Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] 1dB more RF Power?

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 1dB more RF Power?
From: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 19:41:22 -0700
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
On 4/30/20 6:18 PM, David Gilbert wrote:

I confess to having generated those files, although it was several years ago that I put them on my web site.  They just get referenced here or there about once a year when a similar topic surfaces.

http://www.ab7e.com/weak_signal/mdd.html

One dB was about all I could claim was distiguishable, but a difference two dB was surprisingly so.

73,
Dave  AB7E


this is known as the "just noticeable difference" thing and ties into the Weber-Fechner law which is really more that perceived differences are log scaled (that is, a 3 dB change from 3 to 6 dB is perceived as the same jump as 10-13 dB)

for speech it's around 2-3 dB in SNR
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4335553/ was the first hit in general, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4871229/ is another - apparently the hearing aid business really cares about this)

However, for detecting tones in noise, or constrained speech, the JND is smaller. And, JND isn't necessarily related to intelligibility or detectability.

I used to work with tactical comm radios just as digital coding was coming into play and there were tons of arguments about various schemes of various computational complexity: is CVSD better or worse than mu-law with companding at data rate X? What about LPC-10?

It is *highly* situation dependent. What's ok in a tactical situation where you just want to call in artillery fire to the correct grid square is different than whispering sweet nothings to your sweetie.

This kind of analysis, of course, is why modern cellphone audio quality is so bad. Back in the 80s, if someone had said that random consumers would be happy with 8kbps encoding of speech they would have called them crazy. What we used as the "standard of comparison" was so-called "toll quality" which is about 56 kbps, sampled at 8kHz.

This is sort of interesting and describes the "signal detection" problem, which is related to the "CW detection" problem

https://www.weizmann.ac.il/neurobiology/labs/ulanovsky/sites/neurobiology.labs.ulanovsky/files/uploads/behavneurosci_lecture13_dovsagi_psychophysics_05july2018.pdf

And of course, the real problem in CW detection is not just a random tone in noise, it's a "structured tone sequence" in the presence of other "structured tone sequences".

From a psychophysics standpoint it's an interesting problem

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>