Message-ID: <003501cd90eb$a6230680$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
From: "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <504E733E.5000208@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>,<8CF5E5BCA46639D-8FC-4829A@webmail-d050.sysops.aol.com> <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A0FB22D26@ICTS-S-MBX5.luna.kuleuven.be>,<82bc7bcd97ea679e8be267e8e2add69c@dl1dbc.net> <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A0FB22E5E@ICTS-S-MBX5.luna.kuleuven.be> <471908b0534586163cf3bf2502fe2b9b@dl1dbc.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:36:43 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: RE: RE: [rsgb_lf_group] Re: LF: slow WSPR?
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


In the real world of radio there is always QRM, QSB and QRN so let us have a
meaningful test/result
g3kev

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sabine Cremer" <sabine@dl1dbc.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:25 PM
Subject: LF: RE: RE: [rsgb_lf_group] Re: LF: slow WSPR?


> Hi Rik,
>
> > as mentioned in the report the test were done off-air, by adding
> > equal amounts of pure white noise to WSPR / Opera signals of
> > identical
> > amplitude.
> > So no QRM/QRN or QSB involved. Maybe I will do these tests over with
> > QRN and/or QSB added (if there is some interest and if time permits).
>
> I would be very interested in the results! Don't get me wrong, I don't
> want to know what the *best software* is, I would like to learn what are
> the differences using the various algorithms and WHY this is so! It is
> obviously, that you are the right person to give these answers. ;-)
>
> 73
> Sabine, DL1DBC
>
>
>