I have a signal 's' of voice of which you can see an extract here:
I would like to plot the zero crossing points in the same graph. I have tried with the following code:
zci = #(v) find(v(:).*circshift(v(:), [-1 0]) <= 0); % Returns Zero-Crossing Indices Of Argument Vector
zx = zci(s);
figure
set(gcf,'color','w')
plot(t,s)
hold on
plot(t(zx),s(zx),'o')
But it does not interpole the points in which the sign change, so the result is:
However, I'd like that the highlighted points were as near as possible to zero.
I hope someone can help me. Thanks you for your responses in advanced.
Try this?
w = 1;
crossPts=[];
for k=1:(length(s)-1)
if (s(k)*s(k+1)<0)
crossPts(w) = (t(k)+t(k+1))/2;
w = w + 1;
end
end
figure
set(gcf,'color','w')
plot(t,s)
hold on
plot(t, s)
plot(crossPts, zeros(length(crossPts)), 'o')
Important questions: what is the highest frequency conponent of the signal you are measuring? Can you remeasure this signal? What is your sampling rate? What is this analysis for? (Schoolwork or scholarly research). You may have quite a bit of trouble measuring the zeros of this function with any significance or accurracy because it looks like your waveform has a frequency greater than half of your sampling rate (greater than your Nyquist frequency). Upsampling/interpolating your entire waveform will allow you to find the zeros much more precisely (but with no greater degree of accurracy) but this is a huge no-no in the scientific community. While my method may not look super pretty, it's the most accurate method that doesn't make unsafe assumptions. If you just want it to look pretty, I would recommend interp1 and using the 'Spline' method. You can interpolate the whole waveform and then use the above answer to find more accurate zeros.
Also, you could calculate the zeros on the interpolated waveform and then display it on the raw data.
A remotely possible solution to improve your data;
If you're measuring a human voice, why not try filtering at the range of human speech? This should be fine mathematically and could possibly improve your waveform.
Related
I am trying to plot the fft of a set of data I have. These data form a nearly perfect sinc function. Here is the data of which I am trying to plot the fft:
.
I know the fft of a sinc function should look like kind of a step function. However, the results I get are nowhere near that. Finding the fft in itself is super easy, but I think my mistake is when I try to compute the frequency axis. I have found several methods online, but so far I have not been able to make it work. Here is my code:
sampleRate = (max(xdata) - min(xdata))/length(xdata);
sampleN = length(xdata);
y = fft(ydata, sampleN);
Y = y.*conj(y)/sampleN;
freq = (0:1:length(Y)-1)*sampleRate/sampleNumber;
plot(freq, Y)
I have found pretty much all of that online and I understand pretty much none of it (which might be why it's not working...)
Zoom on what I get using that code:
It now seems to be working! This is what I get when I subtract the mean:
What you see here is the zero frequency being much, much larger than everything else. Plot with plot(freq,Y,'o-') to prove that the shape you see is just the linear interpolation between two samples.
The zero frequency is the sum of all samples. Because the mean of your signal is quite a bit larger than the amplitude, the zero frequency dwarfs everything else. And because you are plotting the power (absolute square of the DFT), this difference is enhanced even more.
There are two simple solutions:
Plot using logarithmic y-axis:
plot(freq, Y)
set(gca,'yscale','log')
Subtract the mean from your signal, remove the zero frequency, or scale the y-axis (these are all more or less equivalent):
y = fft(ydata-mean(ydata), sampleN);
or
y(1) = 0;
or
plot(freq, Y)
set(gca,'ylim',[0,max(Y(2:end))]);
I'm just learning Matlab and the fast fourier transform algorithm.
As a first step I tried to duplicate this example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform#Example
I use the following code:
t = -6:0.01:6;
s = cos(2 * pi * 3 * t) .* exp(-pi * t.^2);
figure(1);
plot(t, s);
xlim([-2 2]);
r = fft(s);
figure(2);
plot(t, abs(r));
And I obtained the following picture:
Figure 2:
Figure 1 is OK, but Figure 2 is not. I see one of the problem is that in Figure 2 I should plot vector r against frequency, not against time. Another problem in Figure 2 is the scale in the Y-axis.
Thus, I have 2 questions in order to duplicate the example:
How can I obtain the frequency domain (X-axis in Figure 2)?
How should I scale vector r (Y-axis in Figure 2)?
Your issue is that you aren't actually creating a frequency vector to plot the fft against. The reason that the fft is plotted against time is because that is what you specified in your plot command.
Here is a working fft outline:
N=length(t);
index=0:N-1;
FrequencyResolution=SamplingRate/N;
Frequency=index.*FrequencyResolution;
data_fft=fft(detrend(data));
%the detrend isn't necessary but it does look nicer because it focuses the plot on changes around the mean of the data
data_FFTmagnitude=abs(data_fft);
plot(Frequency, data_FFTmagnitude)
I remember once for the first time that I wanted to use DFT and FFT for one of my study projects I used this webpage, it explains in detail with examples on how to do so. I suggest you go through it and try to replicate for your case, doing so will give you insight and better understanding of the way one can use FFt as you said you are new to Matlab. Do not hesitate to ask again if you need more detailed help.
And also keep in mind that for FFT it is better to have signal length of a power of 2, that way you will get the most exact results, and if you cannot control your signal length you can take the largest power of 2 close to that length, as everyone usually does.
I want to know the best way to fit a sine-wave with a distorted time base, in Matlab.
The distortion in time is given by a n-th order polynomial (n~10), of the form t_distort = P(t).
For example, consider the distortion t_distort = 8 + 12t + 6t^2 + t^3 (which is just the power series expansion of (t-2)^3).
This will distort a sine-wave as follows:
I want to be able to find the distortion given this distorted sine-wave. (i.e. I want to find the function t = G(t_distort), but t_distort = P(t) is unknown.)
If your resolution is high enough, then this is basically an angle-demodulation problem. The standard way to demodulate an angle-modulated signal is to take the derivative, followed by an envelope detector, followed by an integrator.
Since I don't know the exact numbers you're using, I'll show an example with my own numbers. Suppose my original timebase has 10 million points from 0 to 100:
t = 0:0.00001:100;
I then get the distorted timebase and calculate the distorted sine wave:
td = 0.02*(t+2).^3;
yd = sin(td);
Now I can demodulate it. Take the "derivative" using approximate differences divided by the step size from before:
ydot = diff(yd)/0.00001;
The envelope can be easily detected:
envelope = abs(hilbert(ydot));
This gives an approximation for the derivative of P(t). The last step is an integrator, which I can approximate using a cumulative sum (we have to scale it again by the step size):
tdguess = cumsum(envelope)*0.00001;
This gives a curve that's almost identical to the original distorted timebase (so, it gives a good approximation of P(t)):
You won't be able to get the constant term of the polynomial since we made our approximation from its derivative, which of course eliminates the constant term. You wouldn't even be able to find a unique constant term mathematically from just yd, since infinitely many values will yield the same distorted sine wave. You can get the other three coefficients of P(t) using polyfit if you know the degree of P(t) (ignore the last number, it's the constant term):
>> polyfit(t(1:10000000), tdguess, 3)
ans =
0.0200 0.1201 0.2358 0.4915
This is pretty close to the original, aside from the constant term: 0.02*(t+2)^3 = 0.02t^3 + 0.12t^2 + 0.24t + 0.16.
You wanted the inverse mapping Q(t). Can you do that knowing a close approximation for P(t) as found so far?
Here's an analytical driven route that takes asin of the signal with proper unwrapping of the angle. Then you can fit a polynomial using polyfit on the angle or using other fit methods (search for fit and see). Last, take a sin of the fitted function and compare the signal to the fitted one... see this pedagogical example:
% generate data
t=linspace(0,10,1e2);
x=0.02*(t+2).^3;
y=sin(x);
% take asin^2 to obtain points of "discontinuity" where then asin hits +-1
da=(asin(y).^2);
[val locs]=findpeaks(da); % this can be done in many other ways too...
% construct the asin according to the proper phase unwrapping
an=NaN(size(y));
an(1:locs(1)-1)=asin(y(1:locs(1)-1));
for n=2:numel(locs)
an(locs(n-1)+1:locs(n)-1)=(n-1)*pi+(-1)^(n-1)*asin(y(locs(n-1)+1:locs(n)-1));
end
an(locs(n)+1:end)=n*pi+(-1)^(n)*asin(y(locs(n)+1:end));
r=~isnan(an);
p=polyfit(t(r),an(r),3);
figure;
subplot(2,1,1); plot(t,y,'.',t,sin(polyval(p,t)),'r-');
subplot(2,1,2); plot(t,x,'.',t,(polyval(p,t)),'r-');
title(['mean error ' num2str(mean(abs(x-polyval(p,t))))]);
p =
0.0200 0.1200 0.2400 0.1600
The reason I preallocate with NaNand avoid taking the asin at points of discontinuity (locs) is to reduce the error of the fit later. As you can see, for a 100 points between 0,10 the average error is of the order of floating point accuracy, and the polynomial coefficients are as exact as you can have them.
The fact that you are not taking a derivative (as in the very elegant Hilbert transform) allows to be numerically exact. For the same conditions the Hilbert transform solution will have a much bigger average error (order of unity vs 1e-15).
The only limitation of this method is that you need enough points in the regime where the asin flips direction and that function inside the sin is well behaved. If there's a sampling issue you can truncate the data and only maintain a smaller range closer to zero, such that it'll be enough to characterize the function inside the sin. After all, you don't need millions op points to fit to a 3 parameter function.
It's my first time performing an FFT within MatLab by experimenting with some example code from the MathWorks website. I was wondering if it was possible to take the code I have and transform the x axis to a log-scale representation rather than linear. I understand most of the code, but it is the x axis line of code that I'm still not 100% sure exactly what it is doing apart from the +1 at the end of the line, which is that fact that MatLab's indexing structure doesn't start on 0.
My code so far is:
[y,fs] = wavread('Wav/800Hz_2sec.wav');
NFFT = 4096;
Y = fft(y,NFFT)/length(y);
f = fs/2*linspace(0,1,NFFT/2+1);
plot(f,2*abs(Y(1:NFFT/2+1))
frequency usually comes out in linear scale from Discrete Fourier Transform. if you want, you can make a new frequency vector in log scale and interpolate the results you already have
fnew=fs/2.*logspace(log10(fs/length(y)),0,npts);
Ynew= interp1(f,Y(1:NFFT/2+1),fnew);
where npts is the length of your new frequency vector. for just plotting
loglog(f,2*abs(Y(1:NFFT/2+1));
honestly IMO, the interpolation thing doesn't work very well because FFT of real signals produces strong peaks and troughs in spectra, so unless you smooth your spectrum first, the interpolated spectrum won't look as nice
I am wondering if I am using Fourier Transformation in MATLAB the right way. I want to have all the average amplitudes for frequencies in a song. For testing purposes I am using a free mp3 download of Beethovens "For Elise" which I converted to a 8 kHz mono wave file using Audacity.
My MATLAB code is as follows:
clear all % be careful
% load file
% Für Elise Recording by Valentina Lisitsa
% from http://www.forelise.com/recordings/valentina_lisitsa
% Converted to 8 kHz mono using Audacity
allSamples = wavread('fur_elise_valentina_lisitsa_8khz_mono.wav');
% apply windowing function
w = hanning(length(allSamples));
allSamples = allSamples.*w;
% FFT needs input of length 2^x
NFFT = 2^nextpow2(length(allSamples))
% Apply FFT
fftBuckets=fft(allSamples, NFFT);
fftBuckets=fftBuckets(1:(NFFT/2+1)); % because of symetric/mirrored values
% calculate single side amplitude spectrum,
% normalize by dividing by NFFT to get the
% popular way of displaying amplitudes
% in a range of 0 to 1
fftBuckets = (2*abs(fftBuckets))/NFFT;
% plot it: max possible frequency is 4000, because sampling rate of input
% is 8000 Hz
x = linspace(1,4000,length(fftBuckets));
bar(x,fftBuckets);
The output then looks like this:
Can somebody please tell me if my code is correct? I am especially wondering about the peaks around 0.
For normalizing, do I have to divide by NFFT or length(allSamples)?
For me this doesn't really look like a bar chart, but I guess this is due to the many values I am plotting?
Thanks for any hints!
Depends on your definition of "correct". This is doing what you intended, I think, but it's probably not very useful. I would suggest using a 2D spectrogram instead, as you'll get time-localized information on frequency content.
There is no one correct way of normalising FFT output; there are various different conventions (see e.g. the discussion here). The comment in your code says that you want a range of 0 to 1; if your input values are in the range -1 to 1, then dividing by number of bins will achieve that.
Well, exactly!
I would also recommend plotting the y-axis on a logarithmic scale (in decibels), as that's roughly how the human ear interprets loudness.
Two things that jump out at me:
I'm not sure why you are including the DC (index = 1) component in your plot. Not a big deal, but of course that bin contains no frequency data
I think that dividing by length(allSamples) is more likely to be correct than dividing by NFFT. The reason is that if you want the DC component to be equal to the mean of the input data, dividing by length(allSamples) is the right thing to do.
However, like Oli said, you can't really say what the "correct" normalization is until you know exactly what you are trying to calculate. I tend to use FFTs to estimate power spectra, so I want units like "DAC / rt-Hz", which would lead to a different normalization than if you wanted something like "DAC / Hz".
Ultimately there's no substitute for thinking about exacty what you want to get out of the FFT (including units), and working out for yourself what the correct normalization should be (starting from the definition of the FFT if necessary).
You should also be aware that MATLAB's fft has no requirement to use an array length that is a power of 2 (though doing so will presumably lead to the FFT running faster). Because zero-padding will introduce some ringing, you need to think about whether it is the right thing to do for your application.
Finally, if a periodogram / power spectrum is really what you want, MATLAB provides functions like periodogram, pwelch and others that may be helpful.