> However, if the carrier was modulated (like in Sinisa test
> with continuous dits), and the RF gain adjusted so that the
> difference between the signal plus noise level and the noise
> level with no signal is maximized,
> Wouldn't that be a better test? Let me know what you think.
I used I general method similar to what the ARRL lab lays out in their
product review techniques. Because the baseline noise level does change on
a dynamic basis with a signal present versus no signal present, it could be
that what you're suggesting makes a difference. I don't know. If I can
find some time I might look at that more closely.
I'd like to see T-T explain in a brief white paper what is different about
the V1 vs. V2 algorithms. As it is, we're left guessing at it, and with
some controversy that doesn't look like it's going away :-)
For the record, in most respects that matter to me, I was very happy with
my Orion, and am still happy with my Orion II. NR performance wasn't even an
issue on my radar (there are other changes from v1 to v2 that I immediately
noticed and find much more curious, such as why the notches were seemingly
placed outside the AGC loop). And I have no basis for comparison of V2 NR
with V1 NR other than the comments being made by some list members re their
perceived performance differences between 1.371, 1.372 and later, and 2.056,
since I don't have one to measure -- in either a static or dynamic
environment.
Grant/NQ5T
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|