Message-ID: <4F28685A.6010209@talktalk.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:16:58 +0000
From: qrss <qrss@talktalk.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <006201cce044$06c16f80$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <3A9A60CAE4EB4355A5B0A30CDA0F450A@JimPC>
In-Reply-To: <3A9A60CAE4EB4355A5B0A30CDA0F450A@JimPC>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: Opera v qrs evaluation
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0  
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d41154f2868c077e9
X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25
X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none


Hi Jim

It's still on, I see lots of de-codes from you, it will be interesting 
to hear your findings.

I like QRS Morse, I have used it extensively, just look at the e-mail I 
post to the group with, since WSPR and now OPERA it has become clear 
that it does not serve me well, on HF I put it down to the tiny network 
of RX stations who look/listen when they have the time or the 
inclination not necessarily when the propagation is there.

On LF with the high proportion of QRS advocates you would not expect the 
same situation.

73 Eddie

On 31/01/2012 18:35, James Moritz wrote:
> Dear Eddie, LF Group,
>
> In an attempt to actually make a comparison, I have set my RX to the 
> 500kHz WSPR frequency, with Spec Lab going also. Since it has been 
> running, G3ZJO's QRSS3 has been about 10 - 15dB SNR in 0.3Hz FFT 
> resolution, so say about 6dB above the level needed for "good copy". 
> Opera has so far reported SNR between -23 and -27dB - I don't know how 
> this relates to the detection threshold for the Op4 mode. I'll leave 
> it going for a while...
>
> Cheers, Jim Moritz
> 73 de M0BMU
>
>