On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 13:59:15 +0200
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
> Am 25.08.19 um 10:52 schrieb Hal Murray:
> > att...@kinali.ch said:
> >> As you have always two channels, I would recommend to use two mixers fed
> >> with
> >> an LO that is 90°C out of phase to get I and Q components.
> > How does that compare with running a single channel twice as fast?
> At low enough frequencies, the two ways are identical in performance
> and linked by the Hilbert transform.
Yes, exactly. This is the ideal case where it doesn't matter whether
one takes n-times more samples per second by sampling faster or by
using n-times as many ADCs. The I/Q sampling is only meant as a way
to possibly decorelate noise that is not inherent in the signal.
> At high enough frequencies, ADC performance starts to suffer. One gets
> a smaller "effective number of bits" ENOB as sample rate and/or input
> frequency rise.
This starts quite low already, unfortunately. There are several sweet spots
where SNR vs sampling speed is optimal. These happen usually when a certain
ADC technology comes to its limits. Fortunately, these limits, and the
associated sweet spots are moving upwards as time and technology progresses.
A few years back, when we designed the sine-exitacion based TIC[1],
the sweet spot for pipeline ADCs was somewhere around 100-120MHz.
Attila Kinali
[1] https://ohwr.org/projects/r19-tdc-del-a/wiki
--
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no
use without that foundation.
-- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neal Stephenson
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.
