Re: Strategies to save/display low sample-rate data

[John Ackermann N8UR]

On 4/10/24 11:29, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> Both the decimation and 80 size 1024 FFTs per second should be peanuts
> for any modern PC...
>
> And of course you don't need to do the FFT again for every sample,
> it just generates a lot of redundant data.

I understood that if you have a 1024 bin waterfall, it takes that many 
samples to fill it and output a vector.  With a sample rate of 80, that 
means about 12.8 seconds to show one line of the waterfall.  Or do I 
have that wrong?

(I used 80 samples/sec for simplicity.  The actual rate after decimating 
from a 1.536 ms/s stream is 93.75.)