Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11788 invoked from network); 26 Jul 1999 13:31:11 +0100 Received: from magnus.plus.net.uk (HELO magnus.force9.net) (195.166.128.27) by guiness.force9.net with SMTP; 26 Jul 1999 13:31:11 +0100 Received: (qmail 22176 invoked from network); 26 Jul 1999 12:33:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnus.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 26 Jul 1999 12:33:46 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 118jml-0007O4-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jul 1999 13:23:15 +0100 Received: from mail5.svr.pol.co.uk ([195.92.193.20]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 118jml-0007Nz-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jul 1999 13:23:15 +0100 Received: from modem-17.cisapride.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.57.17] helo=default) by mail5.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 118jmi-0007WM-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 26 Jul 1999 13:23:13 +0100 Message-ID: <000001bed761$b696faa0$1139883e@default> From: "wireless" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <000001bed6ee$d989cd80$63976dc2@v3q4v1> Subject: LF: more on spectrogram Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 13:19:53 +0100 Organization: T@ylor Training MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sender: Perhaps I can answer my own question. I have just tried v5.08 on a weak signal that I had recorded. In my opinion it outperforms not just 5.01 but also 4.26. 73 John Taylor G0AKN earth@wireless.freeserve.co.uk