COPPER

A PS Audio Publication

Issue 30 • Free Online Magazine

Issue 30

The Final Frontier

Consider for a moment the Fourier Transform, which I discussed back in Copper # 18. Hands up if you think they’re tough to understand! I want to open your eyes to the world of magic that lies behind it, where the Fourier Transform itself is but one single – but very productive – play in the grand game of transform mathematics. This column is going to kick off with Imaginary Numbers, and get steadily more head-splitting from there. If you’re up for the ride, good for you! If not, this would be a good place to get off. Imaginary numbers is the term given to the mathematical representation of conceptual quantities which are square roots of negative numbers. In the real world we only see real numbers. Count the number of spoons in your cutlery drawer, and the answer will always be a real number. There are no real numbers which, when squared, result in a negative number. However, both mathematicians and engineers have long realized that square roots of negative numbers – the so-called ‘Imaginary’ numbers – actually have a fundamentally important relationship with the real world. We can think of all numbers as comprising a juxtaposition of two parts, a Real part and an Imaginary part. We refer to such numbers as Complex numbers. For all quantities that we encounter in our everyday lives – like the number of spoons in the cutlery drawer – the Imaginary parts of those numbers are all zero. We therefore describe them as purely Real numbers. But mathematically speaking, pretty much everything that we can do with Real numbers can also be done with Complex numbers. So now we dive back into the Fourier Transform. An audio signal, mathematically speaking, is a Real function of time. By this, we mean that the signal itself describes the evolution of a certain property with time. It can be air pressure, it can be an electrical voltage, but whatever it is the key thing here is that it varies with time. And both the thing we are describing (the voltage, or whatever), and time itself, are Real quantities in the sense that neither have an Imaginary component. Now, we all understand that a Fourier Transform takes this data and converts it into a different representation, one which is a function of frequency. That is to say, the transformed signal now describes the relationship of a different property with frequency. Let’s take a closer look at that property. Like time, frequency itself is purely Real. Just as there is no such thing as Imaginary time (although I have worked for bosses who were not always clear on that concept), there is no such thing as Imaginary frequency. However, in our Fourier Transform, the property of frequency that the transform has spat out is actually a Complex number. That is to say it has both Real and Imaginary parts. This is our first opportunity to deal with Complex numbers … so how are we to interpret them? In this case, the answer turns out to be quite simple. Complex numbers can be rearranged so that instead of having Real and Imaginary parts, they have a Magnitude and a Phase Angle. If we do this, the Magnitude of the property can be seen to represent the amount of that frequency present in the original signal, and its Phase Angle represents the phase of that frequency component. Usually when we deal with Fourier Transforms we ignore the phase and just display the magnitude – which is a Real number – so the Complex number aspect ends up hidden from view. I wrote above that, like time, frequency is purely Real. But the transform itself is not constrained to working with purely real bases. After all, it did spit out a bunch of Complex numbers. In the equations governing the Fourier Transform we can easily replace the Real numbers which correspond to frequency with Complex numbers. This modified transform is normally referred to as a ‘z-Transform’, and it turns out to be even more fundamental than the Fourier Transform. Indeed, the Fourier Transform is but a subset of the z-Transform. Where the Fourier Transform’s output is in frequency space, the z-Transform’s output is in an expanded version of frequency space called z-space. It turns out that z-space is a magical kingdom in which wonderful things happen. We can design almost any signal processing operation imaginable in z-space. In particular we can design filters that have all but limitless properties. But there’s a catch. Having designed a filter in z-space, it doesn’t tell us how to implement it in the real world. Only a certain highly specialized set of properties appear in both z-space and in the real world, and so we can only design real-world filters which are based on those specialized properties. Even so, z-space really is a magic kingdom inhabited by wizards who design signal processing algorithms. At this point, you can think of Fourier Transform space (or Fourier Space) as a place where advanced amateurs like me – and maybe you too – can feel comfortable. z-Space then can be thought of as a place where only serious professionals will really feel at home. So, extending that metaphor, where might the real bad-@ss, serious-sh^t, PhD-and-bar experts hang out? Our Final Frontier, if you like … ? Let’s go back to that notion of time, like frequency, being purely real. A couple of paragraphs up I replaced the Real frequency number with a Complex number and ended up in z-space. Can I do the same thing with the Real ‘time’ number, and replace it with a Complex number? What happens then? Well … something quite unexpected happens. If you have got this far you have probably heard of Einstein’s concept of Space-Time, where space and time are melded into one entity, and all the weird stuff we observe in the universe, but couldn’t account for, seems to drop straight out into our laps. Well that’s what happens here. It turns out that both time and frequency are in fact one single entity called Time-Frequency. They’re not independent at all. In fact, we can view the Time-Frequency domain as a Complex number space, where the Real part is Time-like, and the Imaginary part is Frequency-like. An ‘Argand’ Diagram is commonly used to represent Complex numbers. It’s an x-y plot with the Real part on the x-axis and Imaginary part on the y-axis. On the Argand Diagram, the time-based view of our music signal – the one we started out with – lives at the 3 o’clock position, along the x-axis. The frequency-based view – the Fourier Transform – lives along the y-axis at the 12 o’clock position. From this perspective, the Fourier Transform can be seen as a rotation by 90 degrees counter-clockwise. A further rotation of 90 degrees takes us to the 9 o’clock position which turns out to represent a time-reversed version of the original music signal, and a further 90 degree rotation to the 6 o’clock position actually corresponds to the inverse Fourier Transform. This place we have arrived at has several names, and is actually at the very forefront of pure research into signal processing. It is mind-blowingly difficult to master, and I would say that those who are able to do so probably already enjoy an international reputation in their fields, and sport long beards. I for one am so not among them. In the signal-processing field the most commonly used terminology is Fractional Fourier Transform (FrFT, or FRFT). This is because, understanding the picture in the terms I just described, it becomes possible to design transformations which transform the signal into some intermediate position in the Time-Frequency domain, where the datum is neither one thing nor the other. In other words, a rotation of some arbitrary angle somewhere between zero and 90 degrees, hence the term ‘Fractional’ Fourier Transform. This really is the cutting edge. Researchers are only just beginning to uncover what can be done using these theorems and representations. For example, I have read (but am sadly unable to fully comprehend) a paper claiming to show how FRFT can be used to design mathematically perfect sample rate conversion algorithms, something that practically escapes the current state-of-the-art. Furthermore, FRFT shows that the Shannon-Nyquist sampling theory is but a specific case of a more general theory by which sampling is not just constrained to be band-limited in the frequency domain, but in a more complex sense in the entire Time-Frequency domain. There are, I imagine, things one can do with such knowledge! So … hands up if you thought Fourier Transforms were tough!

More from Issue 30

View All Articles in Issue 30

Search Copper Magazine

#234 A Life in High-End Audio: The Roy Hall Interview, Part One by Frank Doris Sep 07, 2026 #234 Jason Greenlaw Offers His Personal Perspective on Jazz Guitar in Vantage Point by Frank Doris Sep 07, 2026 #234 Transcendent Phoenix: Lucina Yue Brings the Ancient Konghou Into Modern Times by Frank Doris Sep 07, 2026 #234 We Must All Follow Our Bliss by B. Jan Montana Sep 07, 2026 #234 How to Play in a Rock Band, 27: Leveling Up by Frank Doris Sep 07, 2026 #234 Ross Valory: Traveling Into New Musical Territory With All of the Above by Ray Chelstowski Sep 07, 2026 #234 Singer/Songwriter John David Schrader: On the Need to Create by Joe Caplan Sep 07, 2026 #234 The People Who Make Audio Happen: More From T.H.E. Show SoCal 2026 by Harris Fogel Sep 07, 2026 #234 The Vinyl Beat Digs Into the Gadget Box by Rudy Radelic Sep 07, 2026 #234 The Rolling Stones: Foreign Tongues Spoken Loud by Wayne Robins Sep 07, 2026 #234 Musical Moments by Rich Isaacs Sep 07, 2026 #234 Rags for Solo Piano and a Dog: David Chesky's Ragtime Music for the Modern Age by Frankly Speaking Sep 07, 2026 #234 HIGH END 2026, Vienna: Here to Stay by Carsten Barnbeck Sep 07, 2026 #234 From The Audiophile’s Guide: The Two Main Types of Loudpeakers – Box and Panel by Paul McGowan Sep 07, 2026 #234 Letting it Slide by Frank Doris Sep 07, 2026 #234 PS Audio in the News by PS Audio Staff Sep 07, 2026 #234 Long Playing by Peter Xeni Sep 07, 2026 #234 La Mer by B. Jan Montana Sep 07, 2026 #233 A Report From The Total Hi-Fi Experience Show SoCal 2026 by B. Jan Montana Aug 03, 2026 #233 Bluegrass Meets Country, Folk, Jazz and More in All That We Carried by The Squid City Slingers by Frank Doris Aug 03, 2026 #233 Corey Glover and One Tribe Nation: A Variegated Musical Collective by Ray Chelstowski Aug 03, 2026 #233 Excursions with Clive: The Late Clive Davis, A Personal History by Wayne Robins Aug 03, 2026 #233 AI, Art, and Music: A Conversation With Synthography Art by Joe Caplan Aug 03, 2026 #233 New American Symphonies: A Rediscovered Gem and a Vital Contemporary Work by Frank Doris Aug 03, 2026 #233 The Vinyl Beat: Genesis, the Dave Clark Five, Antonio Carlos Jobim and More by Rudy Radelic Aug 03, 2026 #233 How to Play in a Rock Band, 26: When It's Time to Record Your Music by Frank Doris Aug 03, 2026 #233 More From T.H.E. Show 2026, and the People Who Made it Happen by Harris Fogel Aug 03, 2026 #233 Underappreciated Artists, Part Three: Icehouse by Rich Isaacs Aug 03, 2026 #233 The Surprisingly Rich and Varied Music of Somalia by Steve Kindig Aug 03, 2026 #233 A Remarkable Discographic Legacy: The LP Recordings of the Basel Symphony Orchestra by Stephan Haberthür Aug 03, 2026 #233 From The Audiophile’s Guide: The Importance of Loudspeakers by Paul McGowan Aug 03, 2026 #233 From Swimming Pool to New Listening Room: A Conversation with Norman Varney of AV RoomService by Gilles Laferrière Aug 03, 2026 #233 PS Audio in the News by PS Audio Staff Aug 03, 2026 #233 Audio Jewelry by Peter Xeni Aug 03, 2026 #233 Enrich Your Life by Frank Doris Aug 03, 2026 #233 The Searcher by James Schrimpf Aug 03, 2026 #232 What came first: Art or Music? A Conversation With Artist Jose Acosta by Joe Caplan Jul 06, 2026 #232 Blow By Blow: The Jeff Beck Story: An Insightful Book About a Guitar Icon by Ray Chelstowski Jul 06, 2026 #232 Creed Over Camaraderie? by B. Jan Montana Jul 06, 2026 #232 Chronicles of a Sound Pilgrim at the 2026 Montreal Audiofest by Hugues Morin Jul 06, 2026 #232 The Vinyl Beat: Summer Grooves by Rudy Radelic Jul 06, 2026 #232 Hibbing Hillbilly Dylan's Acoustic Rock by Wayne Robins Jul 06, 2026 #232 Quad Quads and Plasmatronics Tweeters: An Extraordinary System Comes to Life by Frank Doris Jul 06, 2026 #232 In Praise of Live Music, Once Again by Ted Shafran Jul 06, 2026 #232 Allnic Audio’s L-9000 Preamplifier: Design and Engineering Innovation by Howard Kneller Jul 06, 2026 #232 “Best Of” Lists and Rage Bait: Enough Already by Frank Doris Jul 06, 2026 #232 Quick Takes: Bud Shank, Paulo Almeida, Jakob Dreyer, Tim Eriksen and Peter Irvine by Frank Doris Jul 06, 2026

The Final Frontier

Consider for a moment the Fourier Transform, which I discussed back in Copper # 18. Hands up if you think they’re tough to understand! I want to open your eyes to the world of magic that lies behind it, where the Fourier Transform itself is but one single – but very productive – play in the grand game of transform mathematics. This column is going to kick off with Imaginary Numbers, and get steadily more head-splitting from there. If you’re up for the ride, good for you! If not, this would be a good place to get off. Imaginary numbers is the term given to the mathematical representation of conceptual quantities which are square roots of negative numbers. In the real world we only see real numbers. Count the number of spoons in your cutlery drawer, and the answer will always be a real number. There are no real numbers which, when squared, result in a negative number. However, both mathematicians and engineers have long realized that square roots of negative numbers – the so-called ‘Imaginary’ numbers – actually have a fundamentally important relationship with the real world. We can think of all numbers as comprising a juxtaposition of two parts, a Real part and an Imaginary part. We refer to such numbers as Complex numbers. For all quantities that we encounter in our everyday lives – like the number of spoons in the cutlery drawer – the Imaginary parts of those numbers are all zero. We therefore describe them as purely Real numbers. But mathematically speaking, pretty much everything that we can do with Real numbers can also be done with Complex numbers. So now we dive back into the Fourier Transform. An audio signal, mathematically speaking, is a Real function of time. By this, we mean that the signal itself describes the evolution of a certain property with time. It can be air pressure, it can be an electrical voltage, but whatever it is the key thing here is that it varies with time. And both the thing we are describing (the voltage, or whatever), and time itself, are Real quantities in the sense that neither have an Imaginary component. Now, we all understand that a Fourier Transform takes this data and converts it into a different representation, one which is a function of frequency. That is to say, the transformed signal now describes the relationship of a different property with frequency. Let’s take a closer look at that property. Like time, frequency itself is purely Real. Just as there is no such thing as Imaginary time (although I have worked for bosses who were not always clear on that concept), there is no such thing as Imaginary frequency. However, in our Fourier Transform, the property of frequency that the transform has spat out is actually a Complex number. That is to say it has both Real and Imaginary parts. This is our first opportunity to deal with Complex numbers … so how are we to interpret them? In this case, the answer turns out to be quite simple. Complex numbers can be rearranged so that instead of having Real and Imaginary parts, they have a Magnitude and a Phase Angle. If we do this, the Magnitude of the property can be seen to represent the amount of that frequency present in the original signal, and its Phase Angle represents the phase of that frequency component. Usually when we deal with Fourier Transforms we ignore the phase and just display the magnitude – which is a Real number – so the Complex number aspect ends up hidden from view. I wrote above that, like time, frequency is purely Real. But the transform itself is not constrained to working with purely real bases. After all, it did spit out a bunch of Complex numbers. In the equations governing the Fourier Transform we can easily replace the Real numbers which correspond to frequency with Complex numbers. This modified transform is normally referred to as a ‘z-Transform’, and it turns out to be even more fundamental than the Fourier Transform. Indeed, the Fourier Transform is but a subset of the z-Transform. Where the Fourier Transform’s output is in frequency space, the z-Transform’s output is in an expanded version of frequency space called z-space. It turns out that z-space is a magical kingdom in which wonderful things happen. We can design almost any signal processing operation imaginable in z-space. In particular we can design filters that have all but limitless properties. But there’s a catch. Having designed a filter in z-space, it doesn’t tell us how to implement it in the real world. Only a certain highly specialized set of properties appear in both z-space and in the real world, and so we can only design real-world filters which are based on those specialized properties. Even so, z-space really is a magic kingdom inhabited by wizards who design signal processing algorithms. At this point, you can think of Fourier Transform space (or Fourier Space) as a place where advanced amateurs like me – and maybe you too – can feel comfortable. z-Space then can be thought of as a place where only serious professionals will really feel at home. So, extending that metaphor, where might the real bad-@ss, serious-sh^t, PhD-and-bar experts hang out? Our Final Frontier, if you like … ? Let’s go back to that notion of time, like frequency, being purely real. A couple of paragraphs up I replaced the Real frequency number with a Complex number and ended up in z-space. Can I do the same thing with the Real ‘time’ number, and replace it with a Complex number? What happens then? Well … something quite unexpected happens. If you have got this far you have probably heard of Einstein’s concept of Space-Time, where space and time are melded into one entity, and all the weird stuff we observe in the universe, but couldn’t account for, seems to drop straight out into our laps. Well that’s what happens here. It turns out that both time and frequency are in fact one single entity called Time-Frequency. They’re not independent at all. In fact, we can view the Time-Frequency domain as a Complex number space, where the Real part is Time-like, and the Imaginary part is Frequency-like. An ‘Argand’ Diagram is commonly used to represent Complex numbers. It’s an x-y plot with the Real part on the x-axis and Imaginary part on the y-axis. On the Argand Diagram, the time-based view of our music signal – the one we started out with – lives at the 3 o’clock position, along the x-axis. The frequency-based view – the Fourier Transform – lives along the y-axis at the 12 o’clock position. From this perspective, the Fourier Transform can be seen as a rotation by 90 degrees counter-clockwise. A further rotation of 90 degrees takes us to the 9 o’clock position which turns out to represent a time-reversed version of the original music signal, and a further 90 degree rotation to the 6 o’clock position actually corresponds to the inverse Fourier Transform. This place we have arrived at has several names, and is actually at the very forefront of pure research into signal processing. It is mind-blowingly difficult to master, and I would say that those who are able to do so probably already enjoy an international reputation in their fields, and sport long beards. I for one am so not among them. In the signal-processing field the most commonly used terminology is Fractional Fourier Transform (FrFT, or FRFT). This is because, understanding the picture in the terms I just described, it becomes possible to design transformations which transform the signal into some intermediate position in the Time-Frequency domain, where the datum is neither one thing nor the other. In other words, a rotation of some arbitrary angle somewhere between zero and 90 degrees, hence the term ‘Fractional’ Fourier Transform. This really is the cutting edge. Researchers are only just beginning to uncover what can be done using these theorems and representations. For example, I have read (but am sadly unable to fully comprehend) a paper claiming to show how FRFT can be used to design mathematically perfect sample rate conversion algorithms, something that practically escapes the current state-of-the-art. Furthermore, FRFT shows that the Shannon-Nyquist sampling theory is but a specific case of a more general theory by which sampling is not just constrained to be band-limited in the frequency domain, but in a more complex sense in the entire Time-Frequency domain. There are, I imagine, things one can do with such knowledge! So … hands up if you thought Fourier Transforms were tough!

0 comments

Leave a comment

0 Comments

Your avatar

Loading comments...

🗑️ Delete Comment

Enter moderator password to delete this comment:

✏️ Edit Comment

Enter your email to verify ownership: