Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+PSK\s+and\s+waterfall\s+\-\s+some\s+more\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+PSK\s+and\s+waterfall\s+\-\s+some\s+more\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [RTTY] PSK and waterfall - some more (score: 1): Author: "Phil Cooper" <pcooper@guernsey.net>; Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:41:36 -0000; Hi once more, OK, I will agree, I made a fundamental mistake here! I generated an email on the spur of the moment, and cleanly forgot about overdriven signals being the worst. HOWEVER............. I; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-02/msg00256.html (8,585 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] PSK and waterfall - some more (score: 1): Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:22:53 -0500; That's not just a property of PSK, but of any mode. A weak signal in the midst of several strong stations will be hard to copy. That's why many receiver specifications deal with close-in dynamic rang; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-02/msg00346.html (9,523 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] PSK and waterfall - some more (score: 1): Author: "Duane Budd" <dcbudd@charter.net>; Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 05:21:06 -0500; "Overdriven transmitters aren't the sole province of PSK. It can happen with any audio signal we feed into our transmitters." Which is why some of us much prefer FSK for RTTY, AmTOR and PacTOR. Duane; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-02/msg00356.html (6,422 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] PSK and waterfall - some more (score: 1): Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>; Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 08:51:05 -0500; When properly adjusted, there should be no discernible difference between an FSK and AFSK signal. The key is to find the proper adjustment. Curiously, I found that when using CocoaModem, once setting; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-02/msg00357.html (7,153 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]