again, if the
signals of interest occupy a narrow bandwidth, it shouldn't matter.
You can just let the spectrum analyzer get rid of the unwanted bands,
since they are far away from the interesting stuff.

Cheers,
Tom
 
J

J.A. Legris

Jan 1, 1970
0
Terry said:
I would like to use an Analog Devices MLT04 to multiply a complex
subaudio signal by 1KHz.

The result will be viewed on a spectrum analyzer.

What I am hoping to see is relative amplitudes of the major frequency
components within the subaudio, transposed by a factor of 1,000.

Can anyone tell me if it matters whether or not I use a 1KHz square or
sinewave for this purpose, and, if so, why?

Many thanks,

Terry Osbourne

The resulting transposed frequencies will be very hard to see because
they are so close together. A better solution is to digitize your
low-frequency source and play it back at a faster rate thereby
spreading it out across a larger bandwidth.

For example, if your frequency band of interest is 0 - 1 Hz, sample at
16 samples/s and play back at 16 k samples/s, giving 0 - 1000 Hz.
 
R

Rene Tschaggelar

Jan 1, 1970
0
Terry said:
I would like to use an Analog Devices MLT04 to multiply a complex
subaudio signal by 1KHz.

The result will be viewed on a spectrum analyzer.

What I am hoping to see is relative amplitudes of the major frequency
components within the subaudio, transposed by a factor of 1,000.

Can anyone tell me if it matters whether or not I use a 1KHz square or
sinewave for this purpose, and, if so, why?

A multiplier doesn't do this as already mentioned.
You'd want a single sideband modulator. This
basically is a set of two multipliers operating
in quadrature and with two splitter/combiners.
If adjusted properly, the carrier and the other
sideband are suppressed by say 30..40dB.

Rene
 
J

John Larkin

Jan 1, 1970
0
I would like to use an Analog Devices MLT04 to multiply a complex
subaudio signal by 1KHz.

The result will be viewed on a spectrum analyzer.

What I am hoping to see is relative amplitudes of the major frequency
components within the subaudio, transposed by a factor of 1,000.

Can anyone tell me if it matters whether or not I use a 1KHz square or
sinewave for this purpose, and, if so, why?

Many thanks,

Terry Osbourne

As mentioned, multiplication will shift the spectrum up by 1 KHZ, but
not spread it out. 10 Hz input will make a line at 1010 Hz. You'll
also get a reversed, mirror image spectrum that goes down from 1 KHz
(another line at 990.) A square wave will work just as well, if you
don't care about the additional stuff it will create around 3,5,7...
KHz. Multiplication of an analog signal by a square wave (ie, by +-1)
is simple and can be made very accurate.

This is useful if you have a spectrum analyzer with good resolution
but that doesn't sweep all the way down to zero frequency.

John
 
T

Tom Bruhns

Jan 1, 1970
0
they are so close together. A better solution is to digitize your
low-frequency source and play it back at a faster rate thereby
spreading it out across a larger bandwidth.

For example, if your frequency band of interest is 0 - 1 Hz, sample at
16 samples/s and play back at 16 k samples/s, giving 0 - 1000 Hz.

But...if you've gone to the trouble to digitize it, why "play it back"?
Why not just apply apodization and perform an FFT on it, and be done
with it?

Cheers,
Tom
 
Top