Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-de01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 91378380000DC; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:36:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TeTZ8-00054w-N3 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:35:50 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TeTZ8-00054n-8n for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:35:50 +0000 Received: from ppa04.princeton.edu ([128.112.128.215]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TeTZ6-0006YZ-DH for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:35:49 +0000 Received: from csgsmtp200l.Princeton.EDU (csgsmtp200l.Princeton.EDU [128.112.130.131]) by ppa04.Princeton.EDU (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qAUGZkv6025721 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:35:46 -0500 Received: from [128.112.84.206] (phy-joe.Princeton.EDU [128.112.84.206]) (authenticated bits=0) by csgsmtp200l.Princeton.EDU (8.13.8/8.12.9) with ESMTP id qAUGZkCl024546 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:35:46 -0500 Message-ID: <50B8E062.2000200@princeton.edu> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:35:46 -0500 From: Joe Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <50B8C724.7070906@princeton.edu> <50B8D81D.1010306@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> In-Reply-To: <50B8D81D.1010306@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.9.8185,1.0.431,0.0.0000 definitions=2012-11-30_13:2012-11-30,2012-11-30,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=quarantine_notspam policy=quarantine score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1203120001 definitions=main-1211300140 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ppa04.Princeton.EDU id qAUGZkv6025721 X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) 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: Hi Stefan On 11/30/2012 11:00 AM, Stefan Schäfer wrote: > Hi Joe/K1JT, > > A general question to the NB: What do you think about its performance in > the current state? Normally NB is disabled when starting the program. > Applying a NB to "remove" QRN makes a big effect on LF, you know. > Is there an estimation like 2 dB improvement or so? [...] Content analysis details: (-2.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [128.112.128.215 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: a6b6ffaf48fdddf1ed5c25dc4bf03ee1 Subject: Re: LF: WSJT-X v0.5 r2788 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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=0.3 required=5.0 tests=LINES_OF_YELLING, LINES_OF_YELLING_2,REMOVE_IN_QUOTES 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: 3039ac1d40c950b8e0a061be X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Stefan On 11/30/2012 11:00 AM, Stefan Sch=E4fer wrote: > Hi Joe/K1JT, > > A general question to the NB: What do you think about its performance i= n > the current state? Normally NB is disabled when starting the program. > Applying a NB to "remove" QRN makes a big effect on LF, you know. > Is there an estimation like 2 dB improvement or so? So far I have spent very little time testing or optimizing the WSJT-X=20 noise blanker. Here are some relevant examples from a week ago on 80 meters. The same=20 recorded raw data has been decoded twice using WSJT-X r2788. Everything=20 was the same for the two cases, except for switching NB OFF or ON. UTC Sync dB DT Freq Drift Message ------------------------------------------------- 2156 5 -26 0.3 1349. -1 K1JT G0MGM -09 (NB OFF) 2158 4 -25 0.2 1349. 0 K1JT G0MGM RRR (NB OFF) 2156 9 -22 0.3 1349. -1 K1JT G0MGM -09 (NB ON) 2158 4 -22 0.2 1349. 0 K1JT G0MGM RRR (NB ON) 2200 4 -22 0.1 1346. 1 K1JT I3VWK JN55 (NB OFF) 2200 5 -21 0.1 1346. 1 K1JT I3VWK JN55 (NB ON) Although there's some suggestion that the present noise blanker can=20 improve S/N by 1 to 4 dB, this is hardly a definitive result. If you have some useful example files with a marginal JT9 signal and=20 heavy QRN, please send them along! I may find some time to work on the=20 noise blanker soon. -- 73, Joe, K1JT PS: alas, I listened for your LF signal on 137.42 last night, but did=20 not copy anything. =09