Timeline for What is the relation between FFT length and frequency resolution?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S May 31, 2023 at 16:06 | history | suggested | MayeulC | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added math formatting, clarified the computation and relationship with FFT. I checked that this was indeed equal and mathematically sound, but the original had a few confusing differences: "up to half the sample length" instead of N-1, and inconsistent Sample[j] and Sample[k]. I'm assuming typos.
|
| May 31, 2023 at 9:22 | comment | added | MayeulC |
I edited your answer to add math formatting and clarified the computation and relationship with FFT. I checked that both expressions were indeed equal and mathematically sound, but the original had a few confusing differences: "up to half the sample length" instead of N-1 for both sums (thereby discarding half the input samples), and inconsistent Sample[j] and Sample[k]. I'm assuming this was a simple mistake and typo, but could you please clarify/edit back if not?
|
|
| May 31, 2023 at 9:19 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 31, 2023 at 16:06 | |||||
| Sep 23, 2017 at 17:29 | history | edited | supercat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 642 characters in body
|
| May 10, 2011 at 16:11 | history | answered | supercat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |