Talk:Amplitude-shift keying

message: Can anyone fill in more details here?  I'm thinking particularly in terms of applications.
An earlier version of the article said ASK was not widely used, but I wonder if that's really true.  ASK appears to be a simpler form of QAM, and I believe QAM is used in lots of applications (broadcast television, for instance).  However, I'm not too sure.  Anyone?
Simon 15:01, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: the ASK modulation is the base for most of the other more "refined" (and useful) modulations, but it is rarely used by itself since it would be a waste of channel amplitude. It is necessary to know it, to better understand the other modulations, but it is almost useless by itself. Alessio Damato 14:34, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Applications

message: I have removed the "Considerations" section for the following reasons:
"ASK is the simplest kind of modulation that can be used to send data through a channel."
:This is a subjective judgment; why is it necessarily harder to modulate amplitude than, say, phase or frequency?
"it can be used only when the signal-to-noise ratio is very high, because most of the signal is transmitted at reduced power, so it would be hard to recover."
:This is wrong, and doesn't make any sense.
"it needs A/D converters working at a frequency that could be higher than necessary: for example, if the bandwidth between 100 and 101 MHz is used for the transmission, the spectrum of the signal will be only 1 MHz wide, but the A/D converter will need to work at 101*2 = 202 MHz. In QAM modulation, an A/D converter working at 2 MHz would be enough."
:This is completely wrong, as in any practical application, down-mixing to baseband would be used.  This is not mentioned anywhere in the article.
"Nevertheless, ASK modulation is very important because most of the other more complicated (and efficient) modulations can be expressed and studied in terms of ASK, such as QAM and PSK."
:PSK cannot be analysed in terms of ASK, and beyond 4-QAM, there is little to be gained from viewing QAM as ASK.
Oli Filth 00:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Considerations" section 

message: The article does not cite any references, I think its quite important to have some references since the section of probability may need further reading.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlos.javierloy (talk • contribs) 07:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  references 

message: Does anyone have a decent waveform diagram we can include like this one for example?
Towel401 (talk) 12:36, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Waveform diagram

message: The lead section is too specific: it assumes binary ASK and then also assumes OOK without mentioning that it is just discussing the simplest case. Sohaibafzal (talk) 12:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Copied lead section from PSK article as it was better written. Sohaibafzal (talk) 04:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead Section 

message: Hi, anyone know why the article was missing the math tags, and others ? The images are totally un-linked (still in the text eg."Ask dia calc prob.png" )
etc. Seems weird. Hoemaco (talk) 12:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  article messed up 

message: What does it mean? Addition, logical OR, ...?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.49.156.15 (talk) 07:09, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circle-with-Plus-inside-Sign