Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13345 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 08:33:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by bells.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 08:33:32 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xmjP-0008UC-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:23:03 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from bob.dera.gov.uk ([192.5.29.90]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12xmjO-0008U7-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:23:02 +0100 Received: by bob.dera.gov.uk; (8.8.8/1.3/10May95) id JAA17348; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:26:52 +0100 (BST) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 12551 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2000 09:18:09 -0000 Received: from gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk (172.16.9.10) by baton.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 2 Jun 2000 09:18:09 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk; id JAA07232; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:18:41 GMT Received: from unknown(146.80.11.40) by gauntlet.mail.dera.gov.uk via smap (3.2) id xma007202; Fri, 2 Jun 00 09:18:26 GMT Received: from frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk (unverified) by mailguard.dera.gov.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:28:30 +0100 Received: by frn-gold-1.dera.gov.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:21:43 +0100 Message-ID: <3617AC3245C2D1118A840000F805359C01AB8C85@pdw-mercury-1.dera.gov.uk> From: "Talbot Andrew" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Slow CW vs. BPSK. & Computer modes Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:21:17 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: >This is all-important. Extremely weak stations require considerable >additional work by the 'computer between the ears' to decipher >what is signal and what is noise on the screen - just like aural >Morse, but visual. This accounts for several extra dB of gain, and >however slow you send the Morse, this advantage is still available. >It would take a very sophisticated computer to be as good. NO ! With these modes the computer is not doing anything to aid extraction of the signal that could not be done with conventional hardware. The 'several extra dB gain' is just there because more noise has been filtered out. The brain is just looking at amplitude changes in this narrow bandwidth and integrating over the signalling period (looking at brightness over the length of a dot). All Spect.... is, is a bank of narrow filters. There is nothing in theory to stop you making a crystal filter, or a whole bank of them this narrow. For a display mechanism, a chart recorder - multiple pen ones are available. All this technology was available in the 1950s as I'm sure those who were around in that era will remember. All the computer does is make this much simpler and cheaper and available to everyone, it is only a filter and display mechanism so please can we stop referring to Spect... as computer modes. It can be done in other ways. Coherent etc and PSK31 are computer modes, SPECT..... is not, it is only a filter bank and display. Real computer / DSP modes mean making use of coherent detection and error correction - and have nothing to do with the speed of the signalling. There seems to be no appreciation on this newsgroup of the real value of coherent detection - that is, having phase information available when the signal is decoded and coherently locking to the signal carrier and bit timing. Simple theory, as I covered in a previous email, shows mathematically the considerable theoretical advantage of coherent detection over non coherent, there is no dispute about this. SO unless your ears / eyes can respond to signal phase, is doesn't matter how much personal pride says that the brain is a marvelous computer, is will never compete against PSK : Given the same TOTAL overall signalling speed and comparing like with like on the end to end link. Repeating CW characters time and time again has to be compared with true error correction and low data rate signalling. Computer error correction does the same job as the eye interpreting between the dots on Spect..., and with well chosen codes can do an awful lot better. These optimum codes are only just beginning to appear thanks primarily to the huge research effort funded by the mobile phone industry, but hopefully Coherent etc will soon make use of them - the equations are public information. The maths is similar, just the implementation different. Coherent etc and PSK31 are computer modes, Spect... is not. Andy G4JNT -- The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful.