Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id BC77338000127; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:21:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TTdpu-0006j4-F8 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:20:22 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TTdpu-0006iv-2B for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:20:22 +0000 Received: from out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.243]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TTdps-0006Ga-1X for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:20:20 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApIBAFN5kVBcGSjp/2dsb2JhbAANN8cBAQEBAQM4EUALCQsECSUPAjgBDRMIAQGveJNpi3gbgnyDJAOVdpMx X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,687,1344207600"; d="scan'208";a="52479840" Received: from host-92-25-40-233.as13285.net (HELO [192.168.2.3]) ([92.25.40.233]) by out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 31 Oct 2012 19:20:18 +0000 Message-ID: <509179F2.60700@psk31.plus.com> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:20:18 +0000 From: g3zjo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <50904AD0.5070306@broadpark.no> <50904BB6.4010905@xs4all.nl> <50904E73.9030402@psk31.plus.com> <50904F8F.90505@xs4all.nl> <509056D9.2050107@psk31.plus.com> <50916CF1.8010002@xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <50916CF1.8010002@xs4all.nl> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hello Albert Did you or could you check v2702, it was totally different here to v2706.. 73 Eddie [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Scan-Signature: a6b6ffaf48fdddf1ed5c25dc4bf03ee1 Subject: Re: LF: WSJT-X BENCH TESTS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d600b50917a3500b8 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hello Albert Did you or could you check v2702, it was totally different here to v2706.. 73 Eddie On 31/10/2012 18:24, Albert W wrote: > Hello all test-users of WSJT-X, > > Today I used the afternoon to solve some issues encountered by using > WSTJ-X v0.2 r2706. Test setup Flex1500 TXing 1mW, with a lot of > attenuation into a power combiner, output to a Flex 5000 RXing and the > other input of de combiner to an active antenna providing real outdoor > noise and some QRN. PC's Windows 7 64bit. > > JT9-2: minimum SNR (on WSJT screen) for solid decodes is - 22dB. All > OK while increasing the input level of the wanted signal untill the > SNR reaches 0 dB (-1 dB is still OK) Here we get the famous > *********15P6715P67WCV. The dynamic range of JT9-2 is in this case > only 30 dB. (Remote stations receiving relative weak signals had the > best results) > Conclusion: for the time being you have to keep the RX signals at a > level below a SNR of 0dB and above 22 dB for 100% decodes. > Very important also is the timing, keep your PC clock within 1 sec > accuracy and keep your tx and rx frequency as stable as possible. > > 73, Albert > > > > > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2441/5364 - Release Date: 10/30/12 > >