Envelope-to: dave@picks.force9.co.uk Delivery-date: Tue, 24 May 2005 14:23:19 +0100 Received: by ptb-mxcore02.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1DaZNO-0001Kn-LA for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Tue, 24 May 2005 14:23:19 +0100 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore02.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1DaZNO-0001KJ-EA for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Tue, 24 May 2005 14:23:18 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1DaZN9-0005yp-Bw for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 14:23:03 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1DaZN8-0005yg-Qf for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 14:23:02 +0100 Received: from fh1023.dia.cp.net ([64.97.168.33] helo=n066.sc1.cp.net) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DaZN7-0006tz-Ae for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 14:23:02 +0100 Received: from l8p8y6 (62.252.228.9) by n066.sc1.cp.net (7.0.043) id 4291A78000076EA8 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 24 May 2005 13:22:59 +0000 Message-ID: <000c01c5604e$d629b3e0$09e4fc3e@l8p8y6> From: "hamilton mal" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 10:38:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: 64.97.168.33 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of virgin.net Subject: LF: KK7KA Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PN-SpamFiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00) Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Hi Stewart,
The idea sounds simple enough, implimentation in practical terms could be a problem.
I already use a kind of space diversity at times for experimentation. The vertical goes to one RX and the loop to another RX, then the audio outputs are fed to the computer and viewed on ARGO but the BFO is offset 650 hz + on one Rx and - on the other, this way I can view both received signals simultaneously one on the upper half of screen and the other on the lower part and compare strength etc but the two signals could be combined/added on exactly the same trace by using exactly the same BFO offset on both Receivers.
I mix both audio inputs but maybe a better approach would be to keep both audio inputs to the sound card separate, one from each RX ie use the sterio input instead of mono and let the mixing take place on the sound card.
Maybe someone that specialises in sound cards and their potential knows the answer and the software required.
I know this is not what you really have in mind but it is a start.
Some signals received on the vertical are not heard or seen by the loop because of the directional properties, I really need TWO loops, then there would be 3 inputs and more problems for the sound card that only has 2 inputs !!!!! A proper external multi input balanced mixer might be the answer, there are so many ways to go, and then it becomes a full time job implementing all these expriments.
It will be interesting to see what observations you get about your idea.
73 and gl de Mal/G3KEV