Return-Path: Received: from rly-da09.mx.aol.com (rly-da09.mail.aol.com [172.19.129.83]) by air-da01.mail.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILINDA013-a8e4aabe1e036c; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:01:12 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-da09.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDA096-a8e4aabe1e036c; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:01:05 -0400 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1MmWsv-0003Ew-Ux for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 18:59:41 +0100 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1MmWsv-0003En-1E for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 18:59:41 +0100 Received: from mail-bw0-f212.google.com ([209.85.218.212]) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MmWsl-0007an-Uf for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 18:59:34 +0100 Received: by bwz8 with SMTP id 8so1513720bwz.4 for ; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:59:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=tJW8LiWubLksZVcW3qdCRZSshmLqEYFEru+e1fXmF3g=; b=Mcr9dz+WaCn9P1phXGcc2nbQBSDSWMIlrtsFeAH3gzgYZkYqQIJpEfa0Za/1O0fiNI p5/KEojwP76+VQXnimI4G/2oPa47E0fitKMhgUHllSmdt3DKQxTf+EX8rM41M9P5eKcC W6atM0yXxOZlK/+ycL36EkJkklyQOALNk8OCA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=HlQOIHbMZ119tnObs0HTNVWKYM70GTXIfZ3CfSNDuXoP4nO8dicwgroEGoo1umGJhD 7N1XvO1eCe/AMmT0D0ulpuwv1uUQ4KCyuBVad/HGEvQARJNTwTQR2QniC+B9j9Ez5w5h ZuOJ81XjSwAh0dVGeaxAXDaeYJN6kRdr2qwko= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.145.165 with SMTP id s37mr401864hba.43.1252778365139; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:59:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2EF7A94CAA43488987433D9972EE4279@AGB> References: <4AAB7F2D.25346.12CA10F@dave.davesergeant.com> <925667FA055F4AEEB8A57B77C90220B3@JimPC> <2EF7A94CAA43488987433D9972EE4279@AGB> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 18:59:25 +0100 Message-ID: From: Andy Talbot To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org DomainKey-Status: good (testing) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: Re: WOLF/WSPR Sound card issues Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f6d2f06fbbbe04736531cd 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=HTML_MESSAGE 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-IP: 193.82.116.20 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-m201.2 ; domain : googlemail.com DKIM : pass X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) --001485f6d2f06fbbbe04736531cd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 My Dell Inspiron Laptop, when 11025Hz sampling rate is requested, actually gives 10800Hz (near enough) which was enough to completely kill JT4 decoding. (JT4 is a WSJT mode, not totally unlike WSPR in its coding/error correction and use of four frequency FSK with 50% embedded sync, but with a much wider frequency shift and 48 second Tx period with 4.375Hz symbol interval). The WSJT software itself measures and reports sampling rate errors and allows the user to enter the values into the setup - quite why Joe never made this an automatic procedure I wonder.... the 'JNT theory why it was so far out... The old sampling rate of 11025 has factors of (3 * 3 * 5 * 5 * 7 * 7) However 12000Hz has factors 5 * 5 * 5 * 3 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 So I'm guessing 10800 (factors of 5 * 5 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2) is adopted as it has more in common with 12000 and keeps the firmware simpler. Frequency error of 2.08% which I'm sure a musician would detect As WSPR is the first from the WSJT stable to use 12000 sampling, presumably he saw no need to put the correction into the original WSPR software. Andy www.g4jnt.com (working on modifying WSPR beacon software for the ancient AD9851 DDS, as I have a couple spare now) this email has been scanned for political correctness by the nanny state 2009/9/12 Graham > Jim, > > Re the size of error > > With the delta-4 card, the tx frame could be observed to be some 2 or > more seconds short of the expected time window > > 1 % ~ 1.2 seconds , 2 % ~ 2.4 seconds, assumedly indicating the clock on > the card runs fast, but as to the influence of the system by the software, > dma, irq etc Im not sure, one problem is I expect is the soundcards are > not designed to be the interface for a accurate frequency meter / > generator and as such compromises 'must' exist ... > > The only comparison I can think of is the running of a movie at shot at > 24 fps for projection , on a tele cinie system at 25 fps to sync with the > uk 50 hz frame rate , giving a lift in the sound pitch of + ~ 4 % ? , I > know that this dose generate irate phone calls from musicians pointing out > that orchestras appear to be 'sharp' but not many hi .. so its possible > a tolerance of 2 % may be accepted > > G . > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "James Moritz" > Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 1:33 PM > To: > Subject: LF: Re: WOLF/WSPR Sound card issues > > > >> Dear Dave, >> >> AC 97 >> (http://download.intel.com/support/motherboards/desktop/sb/ac97_r23.pdf ) >> specifies 48kHz as the basic, obligatory sample rate for compliant sound >> cards, so yours should certainly be able to do it - to find more info, you >> could try looking for the audio codec chip on the motherboard - usually a >> very tiny square 48pin thing near the audio connectors, and searching >> using >> its type number. But I guess what sample rate is actually used will depend >> on software, drivers and so forth - perhaps someone with experience of PC >> sound card programming could advise. Looking at the audio settings in the >> Windows control panel may well tell you what sample rates are possible. >> Also, some software allows you to select different sample rates, for >> instance Spectrum Lab, but not Argo as far as I know. >> >> The errors you are getting in the measured frequency seem to be enormous - >> 2 >> or 3%, which would certainly give rise to problems. >> >> Cheers, Jim Moritz >> 73 de M0BMU >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Sergeant" > > >> To: >> Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 11:59 AM >> Subject: LF: WOLF/WSPR Sound card issues >> >> >> It seems that both WOLF and WSPR are >> >>> designed for current sound cards which have 48,000 and 96,000 clock >>> rates. Mine is obviously from the old stable so has 44,100 etc rates. >>> >>> For information it is the sound card interface built into the >>> motherboard, an ASR Rock K7S41GX dating from 2003 with generic AC'97 >>> sound. Zilch more given about its spec in the manual. >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.93/2365 - Release Date: 09/12/09 >> 06:37:00 >> >> > > > --001485f6d2f06fbbbe04736531cd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My Dell Inspiron Laptop, when=A0 11025Hz sampling rate is requested,= actually gives 10800Hz (near enough) which was enough to completely kill= JT4 decoding.=A0 (JT4 is a WSJT mode, not totally unlike WSPR in its codi= ng/error correction=A0and use of four frequency FSK with 50% embedded sync= , but with a much wider frequency shift and 48 second Tx period with 4.375= Hz symbol interval).
=A0
The WSJT software itself measures and reports sampling rate errors an= d allows the user to enter the values into the setup - quite why Joe never= made this an automatic procedure I wonder....
=A0
the 'JNT theory why it was so far out...
The old sampling rate of 11025=A0has factors of (3 * 3 * 5 * 5=A0* 7= * 7)
However 12000Hz has factors=A0=A0=A05 * 5 * 5 *=A03 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2= * 2 * 2
So I'm guessing 10800 (factors of=A0 5 * 5 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 2 * 2 *= 2 * 2) =A0is=A0adopted as it has more in common with 12000 and keeps the= firmware simpler.
=A0
Frequency error of 2.08% which I'm sure a musician would detect
=A0
As WSPR is the first from the WSJT stable to use 12000 sampling, pres= umably he saw no need to put the correction into the original WSPR softwar= e.=A0=A0
=A0
(working on modifying WSPR beacon software for the ancient AD9851 DDS= , as I have a couple spare now)

this email has been scanned for political correctness by the nann= y state


2009/9/12 Graham <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>=
Jim,

Re the =A0size of= error

With the =A0delta-4 card, the =A0tx frame could be observed= to =A0be =A0some =A02 or more seconds short of the =A0expected time =A0wi= ndow

1 % ~ =A01.2 seconds , 2 % =A0~ 2.4 =A0seconds, assumedly indicating= the clock on the =A0card runs fast, but as to the =A0influence of the sys= tem by the software, dma, irq etc =A0Im not =A0sure, one problem is I expe= ct is the soundcards are not =A0designed to be the =A0interface for =A0a= accurate =A0frequency meter / generator and as such compromises 'must= ' exist ...

The only =A0comparison I can think of is the running of a movie at =A0= shot at 24 fps =A0for projection , on a tele cinie system at =A025 fps to= =A0sync with the uk 50 hz frame rate =A0, giving a lift in the sound =A0p= itch of + ~ 4 % ? , I know that this dose generate =A0irate phone =A0calls= from musicians pointing out that orchestras appear to =A0be =A0 'shar= p' but not many =A0hi .. so its possible a tolerance of =A02 % =A0may= be accepted

G .

--------------------------------------------------
From:= "James Moritz" <james.moritz@btopenworld.com>
Sent: Saturd= ay, September 12, 2009 1:33 PM=20

To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subjec= t: LF: Re: WOLF/WSPR Sound card issues=20



Dear Dave,

AC 97(http://download.intel.com/support/motherboard= s/desktop/sb/ac97_r23.pdf )
specifies 48kHz as the basic, obligatory sample rate for compliant soundcards, so yours should certainly be able to do it - to find more info,= you
could try looking for the audio codec chip on the motherboard - us= ually a
very tiny square 48pin thing near the audio connectors, and searching usin= g
its type number. But I guess what sample rate is actually used will= depend
on software, drivers and so forth - perhaps someone with experi= ence of PC
sound card programming could advise. Looking at the audio settings in the<= br>Windows control panel may well tell you what sample rates are possible.=
Also, some software allows you to select different sample rates, for instance Spectrum Lab, but not Argo as far as I know.

The errors yo= u are getting in the measured frequency seem to be enormous - 2
or 3%,= which would certainly give rise to problems.

Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU

----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Sergeant&= quot; <dave@= davesergeant.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 11:59 AM
Subject: LF: WOLF/WSPR Soun= d card issues


It seems that both WOLF and WSPR are
designed for current sound car= ds which have 48,000 and 96,000 clock
rates. Mine is obviously from the= old stable so has 44,100 etc rates.

For information it is the sound card interface built into the
mothe= rboard, an ASR Rock K7S41GX dating from 2003 with generic AC'97
sou= nd. Zilch more given about its spec in the manual.







No virus found in this inc= oming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.93/2365 - Release Date: 09/12/09= 06:37:00





--001485f6d2f06fbbbe04736531cd--