0
$\begingroup$

Are there any command line programs for Windows, preferably free and stand-alone, which can report the peak/strongest frequency within a given range of frequencies? I need something like this to automate finding the frequency of a calibration signal which slowly drifts.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hi! Sorry, you're asking for a program that fulfills your specifications – these questions are best-case borderline off-topic. You could, however, write a program yourself that does that. Can you tell us more about your signal, and the tools you're using? (also, the title stands somewhat in conflict with your question's body, so this really calls for more background on what signal you're dealing with, and how much precision with how much observation you need) $\endgroup$ – Marcus Müller Jun 22 at 18:18
  • $\begingroup$ I need the strongest frequency from within a range with white noise and 1 strong calibration sine signal. The added calibration signal shifts as the receiver has no TCXO, so this allows me to determine its characteristics and calibrate the other signals. From this I can determine the calibration signals' amplitude and relate to its known power. I want to automate this as there are 576 audio files to process. 'FFT 1.0' by Lionel Loudet sidstation.loudet.org/fft-en.xhtml does FFT from the command line. I coded a script to extract the info but it takes a lot of processing time. $\endgroup$ – Petoetje59 Jun 23 at 14:18
  • $\begingroup$ why is the script slow? I'm not sure a standalone program would be faster, since in scripting languages, you'll typically just call a FFT function from a library (that is very fast), so I'd assume the overhead is negligible. $\endgroup$ – Marcus Müller Jun 25 at 6:57
  • $\begingroup$ In this script the fft.exe is the culprit - it gobbles up most of the processing time. In all it takes 732 secs to process just a 5 minute file, so visually determining the calibration frequency by just watching it in SpecLab is way faster, but still very time consuming to do. $\endgroup$ – Petoetje59 Jun 26 at 12:02
  • $\begingroup$ yes, but having a different program do the same will not be faster. You need to have a better way of estimating the frequency than to use the FFT, not a different program to encapsulate the FFT. $\endgroup$ – Marcus Müller Jun 26 at 12:13

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.