Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13623 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 12:58:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 6 Jun 2000 12:58:00 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zJUN-0001TB-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:33:51 +0100 Received: from mserv1b.u-net.net ([195.102.240.137]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zJUM-0001T6-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:33:50 +0100 Received: from rsgb.u-net.com ([195.102.80.225] helo=rsgb.org.uk) by mserv1b.u-net.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #63) id 12zIkh-0003zU-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 13:46:41 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from miked by rsgb.org.uk with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Tue, 06 Jun 2000 13:30:38 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 13:30:36 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: LF: Re: Copying CW In-reply-to: <001701bfcfa9$ea7322e0$1fd499d4@w8k3f0> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Return-Path: miked@mail.rsgbhq Message-ID: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Dick, PA0SE wrote: > I have tested "pseudo-stereophonic" reception of CW by feeding the halves > of a stereo headphone via series tuned circuits resonating at 1002 and > 842Hz (922 ± 80Hz) respectively. At first the result was pleasant; it > sounded like being in a room with the wanted 922Hz signal in the centre. > But it did not take me long to find out that it contributed absolutely > nothing to the readibility of signals under difficult conditions. > It proved again that our sophisticated ear/brain system cannot be helped > by such primitive contraptions. Yes, I'm aware of this but am keeping an open mind. I have already done some interesting tests that combine some of the advantages of both analogue and digital techniques. One crude test last weekend produced significantly better readability of a weak station in heavy static than was available either direct from my radio, or via a DSP unit. What sparked off this idea was the number of people who agreed that listening to a pair of headphones on the bench gave them better reception than when the phones were on the head. Therefore there appears to be at least one uninvestigated way of enhancing reception which at present relies on chance and acoustics. I agree that all theoretical work tends to ignore the colossal advantage of using the brain, but I am not a theorist and would like to find ways of helping the brain along a bit. Thanks very much to all those who replied re time delays. As soon as I have reached some conclusions I will report my results - or that Dick is indeed right and the brain can't be helped at all! Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm