Talk:Cutoff frequency

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Telecommunications (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Professional sound production (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Professional sound production, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sound recording and reproduction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

merge[edit]

Hi, sorry for any confusion - I originally proposed a deletion of the cutoff wavelength article because there isn't any point in having an article about cutoff frequency and cutoff wavelength. Then I read this article, and it is somewhat incomplete - it doesn't include anything specifically about waveguides such as the optical waveguides mentioned in the other article. I'll start adding to this article soon, and hopefully incorporate the info in the cutoff wavelength stub. Thanks --Bmk 05:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The lowest TM cutoff frequency for for a rectangular waveguide should be n=1,m=1 not (0,1). If either n or m is 0 then the electric field will equal 0, since Ez (x,y) = E0 sin (n*Pi*x/a) sin (m*Pi*y/b).

--Pozarnik (talk) 07:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Article is not written in everyday terms[edit]

I don't understand this article at all. It doesn’t seem very clearly explained in everyday terms, and relies on knowledge of other terms and concpets which I don’t think most people would understand.

I would suggest that a more dumbed-down explanation is used in the introduction, before getting more technical later on. I’d write a clearer explanation myself, but unfortunately I don’t have a clue what “cutoff” means. (Well, actually, I thought I did know what cutoff meant before I read this article, but this article doesn’t seem to support my definition of cutoff. Or maybe it does and I just can’t understand it?)

Grand Dizzy (talk) 18:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree the lead was a mess; see if my attempt to clarify helps. Bring more suggestions if this doesn't do it. Dicklyon (talk) 20:11, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Music?[edit]

This seems to be mentioning alot about electronics, but nothing about the use if cutoff, bandpass, highpass, or lowpass, as in synthesizers for music. I think this article needs to list more things that use said filters, instead of just the very broad "electronics". G man yo (talk) 09:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Good suggestion. Why not write a text that refers to articles such as high frequency limit, subtractive synthesis, voltage-controlled filter VCF (which i.m.o. should be extended to also cover Digitally Controlled Filters DCF), Parametric equalization, Wah-wah (music), Audio crossovers for loudspeakers, etc. Or put it in the low-pass filter and band-pass filter articles. Mange01 (talk) 00:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I could try, but I dont know what half of that stuff means, I just thought it might be a good idea :P. I could research in some of my spare time, though.G man yo (talk) 09:47, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't you mean "j is the imaginary unit"?[edit]

In Single-pole transfer function example, where article reads: "...and i is the imaginary unit", don't you mean "...and j is the imaginary unit", since the equations are using j not i? 71.139.173.203 (talk) 06:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Crossover frequency[edit]

crossover frequency redirects here, this is very wrong and confusing82.168.65.130 (talk) 17:41, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, this article is not a very good target for crossover frequency. I have retargeted it to audio crossover. SpinningSpark 19:10, 30 October 2013 (UTC)