Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+psychoacoustics\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+psychoacoustics\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: softwave@ameritech.net (Joseph Holstein); Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2000 14:29:16 -0400; I remember the article about the spatial CW filter but not where I read it. I believe the author may have been "Hildrith"?. I think there was a company Called Hildrith Engineering that manufactured t; /archives//html/Topband/2000-07/msg00016.html (6,780 bytes)
2. Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: btippett@ctc.net (Bill Tippett); Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 10:46:43 +0100; That article was by Donald Hildreth W6NRW and appeared in a 80's issue of Ham Radio. I tried one but, like every audio/DSP filter I've ever tried, I concluded it was not as good as the audio filter b; /archives//html/Topband/2000-07/msg00017.html (6,904 bytes)
3. Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>; Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:17:47 -0700; It is commonly known that the human brain is a good processor for picking signals out of the noise. I found the following excerpt (slightly edited) on psychoacoustics at http://www.ka7oei.com/qrss1.h; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00288.html (8,153 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: Barry Gross <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:52:09 -0500; Listening to a weak cw signal in the midst of roaring, popping qrn isn't directly analagous to a weak signal against a background of constant level white noise. I suspect cw filters are more useful i; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00289.html (7,357 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>; Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:32:12 -0700; Maybe I should have been more specific. I have the DSP filters in my 756Pro set to "100 Hz", 200 Hz, and 400 Hz. The "100 Hz" setting is actually 600 Hz narrowed down by the PBT controls to give a mo; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00293.html (7,868 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: "Lawrence Stoskopf" <stoskopf@tri.net>; Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 02:40:13 GMT; This is a well researched science. Utilized by those compressing data to take out stuff that the normal ear can't hear anyway. A loud noise will block out anything shortly after. Some tones mask othe; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00298.html (7,735 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>; Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:13:56 -0800; I have often found my SSB filters to be more useful for EME work than CW filters. However, with lots of QRN, I think the CW filters do help. Tree N6TR _______________________________________________; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00299.html (6,992 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: W2RU - Bud Hippisley <W2RU@frontiernet.net>; Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 15:27:04 +0000; I agree with Tree. For MF/HF/VHF terrestrial weak signal CW reception I have found over the decades that I seem to do best with a hardware filter bandwidth no narrower than 1000 to 1200 Hz. Super nar; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00304.html (8,520 bytes)
9. Re: Topband: psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@verizon.net>; Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:25:35 -0500; I've found that small signal detection is actually BETTER in a wider bandwidth. i.e. ssb filters vs. cw filters for cw sigs. Why? It's a better sample of white noise, which the brain can average out.; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00309.html (8,321 bytes)
10. Re: Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: "Roger Graves" <rgraves@uvic.ca>; Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:21:09 -0800; The filter width issue clearly relates to the type of noise involved. In my case, with a city location, the background "white" noise is at least S7 and often 10 over nine with a 2.4 kHz filter. I nev; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00311.html (9,179 bytes)
11. Re: Topband: Psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: "Keith Jillings (G3OIT)" <g3oit@jillings.org.uk>; Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 19:06:34 +0000; I remember from my youth a device that split audio progressively between the left and right ear of a stereo headset, based on frequency. I was impressed with how that allowed separation of signals. W; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00312.html (7,971 bytes)
12. Re: Topband: psychoacoustics (score: 1): Author: David Gilbert <rimradio@direcway.com>; Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 15:00:36 -0700; Yes, a drifting signal gives the same effect as when I slowly tune through a signal to help pick it out of the noise. One of the hams who responded offline to my original message said he sometimes wi; /archives//html/Topband/2005-11/msg00315.html (10,720 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]