From: Rick Lyons on 28 Mar 2010 06:39 On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:46:26 -0700 (PDT), "Ron N." <rhnlogic(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Feb 27, 1:10�pm, karthikbalaguru <karthikbalagur...(a)gmail.com> >wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am looking for an open source implementation >> for decoding DTMF signals using Goertzl Algorithm >> in C language. I searched the internet, but did not >> get an open source implementation in C language. > >Note that there is a difference between just using >a Goertzel filter, and decoding DTMF. For decoding, >there needs to be a decision criteria, so you might >want to do a running estimate the average signal >power and the noise floor and use those as part of >your decision criteria. > >Also, a Goertzel filter is similar to a 1-bin DFT. And >thus if the frequency of interest, or any other strong >frequencies present, are non-periodic in the length >of the filter, then you may get "leakage artifacts". >You might be able to minimize these "artifacts" by >pre-windowing the data. > >Somewhere on my website is an explanation of >this 1-bin DFT/Goertzel "leakage": > http://www.nicholson.com/rhn/dsp.html > >IMHO. YMMV. Hi Ron It's the "Frequency Response of Zero-padded FFT/DFT" section of your web page. By the way, I thnk your "Common FFT Usage Misconceptions" material is interesting. See Ya', [-Rick-]
From: Vladimir Vassilevsky on 28 Mar 2010 08:14 Rick Lyons wrote: > On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:46:26 -0700 (PDT), "Ron N." > <rhnlogic(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>Somewhere on my website is an explanation of >>this 1-bin DFT/Goertzel "leakage": >> http://www.nicholson.com/rhn/dsp.html >> > It's the "Frequency Response of Zero-padded FFT/DFT" > section of your web page. By the way, I thnk your > "Common FFT Usage Misconceptions" material is interesting. The most common FFT misconception is the one with is scaling of the FFT results. It had been 1000 times when I had to explain them that they can't compare 512pt FFT to 4096pt FFT directly; people just don't seem to understand that. It is also very common to see a spectral plot without any reference to the bin width. Vladimir Vassilevsky DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant http://www.abvolt.com
From: Mark on 29 Mar 2010 22:41 Thad Smith wrote: >>> ... >>> It worked after adding the following line: >>> #define PI 3.14159265358979 >>> >>> PI is not defined by the either of the standard headers. >>> >> >> Did you try M_PI? > > That's not defined by a Standard C header, either. Either one of > those might be defined in a non-conforming compiler, but not Standard > C. So the C standard leaves PI defintion, as well as other constants (for example, log2e, log10e) to implementation? -- Mark
From: John Devereux on 30 Mar 2010 02:54 Thad Smith <ThadSmith(a)acm.org> writes: > 2G wrote: >> On Feb 27, 12:10 pm, karthikbalaguru <karthikbalagur...(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am looking for an open source implementation >>> for decoding DTMF signals using Goertzl Algorithm >>> in C language. I searched the internet, but did not >>> get an open source implementation in C language. >>> I searched the internet and landed in the below link, >>> but the 'Listing 1' as mentioned in the contents of >>> the below link does not seem to work -http://www.embedded.com/story/OEG20020819S0057 >>> Any other links/open source implementation ? > ... >> It worked for me. Here is Listing 1: >> >> Listing 1 A Goertzel implementation >> >> #include <stdio.h> >> #include <math.h> >> > ... > It worked after adding the following line: > #define PI 3.14159265358979 > > PI is not defined by the either of the standard headers. Best use #include <math.h> double pi = acos(-1); This will continue to work even if the value of pi changes in the future. -- John Devereux
From: Ron N. on 30 Mar 2010 18:29 On Mar 28, 5:14 am, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nos...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > Rick Lyons wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:46:26 -0700 (PDT), "Ron N." > > <rhnlo...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>Somewhere on my website is an explanation of > >>this 1-bin DFT/Goertzel "leakage": > >>http://www.nicholson.com/rhn/dsp.html > > > It's the "Frequency Response of Zero-padded FFT/DFT" > > section of your web page. By the way, I thnk your > > "Common FFT Usage Misconceptions" material is interesting. > > The most common FFT misconception is the one with is scaling of the FFT > results. It had been 1000 times when I had to explain them that they > can't compare 512pt FFT to 4096pt FFT directly; people just don't seem > to understand that. I would believe there could be confusion about that. What do you find to be the most common area of misconception? The frequency represented by a particular bin number? The bin "width"? Something about the time/resolution trade-off when changing the number of points? I'll add that to my list. -- rhn A.T nicholson d.0.t C-o-M
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: LHC and probability of global death. Next: Accurate Harmonic Analysis |