Re: Fo frequency - Movie of Wendover Coi

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Rich Simpson <richcreations@xxxxxxxxx>

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to ask a couple of questions about what I understand to be 
between the original signal, and the recording we now have...

I remember that the original was on a vhs tape? is that what is being analized?

If you are directly sampling the VHS tape, it is all analog, no A/D to get 
in the way. this leaves us with the bandwith of the tape, and microphone, 
preamps, etc...

I do not know how much the frequency response of the mic matters, but 
little electret condensers (built into stuff like camcorders) often go up 
to 40khz

the audio track on the tape should be good for 60db dynamic range, if not 
more, frequency response is anouther matter though, prob not "really" good 
for more then 22-25khz, but after that it will just be at reduced level...

If it is not terry that has the "tape" could it be loaned to him to try to 
sample directly from it. (Just a suggestion)

I may be completly wrong, but if so you all will tell me...

-Rich
On Apr 18, 2005, at 6:26 PM, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: Jim Lux <jimlux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> At 03:43 PM 4/18/2005, you wrote:
> > Original poster: Terry Fritz <teslalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > At 03:38 PM 4/18/2005, you wrote:
> > > Considering we have absolutely no idea how the original recording was 
> > > made or how the A/D conversion was made, all of this IMHO is a stretch, 
> > > at best. I believe any "data" you acquire this way is extremely suspect.
> > >
> > > Paul Brodie
> > > Think Positive
> >
> > Yep!!  I could almost see how a sliver of 35kHz might slip through all 
> > the conversions but not 70kHz.
>
> Fairly easy to get in.  tens of kHz isn't all that far out of the 
> passband, and most systems have nothing like a brickwall filter (for one 
> thing they're expensive, for another, they have ringing and horrible phase 
> distortion).  It was clearly recorded in "pre DSP FIR filter" days, so it 
> would have used analog filtering.
>
> Once it's undersampled, it's down at baseband and will propagate all the 
> way through.  What you wouldn't know is what all the intermediate sample 
> rates are, so relating a given frequency in the baseband back to a 
> pre-aliased frequency would be quite difficult.
>
> One can sometimes infer a sampling rate, if the input signal is the result 
> of nonlinear mixing and has harmonically related spurs.
> Example.. say I have a 30 kHz signal, and it has a strong second harmonic 
> at 60 kHz.  I sample this at 11 kHz.  The 30 aliases down to an apparent 
> frequency of (30-22 =) 8 kHz.  The 60 aliases down to (60-55 =) 5 kHz.  If 
> the signal of interest is moving, then the 5 kHz signal will move twice as 
> fast as the 8 kHz signal (allowing you to identify it as a second harmonic).
> Likewise, if you know that the 8 and 5 are the first and second harmonic, 
> you can solve for what sampling rates would cause that particular aliasing.
>
>
> >>to look for fun and the 35kHz is "there"...  The odds that it is the 
> Wendover coil's Fo frequency sneaking past all the electronics that is 
> not supposed to allow it though is pretty darn low....  Of course, the 
> signal is -60dB down just off the noise floor too...
>
>
> And now you have practical experience at what TEMPEST engineers used to 
> do...(and may still do...for all I know)