# An explanation of the Z transform part 1

An explanation of the Z transform part 1

This is the first part of a very concise and quite detailed explanation of the z-transform and not recommended for those dealing with the z-transform for the first time.

A more gentle introduction to the z-transform can be found at https://youtu.be/m5TP2uG_O2M

Laplace droid

Thanks alot 💖

Very nice video. Thanks a lot

your lecture is realy amazing.sir what can we say about the significance of z transform in power system protecyion

This is so good

Amazing!

This is probably the best lecture series on signals and system ever put on internet. Very useful to get the intuitive knowledge of all the concepts. Please keep making more videos on Laplace, convolution and so on, which will give intuitive perspective of the equations.

Great video about the insight what Z-Tx is actually doing, however, I do have this question; at 11:24, the animation of the sinusoid shows an oscillating signal with some frequency when z is almost equal to -1+0j. Shouldn’t the signal at this point have zero frequency because of the imaginary part equal to zero?

explained very well…👍

Absolute perfection description of Z-transform

Stewie

Excellent video! God bless you sir! I think I finally understand this!!

saludos julio, a ver cuando vengas por corrientes y le metemos una guitarreada!

T H A N K Y O U.

The best explanation, you are a legend !!!

beyond z-transform that i knew before. great explanation

you have showed the variation of z^-n. But can you explain how z transform tells us about the system.

I am an Electrical Engineer. Proudly say that this is the most amazing video regarding Z-transform, i ever watched. What a noble way to teach with proper fitting examples . WOW !! I know Z-transform very well, but still i can say I LEARNT A LOT 🙂

You are awesome ! thanks

Thankx David

No other materials explain Z transform better than this one. This really help me a lot! Thanks David!

Nice vid! Nonetheless, I have one question: in the video you state that z=r*e^(jw), but (please correct me if I’m wrong) the euler identity is that e^(j*ANGLE)=fasor, so one should say that z=r*e^(j*(w*t)), where t is time. z is a fasor of radius r and angular velocity w, and that’s why you can have a sinusoidal signal if you plot that on time.

great work ! keep it up!

By far the best, impeccable explanation of z-transformation and its usage. Thank you for video. Keep up the good work! 🙂

David . You have a rare talent . You have a talent for communication . You take something that is complex and make it understandable . Great voice as well ,very clear .

What a true gem on the Internet!

Fantastic video. I’ve been looking for an intuitive interpretation for a while. Thanks. I’m not sure how he pronounces the ‘r’ variable (something like "or"). It looks like a regular ‘r’… What is it?.

Hey where are the other part of this videos. Plz post them asap. Plz N make video on laplace transform and Fourier transform also

Wow thank you very much. The first one and a half minute about systems stable/unstable were worth it.

Thank you for your perfect English. God bless you!

Almost 10/10 in terms of content, crisply delivered, great ideas, you were clear on how r^-n controls the exponential growth or decay, I wish you had talked about why we have BOTH a cos and a sin in (cos(wn)-sin(wn)), together they contribute to the oscillation, one would be enough if we just wanted oscillating decay. like the second term is just phase shifted version. Maybe something to do with how together those two form an orthogonal basis? The phase shifting seems to encode the information regarding which direction of the imaginary axis that frequency is selected. It’s not clear at all to me and I hope anyone who decides to use david’s great video as a template decides to go a bit deeper in that.

I think it might have been better to think of the complex part as a complex phasor spinning at a rate of w Hz rather than as the seperate cos or sin terms.

If I did not know 3b1b I would not know what levels of animation is possible, so I have higher expectations from you. Still Thanks so much.

Nice non-Indian accent, just sayin

Thanks for the great explanation. Made it a lot easier for me to understand what Z-transform is useful for.

Good video but I am confuzzled… at 4 minutes you say [1,1,1…] is a DC signal, which you use for the two sets of correlations. Then at just before 5 minutes you say the outcome of the correlation is 0, which indicates there is no DC component present in the signal, which I sort of took to mean, no DC input components, but that makes no sense… or does it? or did you mean the output signal?

Crystal clear explanation. You’re a hero.

I always get teachers who are concerned in solving rather than y to solve

Great explanation!!, do you have some explanation of the discrete wavelet transform using the lifting scheme? , becoming more important every year, and a lot of us would be really helped by your explanation, cheers

No words to thank you. Exceptionally good.

Incredible. What a clear and comprehensive video. I learned quite a lot and really think it’ll help advance my understanding of z-transforms.

Fantastic !!

Making this shit argument understandable is an act of heroism. Thanks man, you are a Hero!!!

Brain Overheating!!

Watch the 12 min video in 2 hours, but learn things that confused me for 5 years!

Hope I can thumb up for 1000 times.

Thank you for your excellent work, David!

This is brilliant. I wish there was just a second of pause between topics and changing the visual, but nonetheless you make it extraordinarily clear (and youtube has a pause button, anyway).

are you irish?

Sound a lot like people in peaky blinders

This is unbelievably useful, detailed, yet top down. You are sent from the heavens thank you!

great explanation

Part 2 please

great tutoring..,,,,,just one point to mention…could you please speak slowly…english is my 5th language,,,cheers

Ty bro, God bless you.