Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1102; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id t13NEL6Q011008 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 00:14:21 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1YImYp-000897-SQ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 23:07:11 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1YImYp-00088y-GC for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 23:07:11 +0000 Received: from omr-m01.mx.aol.com ([64.12.143.75]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1YImYn-00009s-2b for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 23:07:10 +0000 Received: from mtaout-mcb01.mx.aol.com (mtaout-mcb01.mx.aol.com [172.26.50.173]) by omr-m01.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 978017047A85F for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 18:07:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from White (ipb21bee4a.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de [178.27.238.74]) by mtaout-mcb01.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPA id 0627138000093 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 18:07:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <6B8E3E85EAD84D18B2B914F3AFC2CFB0@White> From: "Markus Vester" To: References: <5E5CE58E519E4555A1A38CCC37F8AA17@malHP> <54CBC354.9010604@gmail.com> <54D14FA1.8000003@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 00:07:01 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 12.0.1606 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V12.0.1606 x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20140625; t=1423004826; bh=PgXpfZQQ9r8Bh1qEWwz2VtEaKhaStaUiNdNuYrI/iGQ=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HJt+gSPcRNCXL2P/pJl6yDkwn9v6wyP6jKYniZI5wDse4kkSU9UJRKfWaURxGqBv7 4OdoSIMHAmbrF/fO7dTAxq7ODX28EbQ92XxNVBWKgoJk/erY3sTGXmy1DR6d2+A0nU +3nCKmwwZiWObj44W3Az4Cj3YK6HO5GYgA6jHQw4= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1a32ad54d154963b23 X-AOL-IP: 178.27.238.74 X-Scan-Signature: 74b370a313f780c8b04cdb625468086b Subject: Re: LF: MF WSPR remote RX experiments Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01D0400E.7FCFA9A0" 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.10 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2229 Dies ist eine mehrteilige Nachricht im MIME-Format. ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01D0400E.7FCFA9A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Stefan, interesting, great experiment!=20 I've placed your two MF grabbers side by side. Actually except for the = different scroll rates, the two spectrograms look surprisingly similar. = Even some of the interference seems to be common to both (eg. the = unstable line on 475.35 kHz) - I would have thought this is a local one = from your building but apparently not so. Background noise level also seems to be similar now. But if there is an = improvemant it may show up more dramatically in the daytime when the = external noise floor should be much lower. Best of luck, Markus=20 From: DK7FC=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 11:45 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: Re: LF: MF WSPR remote RX experiments Hi MF, I have improved my new /p receiver for MF. Also Wolf followed a suggestion for SpecLab and released an updated=20 version, many thanks for the service! The suggestion was to add a button = to automatically restart the connection to a web stream. This function is important for my Raspberry VLF/LF/MF link, in case the=20 is a short loss of the connection. Re-connecting works very well and so, = the "near end" of the system, i.e. the link: data-stream ->=20 Spectrogram/grabber/tone/VAC/WSPR et. al. is complete! So, SpecLab reads the stream, generates Spectrograms, CW tone, WSPR=20 passband inclusive frequency conversion to 1500 Hz "dial", jpgs and=20 uploads to the web server, all i need :-) I set up a new experimental grabber at=20 http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/DK7FC_remote_Grabber.html, = now showing the received data stream of MF. I'm excited by the rx performance now (homemade DC). The dynamic range=20 is 100 dB and the band noise at -80 dB f.s., i.e. 80 dB range. Maybe=20 this even allows to transmit without overloading the RX if it is in 2.4=20 km distance? Just some thoughts for the moment ;-) 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 30.01.2015 18:45, schrieb DK7FC: > Hello MF, > > I've continued with tests for my remote RX station. > > Right now i am running a Raspberry pi on a 7 Ah battery. It drives a=20 > WLAN stick and a simple USB sound card, feeding audio via a vorbis=20 > steam through the web. A MF receiver (LO =3D 461 kHz) is running on = the=20 > same battery. The RX is connected to the same antenna where my MF/LF=20 > grabber is connected to. Ah and the Raspberry pi is powered by an=20 > external switch mode regulator, 12V=3D>5V! All in all this consumes=20 > about 250 mA @ 12V. > > I am playing the vorbis audio stream (about 220 kbps) directly in=20 > SpecLab where i can see the full MF spectrum. SpecLab is running a 2.5 = > kHz wide band filter and frequency converter feeding a virtual audio=20 > cable. Finally this is connected to WSPR-X... Now i can compare the=20 > SNR difference on both, the grabber RX and the remote-RX plus web=20 > data stream. The receivers are technically nearly identical as well as = > the filter settings. > > There is some time delay but it is not problematic, no correction=20 > needed for WSPR. I'm getting quite good results from the first=20 > attempt, a SNR difference less than +- 1 dB. > > The remote system is not running in the garden now, just a local test. > > WSPR reports on MF via web streaming are coming in at DK7FC/RPI. > > The test is running for a few hours now :-) > > 73, Stefan/DK7FC > ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01D0400E.7FCFA9A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi=20 Stefan,
 
interesting, great experiment! =
 
I've placed your two MF grabbers side = by side.=20 Actually except for the different scroll rates, the two spectrograms = look=20 surprisingly similar. Even some of the interference seems to be = common to=20 both (eg. the unstable line on 475.35 kHz) - I would have thought this = is a=20 local one from your building but apparently not so.
 
Background noise level also seems to be = similar=20 now. But if there is an improvemant it may show up more = dramatically=20 in the daytime when the external noise floor should be much=20 lower.
 
Best of luck,
Markus 

From:=20 DK7FC
Sent: Tuesday, February = 03, 2015 11:45=20 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: MF WSPR = remote RX=20 experiments

Hi MF,

I have improved my new /p = receiver=20 for MF.

Also Wolf followed a suggestion for SpecLab and released = an=20 updated
version, many thanks for the service! The suggestion was to = add a=20 button
to automatically restart the connection to a web = stream.

This=20 function is important for my Raspberry VLF/LF/MF link, in case the =
is a=20 short loss of the connection. Re-connecting works very well and so, =
the=20 "near end" of the system, i.e. the link: data-stream ->=20
Spectrogram/grabber/tone/VAC/WSPR et. al. is complete!

So, = SpecLab=20 reads the stream, generates Spectrograms, CW tone, WSPR
passband = inclusive=20 frequency conversion to 1500 Hz "dial", jpgs and
uploads to the web = server,=20 all i need :-)
I set up a new experimental grabber at
http://www.iup.uni-heidelberg.de/schaefer_vlf/DK7FC_remote_G= rabber.html,
now showing the received data stream of = MF.

I'm=20 excited by the rx performance now (homemade DC). The dynamic range =
is 100 dB=20 and the band noise at -80 dB f.s., i.e. 80 dB range. Maybe
this even = allows=20 to transmit without overloading the RX if it is in 2.4
km=20 distance?

Just some thoughts for the moment ;-)

73,=20 Stefan/DK7FC


Am 30.01.2015 18:45, schrieb DK7FC:
> = Hello=20 MF,
>
> I've continued with tests for my remote RX=20 station.
>
> Right now i am running a Raspberry pi on a 7 Ah = battery. It drives a
> WLAN stick and a simple USB sound card, = feeding=20 audio via a vorbis
> steam through the web. A MF receiver (LO =3D = 461 kHz)=20 is running on the
> same battery. The RX is connected to the same = antenna=20 where my MF/LF
> grabber is connected to. Ah and the Raspberry pi = is=20 powered by an
> external switch mode regulator, 12V=3D>5V! All = in all=20 this consumes
> about 250 mA @ 12V.
>
> I am playing = the=20 vorbis audio stream (about 220 kbps) directly in
> SpecLab where = i can=20 see the full MF spectrum. SpecLab is running a 2.5
> kHz wide = band filter=20 and frequency converter feeding a virtual audio
> cable. Finally = this is=20 connected to WSPR-X... Now i can compare the
> SNR difference on = both,=20 the grabber RX and the remote-RX  plus web
> data stream. = The=20 receivers are technically nearly identical as well as
> the = filter=20 settings.
>
> There is some time delay but it is not = problematic, no=20 correction
> needed for WSPR. I'm getting quite good results from = the=20 first
> attempt, a SNR difference less than +- 1 = dB.
>
> The=20 remote system is not running in the garden now, just a local=20 test.
>
> WSPR reports on MF via web streaming are coming in = at=20 DK7FC/RPI.
>
> The test is running for a few hours now=20 :-)
>
> 73, = Stefan/DK7FC
>

------=_NextPart_000_0003_01D0400E.7FCFA9A0--