CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabril

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabrillo --...
From: K4XS via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Reply-to: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 20:59:02 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
My hat is off to you for doing the "fix".  I owned two of the  1000s and 
did the "fix".  Unfortunately there are two groups who don't  worry about such 
things.
 
Some use the dirty signal as a shield,  and use it  to keep the adjacent 
frequencies clear.  Nobody like to be close to a dirty  signal.  In fact there 
is a notorious W1 who seems to be able to turn his  clicks on and off at 
will to "clear up" his frequency.
 
The second group has a different attitude...denial.  "I paid  $6000 for 
this rig and you tell me I have a dirty signal".  Yep, you  spent all that 
money and don't have a clue how to set up your audio so it  doesn't sound like 
manure.
 
Both of these ops operate with a dirty signal, but for different  reasons.
 
K4XS/KH7XS
 
 
In a message dated 4/11/2015 12:34:19 A.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,  
bparry@rgv.rr.com writes:

Actually  I believe that they don't know how bad they sound. After I bought
my  previous radio, (FT1000), I thought it was pretty good and got a lot  of
complements. One day W8JI sent me a polite e-mail and said that I had  bad
key clicks. I found out there was a partial fix and got it done. Now  I
realize that most Yaesu radios have Clicks and Icom isn't much better!  I
very much appreciated W8JI letting me know. I don't believe that most  of
those awful SSB signals done are on purpose, they just don't know  any
better. We need to do a better job of letting these folks know about  their
signals without being too rude. If you are too "in their face", they  will
just turn you off. Your purpose should be to get them to be better,  not 
make
them mad!

Bill W5VX 

-----Original  Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On  Behalf Of
Kelly Taylor
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 2:05 PM
To: Mike  Fatchett W0MU; George via CQ-Contest
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive  Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for
Cabrillo -- and the phone skimmer,  new idea

They either do it on purpose or they're so convinced of their  technological
greatness they've convinced themselves their audio is  perfect.

Either way, mentioning it won't have much effect: it will  either confirm to
them they set it the way they intended (more complaints  the better), or
they'll dismiss you as a technological pretender with no  real knowledge,
and, by the way, 'How DARE you have the temerity to  question my 
audiological
prowess? Don't you know who I am?'

The best  fix is for everybody to vote with their feet. Don't work 'em.

73,  kelly
ve4xt



On 4/10/15 12:52 PM, "Mike Fatchett W0MU"  <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:

> I have never understood thought  process behind not publicly "outing" 
> the
> 
offenders.   Most of them know they have crappy or very wide audio.  They do
>  it on purpose.

The best medicine would to pass these lousy signals by  but
> people won't 
because they have to have that one contact, at  least tell them
> their 
audio is lousy and you hope that nobody  reports them, ahem.....

Mike
> W0MU

On 4/10/2015 5:09 AM,  Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
> Not only that, but the
> number of awards  thereafter could be halved, 
> saving ARRL and other
> societies  lots of money.
>
> But seriously, folks, can you imagine the  mess
> that would result if 
> the same phone ops who "amuse" us  with their lousy
> audio added either 
> subaudible tones or 100  wpm CW to their awful
> signals.
>
> I'm waiting with  interest to see whether CQWW follows through on
> rule 
> XII (A)  (5) and disciplines at least a few stations for 
>
>  excessivebandwidth.  I'm not interested in outing a list of those  
>
> disciplined, necessarily, but I hope at least the number of  actions 
> taken
> is made public, so that people know the  committee is serious.  
> With the
> tools now available, in  particular whole contest recordings 
> and SDR
> panadaptors, it  should be possible to objectively define 
> excessive
> bandwidth  (e.g., level in dB relative to peak amplitude, 
> versus  frequency
> difference).
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> Check out  the Reverse Beacon Network at
>
>  http://reversebeacon.net,
> blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
>  For spots,
> please go to your favorite
> ARC V6 or VE7CC DX  cluster node.
>
> On 4/10/2015
> 12:55 AM, Bokverket  wrote:
>> ----- Ursprungligt meddelande -----
>>  Från:
> "Bokverket" <info@bokverket.com>
>> Till:  <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>>
> Skickat: den 9 april  2015 13:15
>> Ämne: Suggestion for Cabrillo -- and the
> phone  skimmer, new idea
>>
>>
>> Rarely do one's wishes  be fulfilled so soon,
> even retroactively!
>>
>>  Goran/SM0DRD, who thinks that hte subaudible tones
> that someone  
>> mentioned
>> would be a great step towards a  quick
> realization of the phone 
>> skimmer. But
>>  even better would be ***
> combining cw and SSB into one signal  ***  
>> The cw
>> could be sent at 100
> or  something wpm like a rattle, just as with those
>> obsolete  spy
> transmissions. It won't disturb the audio since there is  so
>> much overdrive
> noise already, and can then be detected  easily by a new
>> version of the cw
>  skimmer.
>>
>> But what's more, we could halve the number of  contests!!! Save
> countless
>> $$'s and marriages.  And  for die-hard cw only people, the number
> of 
>>  contacts
>> will increase and the extra transmitted phone messages  can
> be 
>> automatically
>>  generated.
>>
>> 73,
>>  Goran/SM0DRD
>>
>>
>  _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing  list
>>
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>
>  http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing  list
>
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>
>  http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_____________________
>  __________________________
CQ-Contest mailing
>  list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq
>  -contest



_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest  mailing  list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest  mailing  list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>