Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:lists@subich.com: 812 ]

Total 812 documents matching your query.

301. Re: [RTTY] BARTG Sprint 2013 (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 20:23:32 -0500
You know that a G station DOES change calls within different areas of the UK. *Not* when moving within England - which is equivalent to moving within the continental 48 US states. Going among Scotlan
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00129.html (18,740 bytes)

302. Re: [RTTY] US call signs (BARTG) (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:02:47 -0500
There is no requirement to sign portable (/P or /A). There is no requirement to identify which from which "call area" one is operating - including KP1, KP2, KP3, KP5, KH0 - KH9 or KL. EA RTTY, JARTS
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00149.html (11,325 bytes)

303. Re: [RTTY] US call signs (BARTG) (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:09:28 -0500
How about all contests eliminate countries as multipliers in Europe? Instead go to CQ or ITU zones and include zone in the exchange? Or you can adopt the WAE and JARTS format and use the prefix with
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00150.html (11,929 bytes)

304. Re: [RTTY] US call signs (BARTG) (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 09:33:28 -0500
The "problem" is that the rules unfairly penalize some participants who are operating within the regulations and using their legal call. Although I did it in 1999 and 2000, using a callsign twice as
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00154.html (13,424 bytes)

305. Re: [RTTY] RTTY spectrum analysis article (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:22:59 -0500
Then how do you keep strong signals in the passband of the (now wider) rig filter away from the AGC in the rig? 400 Hz is nearly the minimum bandwidth necessary for proper decoding (minimum intersymb
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00178.html (11,610 bytes)

306. Re: [RTTY] RTTY Rx filter bandwidth (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:46:50 -0500
I haven't done any rigorous experiments but since the 400 Hz filter is about 430 Hz wide with a "rounded" top see: (http://www.elecraft.com/K3/K3_filter_plots.htm) an optimal configuration might be t
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00185.html (9,341 bytes)

307. Re: [RTTY] RTTY spectrum analysis article (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:51:08 -0500
Phil, Using the "soft" option instead of the hardest (steepest) may help with regard to the narrow bandwidths as the softer skirts/more gentle change from passband to stopband should result in lower
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00186.html (10,093 bytes)

308. Re: [RTTY] RTTY Rx filter bandwidth (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 16:28:18 -0500
Which is why it makes little sense to put both the KFL3A-400 and KFL3A-250 in the same K3<G>. Again, see the Elecraft filter plots: http://www.elecraft.com/K3/K3_filter_plots.htm 370Hz is very close
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00190.html (9,262 bytes)

309. Re: [RTTY] RTTY spectrum analysis article (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:46:16 -0500
It looks like several radios have built-in "sound cards" that are available by a USB connection. In principle this should be essentially the same thing as the Flex flex is doing--no analog audio line
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00214.html (12,745 bytes)

310. Re: [RTTY] RTTY spectrum analysis article (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:30:00 -0500
Chen, If the radio manufacturer did the right things, their noise floor can be as low as any external sound card, and probably better Therein likes the rub. Some manufacturers are simply summing the
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00216.html (9,139 bytes)

311. [RTTY] The Problem with AFSK ... (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 12:00:27 -0500
With all the recent talk that AFSK is cleaner than FSK, this morning on 12 meters I watched a classic example of the problems with using AFSK and the reason I would rather put up with the "hard" keyi
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00224.html (9,751 bytes)

312. Re: [RTTY] The Problem with AFSK ... (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:21:06 -0500
No, I'm viewing the entire "system" ... you're very correct that it's relatively easy to generate a cleaner signal *from the sound card* in AFSK but there are so many more opportunities to screw it
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00226.html (9,274 bytes)

313. Re: [RTTY] The Problem with AFSK ... (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500
Doesn't mean a thing if the level going into the mic jack is already too high for the microphone preamplifier. Most rigs that use dynamic mics (Kenwood, Yaesu, Ten-Tec) will clip in the mic preamp if
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00227.html (10,322 bytes)

314. Re: [RTTY] [MMTTY] The Problem with AFSK ... (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:34:34 -0500
That might be an issue for some sound cards, I don't know. HOWEVER, such erroneous advice may lead to problems among hams who use some of the most popular sound card technologies, the Signalink-USB.
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00229.html (12,947 bytes)

315. Re: [RTTY] The Problem with AFSK ... (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:20:20 -0500
Unfortunately West Mountain Radio and Signalink both do exactly this by default. For example - Signalink cables: SLUSB4R - For 4-Pin Round Mic Connector SLUSB8R - For 8-Pin Round Mic Connector SLUSB
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00232.html (12,796 bytes)

316. Re: [RTTY] Z6 Prefix (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 08:38:01 -0500
Per the ARRL Letter dated September 27, 2012 <http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter%3Fissue%3D2012-09-27>: Although not formally assigned a prefix by the International Telecommunication Union, Kosovo will
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00242.html (8,351 bytes)

317. Re: [RTTY] Getting rid of clicks--what's the risk? (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:39:34 -0500
Andy, The point is as you said, "this is an examinations of ... one particular model and does not represent any others." The "clean up" you see is due entirely to the Elecraft's unique AFSK filter. B
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00245.html (12,993 bytes)

318. Re: [RTTY] Z6 Prefix (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:17:43 -0500
I am going to Kosovo again for CQ WW 160m CW after November event. I hope DXCC status would be resolved this year thru extensive EU negotiations. The DXCC rules specify only two ways for a "political
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00256.html (10,687 bytes)

319. Re: [RTTY] AFSK Tips (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 11:49:46 -0500
Someone had a tip the other day (W4TV?) recommending setting the soundcard output level on the high side, thereby minimizing mic gain on the radio side, keeping unwanted hum and distortion at a minim
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00292.html (11,037 bytes)

320. [RTTY] Bad AFSK (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:38:45 -0500
Elecraft have taken the lead on FSK bandwidth - thanks to W7AY, K0SM and W0YK among others. Lets hope other manufacturers follow quickly. Yesterday evening as I was looking for some RTTY activity to
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-01/msg00310.html (7,715 bytes)

Current List: 301 - 320
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]
This search system is powered by Namazu