All listeners with an RIT control can just decide how girly or manly they want
the other person's voice to sound :)
Another reason why I love CW so much...
Best regards - Bry Carling
> On Feb 22, 2014, at 7:03 PM, k6jek <k6jek@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> My experience is that with modern equipment, when people say they are on 3895
> they actually are, +/- not much and they actually stay there. Land yourself
> on that number and you've got it. With older equipment not so. Without a
> leader that we all tune to, say in an informal gathering, we wander all over
> the band. Somebody is a little high, I tune to him, maybe miss by a little.
> Somebody else tunes to me, misses a little etc. And, of course, we all drift
> like mad.
>
> Even with a leader, it can be pretty amusing. I participate in a vintage
> sideband roundtable most Tuesdays. We all tune to the roundtable leader.
> Depending on what he's running we can end up 5 kHz from where we started if
> somebody doesn't jump in and drag the whole conglomeration back. And many of
> the people who have tuned to net control haven't really succeeded. Maybe the
> tuned to where he used to be. Maybe they just couldn't hear what's right.
>
> And no, people aren't very good at hitting it dead on when they are tuning to
> natural speech. You can prove this to yourself. Using a dummy load and a
> recording of a voice that isn't you, tune with another receiver until the
> speech sounds right. Analog only. Now play some music through the
> transmitter. Chances are it will sound like hell. You've missed the mark.
>
> I've invited other people to do this. They can't hit it either. I have
> theories on why this is but that's another story.
>
> Jon, K6JEK
>
>
>
>
>> On Feb 22, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Brian Carling wrote:
>>
>> How does a digital readout help you to get on the same frequency any better
>> than an analog one ? If you can't hear when a human voice sounds natural
>> then a digital won't help.
>>
>> Best regards - Bry Carling
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 22, 2014, at 6:01 PM, k6jek <k6jek@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> I know. As an aficionado of vintage equipment I agree in spirt. But on SSB
>>> it really is delightful to talk with people who are actually on frequency,
>>> a rarity with vintage gear but the norm now with new equipment. People just
>>> sound so much more human when their speech isn't shifted 30 Hz or 20 or
>>> even 10.
>>>
>>> I have a Corsair (I) and have not considered replacing the PTO with a DDS
>>> unit but might just find a way to get a better read of my actual frequency.
>>> Shouldn't be hard. That way I can talk with my buddies on their Flex Radios
>>> (*), ICOM 7600's and such without annoying them while still enjoying my
>>> fine old stuff.
>>>
>>> Jon, K6JEK
>>>
>>> * I have all that modern stuff too, an SDR, OMNI VII etc. I just don't like
>>> it much. Heck, I think my favorites are the tube pieces from '50's.
>>>
>>>> On Feb 22, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I remember when digital frequency readouts (the kind using an electronic
>>>> counter, not the kind on a R-390) started appearing on ham gear. Most
>>>> people (myself included) just had to have it. We never needed it before.
>>>> There were easy enough reliable methods to make sure we stayed inside our
>>>> band (or sub-band) limits, but for some reason it seemed like a digital
>>>> display of our frequency became a necessity.
>>>>
>>>> DE N6KB
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/22/2014 11:14 AM, Mike Bryce wrote:
>>>>> I guess it was a year ago I put in a DDS replacement for the PTO. Rock
>>>>> solid. Dual VFOs, speed sensitive tuning, all kinds of goodies.
>>>>>
>>>>> I took it out and the analog PTO back in.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep, it didn’t have the same feel. It (the DDS) made all kinds of noise
>>>>> when no antenna was connected.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sometimes, and this was one of them, older really is better
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike, WB8VGE
>>>>> SunLight Energy Systems
>>>>> The Heathkit Shop
>>>>> http://www.theheathkitshop.com/
>>>>> J e e p
>>>>> o|||||||o
>>>>>
>>>>> A man with one clock knows what time it is. A man with two clocks is
>>>>> never sure.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> TenTec mailing list
>>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TenTec mailing list
>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|