I typed AFC in the fist sentence and it should of been AGC, me bad!
-- llindblom@juno.com wrote:
This is very reason I alway turn off the AFC before diving into the crowded
portions of any band on any mode. AGC off can be harder on the ears at times
but this prevents a strong nuisance signal from totally covering up the ESP
signal you are trying to copy.
73 W0ETC
-- "Don Inbody" <ad0k@inbody.net> wrote:
-----------------------------SNIP------------------------------
My only problem is the tendency of my rig (TS-430) to clamp down the AGC
when a nearby loud signal comes on, thereby virtually eliminating the weaker
signal I may be copying. In that circumstance, a tight filter (or moving
the IF shift) will help.
Don
Don Inbody/AD0K
QSL via LotW and eQSL
-----Original Message-----
From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On
Behalf Of llindblom@juno.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 13:07
To: wrt@dslextreme.com
Cc: RTTY@CONTESTING.COM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Re: Noise with MMTTY
As some one who over the past 40+ years has done a lot of all nighters on 80
and 160 during SSB contests, I learned I could copy signals better with the
widest filters in the rig. Eventually I started doing that on CW and it
worked well.
During BARTG I decide to try and take this one step further. For the weakest
of signals it seemed that going to the wide filters in my IC-775 did the
trick and let MMTTY decode cleaner. Or, did the signal peak when I went
wide and dive when I went back to a narrower setting?
73 W0ETC
-- Bill Turner <wrt@dslextreme.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:29:59 -0600, Charles Morrison wrote:
>I can't speak to this issue directly. However, on the human factors side
>people doing signal detection research stumbled across something that is
>counter intuitive. Is it easier to copy a weak CW signal on a quiet or
>noisy band?
>Many people will say it is easiest to copy CW on a quiet band. However,
>under controlled testing people did a better job of copying a weak CW
signal
>in noise than when there was no noise. A demonstration of this on NPR
>nearly blew me away. The played 10 seconds of what to the human ear
sounded
>like silence but actually contained a very low level CW signal. When noise
>was added in the CW signal was very obvious. Of course too much noise mask
>the signal entirely.
>I doubt electronic circuits/software work the same as the human brain.
But,
>the next time you operate the original digital mode don't cuss any noise
for
>it might be help your brain detect a signal that it otherwise might not
>process.
_________________________________________________________
I've noticed a similar effect on CW myself. Often I can copy CW better
with a wide filter instead of a narrow one, even though the apparent
noise is more. Strange.
--
Bill, W6WRT
QSLs via LoTW
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|