Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
From: MarkusVester@aol.com
Message-ID: <3a4.36be2d9.323874dd@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 16:38:53 EDT
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: LF: Big signal with hum...
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_3a4.36be2d9.323874dd_boundary"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: RO


--part1_3a4.36be2d9.323874dd_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Wolfgang,

for a quick comparison, I set up SpecLab's generator for 100 Hz squarewave=20
FM, 170 Hz shift. The first five lines on either side were nearly identical=20=
to=20
those in the observed EFR spectrum. Bandlimiting (or shaping) sets in at 600=
=20
Hz, with something like 10 to 15 dB down at 1.1 kHz offset. I think those ha=
rd=20
transitions are also present on DCF39.

As the operational data bursts will appear only every 10 seconds or so, the=20
impact on straight CW may finally be not that bad. Get nine characters, drop=
=20
one :-(

73 and regards
Markus

In einer eMail vom 12.09.2006 21:42:54 Westeurop=E4ische Sommerzeit schreibt=
=20
dl4yhf@freenet.de:=20

> Hi Markus and all,
>=20
> I heard the signal today and wondered why it's so broad - don't they=20
> apply amplitude shaping to the baseband signal before modulating it, or=20
> what do you think ?
> I couldn't record the signal when I heard it but it sounded very harsh=20
> to me, almost like deliberately to produce broad sidebands.
> Still I don't like the idea to have to use a 'puter to get rid of this=20
> on 136.5 in CW ;-)
>=20
> 73,
> Wolf DL4YHF=20


--part1_3a4.36be2d9.323874dd_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><HTML><FONT  SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=
=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"2">Hi Wolfgang,<BR>
<BR>
for a quick comparison, I set up SpecLab's generator for 100 Hz squarewave F=
M, 170 Hz shift. The first five lines on either side were nearly identical t=
o those in the observed EFR spectrum. Bandlimiting (or shaping) sets in at 6=
00 Hz, with something like 10 to 15 dB down at 1.1 kHz offset. I think those=
 hard transitions are also present on DCF39.<BR>
<BR>
As the operational data bursts will appear only every 10 seconds or so, the=20=
impact on straight CW may finally be not that bad. Get nine characters, drop=
 one :-(<BR>
<BR>
73 and regards<BR>
Markus<BR>
<BR>
In einer eMail vom 12.09.2006 21:42:54 Westeurop=E4ische Sommerzeit schreibt=
 dl4yhf@freenet.de: <BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Hi Markus and all,<BR>
<BR>
I heard the signal today and wondered why it's so broad - don't they <BR>
apply amplitude shaping to the baseband signal before modulating it, or <BR>
what do you think ?<BR>
I couldn't record the signal when I heard it but it sounded very harsh <BR>
to me, almost like deliberately to produce broad sidebands.<BR>
Still I don't like the idea to have to use a 'puter to get rid of this <BR>
on 136.5 in CW ;-)<BR>
<BR>
73,<BR>
Wolf DL4YHF </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_3a4.36be2d9.323874dd_boundary--