Return-Path: Received: from rly-df11.mx.aol.com (rly-df11.mail.aol.com [172.19.156.24]) by air-df02.mail.aol.com (v121_r5.5) with ESMTP id MAILINDF022-5884980da46a3; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:21:05 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-df11.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDF111-5884980da46a3; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:20:55 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1LSIm1-0002NF-5O for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:20:41 +0000 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1LSIm0-0002N6-P0 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:20:40 +0000 Received: from sighthound.demon.co.uk ([80.177.174.126]) by relay2.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LSIlx-0004VV-VG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:20:40 +0000 Received: from lurcher (lurcher.twatt.home [10.0.0.8]) by deerhound.twatt.home (Postfix) with ESMTP id C20FE3B6A4 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:20:31 +0000 (GMT) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:20:31 +0000 From: John P-G To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <20090128222031.696363aa@lurcher> In-Reply-To: <00c701c9818b$2aac4520$6401a8c0@asus> References: <00c701c9818b$2aac4520$6401a8c0@asus> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.14.4; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,AWL=0.119 Subject: Re: LF: WSPR - G0NBD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 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-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:58:26 -0000 "Gary - G4WGT" wrote: > Hi LF, >=20 > =20 >=20 > Interesting observation. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Tonight up to now I have only had one decode from Graham's WSPR & > that was when I had a high level of broadband noise here masking the > signal. > Yes, I also notice good decodes at low S/N ratios, during downward fades, but nil decodes when the signal is stronger than about -6dB >From what I can find at the WSPR forums others have seen poor decodes of strong signals due to soundcard sample rate problems, and in this instance I assume the problem is at the sending end. Perhaps a period of QRP operation might help, counterintuitively. Cheers, John