I would define "best" as the the limit of this calculation as the sample rate approaches infinity: rise/run between each adjacent data point of instantaneous phase I could simply bump my sample rate up very high, but there would be advantages to having a function instead of having to numerically calculate the rise/run between each adjacent data point. Having a formula would make implementing this calculation in certain environments other than Scilab or Matlab possible/practical, such as in VST or Reaktor. Thanks again for setting me straight earlier Dale. Were it not for that, I may have gone on thinking that the rate of change of phase was constant, and not calculated its rise/run. When I saw that plot of approximate instantaneous frequency I really jumped with joy, it was exactly the type of thing I was hoping to find.>You have a calculation for F: >http://www.studioprofessor.com/images/instantaneousfrequencyestimatio... >so just do it as accurately as you like by reducing the size of the >interval used and it's done. > >If that isn't 'best' then you need to explain what the criteria for >'best' would be. > >Dale B. Dalrymple > >

# Calculating instantaneous phase of a simple signal

Started by ●February 29, 2008

Reply by ●March 5, 20082008-03-05