Message-ID: <029701ca60af$4f444d20$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920>
From: "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <027601ca60a2$841cd150$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920> <020b01ca60a9$4495adc0$0201a8c0@Clemens04>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:08:59 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: LF: Re: Re: WSPR
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Two points

Why waste 2.4 kHz when QRS only needs a few Hz with a better S/N ratio.

You agree that a faint trace is visible. If this faint trace was QRS mode 
only a few Hz bandwidth would be necessary to read the intellegence and the 
signal/noise would be superior.
G3KEV

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Clemens Paul" <cpaul@gmx.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 7:23 PM
Subject: LF: Re: WSPR


> Mal,
>
>>WSPR reports amongst stns indicate reception reports usually minus dB. 
>>Most of these
>> stations are usually PLUS
>>dB with me or very close to that figure.
>
> WSPR refers the indicated SNR to a BW of 2,4kHz.
> So if your receiving BW is say 100Hz your actual SNR is better by ~14dB 
> than WSPR
> reports.
>
>>A trace of the signal is visible long before a decode takes place, 
>>therefore why
>>not use QRS in
> >the first place.
>
> This may be an issue of your RX/soundcard setup.
> I can assure you that with my Perseus SDR RX,set to a RBW of less than one 
> Hertz
> for the display,I can decode every WSPR signal which shows even only a 
> faint trace on
> the waterfall diagram.
> At least this is my experience so far.
>
> 73
> Clemens
> DL4RAJ
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: mal hamilton
> To: rsgb
> Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 7:37 PM
> Subject: LF: WSPR
>
>
> WSPR reports amongst stns indicate reception reports usually minus dB. 
> Most of these stations
> are usually PLUS dB with me or very close to that figure.
> So what does that prove. I would say it depends on the RX antenna and not 
> necessarily
> propagation. A large antenna yields better results than a small loop or 
> active whip.
> When I switch from my 1/4 wave inv L for 500 khz to a smaller 40 m 
> resonated loop for 500 the
> signals then do go down to a minus db figure.
> So what is all this all ABOUT ?
> There is also the TX pwr to consider. Two transmitters from the same 
> location one using QRO
> and the other QRP will be received at different levels at a specified RX 
> location. There is a
> lot of misrepresentation and misleading information by WSPR operator
> A trace of the signal is visible long before a decode takes place, 
> therefore why not use QRS
> in the first place.
>
> G3KEV
>
>
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.55/2489 - Release Date: 11/08/09 
> 07:37:00
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.55/2489 - Release Date: 11/08/09 
07:37:00