Tom Van Baak wrote: >> Interesting as the techniques employed may be, the resultant performance >> is still inadequate for characterising state of the art oscillators. >> The instrument phase noise floor is higher than that specified for >> current low noise (but not necessarily low drift) crystal oscillators. >> > > Well, true, but perhaps one definition of "state of the art" > is simply when the high-end test tools that you can buy > off the shelf are inadequate compared to the newest > technology you are building in the lab... > > /tvb > > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > > My point really was that "inferior" analog techniques such as 2 reference source 2 mixer cross correlation analysers have a phase noise floor 15-20dB lower than the supposed superior direct digital mixing techniques. Such cross correlation instruments are commercially available from Wenzel associates and others. The latest Agilent phase noise analysers use analog mixers, dual digital phase locked loops and digital cross correlation.
Bruce _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list [email protected] https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
