Return-Path: Received: from rly-md03.mx.aol.com (rly-md03.mail.aol.com [172.20.29.141]) by air-md03.mail.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILINMD031-8f54ad5c62b28; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:38:23 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-md03.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMD035-8f54ad5c62b28; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:38:04 -0400 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1My365-00066i-0h for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:36:53 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1My364-00066Z-8K for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:36:52 +0100 Received: from web28102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.146.182.122]) by relay1.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1My34Z-0008WS-CZ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:35:19 +0100 Received: (qmail 99195 invoked by uid 60001); 14 Oct 2009 12:36:35 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.uk; s=s1024; t=1255523795; bh=/VrEvdY8FS9SZkJC8ATMhJhRv1I3A+6PLtblAQlp8Fs=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=f9pZx8nkpgzkzGS+ZGwBe4UhFcnUNHvLQPlVVXcec08MUOdrQG8tyGmI2CEPtm6IHa1Uiy81AF2sMkdWdaGckbxJTfVb40YqbCHfMle1MnY4vZv34Wsjn1r/9ndFX4oCtY6YHzibNgyPLSbB0nzIE5Lm8QizFIBeY+MI8AwXHsU= DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.uk; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=XEpbQKuH/nU2hv3N6HOU5hX3uazxKprJ8inwZBxSSDJyNBUVq4X+BMF5e12zYDDk5wjpPOaNWUsgjA+vaNAqUCsHXw6piiAJBNp6Np8psWCwvL+7P0VxwZ++6Ii313aShLVEtauNS5BDkBV2fL6cUdMbm5TLdIKRv3dRJxqtxyY=; Message-ID: <734614.81731.qm@web28102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: eJjOCv0VM1noeHGof4c_VA22g16CnCUjfRTaGkKJEUrBI5xhXJFLssUjhTAp7Dj2AHIbzgw6YEI_Ev3fT.ztOMn1Z0aaCvdBh8gCVg1fbdBrumdcUo.UH88l7NWEXXjmqOtcnNb10hUyhxGCGRcM0k4gZp4HVznZVbKy3NrldC1CbwVGXWjEJCe1fTJU_R5lQulUScudseo2faCa.FubsLPh5h0aAYFeeSvltZNkBkXoaHsFs0jEeU1XG8xaiiZbP4YDV.l8Lg22NGj6miaf.JFAy5nhb_iFGJw_o4U2LA6bwHZw6O60dUU1ysvBaCaptNcQt9A_nY4- Received: from [86.130.66.3] by web28102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:36:35 GMT X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/7.0.14 YahooMailWebService/0.7.347.3 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:36:35 +0000 (GMT) From: M0FMT To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Karma: unknown: DomainKey-Status: good (testing) Subject: RE: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1031628079-1255523795=:81731" 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-m250.1 ; domain : yahoo.co.uk DKIM : pass --0-1031628079-1255523795=:81731 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi LF group =C2=A0 Thank you Jim and Laurence for you interest and information. =C2=A0 Lifting this from Wikipedia ....... "With standard ADSL (annex A), the ban= d from 25.875=C2=A0kHz to 138=C2=A0kHz is used for upstream communication,= while 138=C2=A0kHz =E2=80=93 1104=C2=A0kHz is used for downstream communi= cation" .......=C2=A0 Jim is right about 136 and I find the band unaffected it is in=C2=A0a dead= spot in the ADSL spectrum, assuming its clean of course. I have considered filters that are advertised but since we have a weak ADS= L signal here, easily knocked out by Amateur TX on virtually any band I fe= lt that a filter would make things worse in that respect. The reasoning be= ing that a filter notch sitting right in the middle of the down stream cha= nnel would adversely affect the down load times which are only a tad bette= r than dial up here. I may make something and try it, thanks for putting= that idea into the mix. =C2=A0 It doesn't help that my antenna runs above the BT line (at right angles)= =C2=A0to my neighbours place but having said that trials at the furthest= distance from the line using a frame ant and battery run RX things were= no better. However I did not earth the LW=C2=A0that I will try next time. =C2=A0 Thanks to all for the inputs I have filed them for reference. =C2=A0 73 petefmt =C2=A0 --- On Wed, 14/10/09, Laurence BY3A-KL1X China wrote: From: Laurence BY3A-KL1X China Subject: RE: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wednesday, 14 October, 2009, 3:39 AM I had the same problem on 500 up in KL7 at home. I ended up moving the=C2= =A0modem to the garage where the telephone line comes out of the ground an= d keeping the ADSL loaded wiring as short as possible - =C2=A0then on the= telephone side of the router=C2=A0=C2=A0I connected up a pair of reasonab= le quality of seried ADSL filters=C2=A0outbound for normal telephone wirin= g=C2=A0in the house. From 20 over noise I cant "see=C2=A0it"=C2=A0now as= the big antennae has been chocked off. I only use wireless around the pro= perty so it wasnt an issue. =C2=A0 Next job is to choke off the noise from the AC power line coming out of th= e ground - its awful. =C2=A0 relates to MTA Palmer Alaska solutions ADSL =C2=A0 Laurence KL 1 X =C2=A0 > From: james.moritz@btopenworld.com > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:10:53 +0100 > Subject: Re: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise >=20 > Dear Pete, Paul-Henrik, >=20 > M0FMT wrote: > ....> Well I can only conclude it is ADSL because it is just raising the= =20 > noise floor it is very subtle not really identifiable like say TV LTB,= it's=20 > a mush...> >=20 > I have problems with ADSL on 500kHz at my QTH - it sounds like "white no= ise"=20 > with no audible distinctive features I can detect. The noise can be abou= t=20 > 10 - 20dB over the band noise here over a fairly wide bandwidth in the= MF=20 > range. It does not seem to be a problem at 136k, perhaps because this is= in=20 > the guard band between upstream and downstream ADSL signals. It is easy= to=20 > tell if you are experiencing noise from your own ADSL connection -=20 > disconnect the incoming phone line (probably just unplugging the modem= from=20 > the phone socket will be enough) and there will be a reduction in noise= =20 > level. Unfortunately, there also seems to be a significant level of simi= lar=20 > noise here from other sources, probably my neighbors' ADSL via the overh= ead=20 > phone lines. >=20 > I have had some success with a noise-cancelling arrangement here, where= the=20 > ADSL noise is sampled using a current transformer made by passing the=20 > incoming phone line through a ferrite core, and summed with the signal= from=20 > loop antennas via a variable phase-shifting and gain-adjusting network,= =20 > which is adjusted for a null in the noise. Also, moving the loop around= the=20 > QTH shows some positions are better than others. Actually, life is a bit= =20 > more complicated at this particular QTH, since there also seems to be=20 > wide-band noise originating as very low-level sidebands from the local= =20 > broadcast stations. This requires a second noise-cancelling network to= null=20 > noise from that direction. Also, it was necessary to insert a relay in= =20 > series with the loading coil to disconnect the TX antenna on receive,=20 > otherwise this coupled more noise into the receiving antennas. But when= it=20 > is all adjusted properly, the overall noise level can be reduced in=20 > favourable directions by about 20dB, which is worth doing. >=20 > Cheers, Jim Moritz > 73 de M0BMU=20 >=20 >=20 Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft=E2=80=99s powerful SPAM protection.= Sign up now.=20 =20 --0-1031628079-1255523795=:81731 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi LF group
 
Thank you Jim and Laurence for you interest and information.
 
Lifting this from Wikipedia ....... "With standard ADSL (annex A), th= e band from 25.875 kHz to 138 kHz is used for upst= ream communication, while 138 kHz =E2=80=93 1104 kHz is used for= downstream communication" ....... 
Jim is right about 136 and I find the band unaffected it is in a= dead spot in the ADSL spectrum, assuming its clean of course.
I have considered filters that are advertised but since we have a wea= k ADSL signal here, easily knocked out by Amateur TX on virtually any band= I felt that a filter would make things worse in that respect. The reasoni= ng being that a filter notch sitting right in the middle of the down strea= m channel would adversely affect the down load times which are only a tad= better than dial up here. I may make something and try it, thanks for put= ting that idea into the mix.
 
It doesn't help that my antenna runs above the BT line (at right angl= es) to my neighbours place but having said that trials at the furthes= t distance from the line using a frame ant and battery run RX things were= no better. However I did not earth the LW that I will try next time.=
 
Thanks to all for the inputs I have filed them for reference.
 
73 petefmt
 
--- On Wed, 14/10/09, Laurence BY3A-KL1X China <hellozerohel= lozero@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Laurence BY3A-KL1X China <hellozerohe= llozero@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise
To: rsgb_l= f_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Wednesday, 14 October, 2009, 3:39 AM
I had the same problem on 500 up in KL7 at home. I ended up moving the&nbs= p;modem to the garage where the telephone line comes out of the ground and= keeping the ADSL loaded wiring as short as possible -  then on the= telephone side of the router  I connected up a pair of reasonab= le quality of seried ADSL filters outbound for normal telephone wirin= g in the house. From 20 over noise I cant "see it" now as= the big antennae has been chocked off. I only use wireless around the pro= perty so it wasnt an issue.
 
Next job is to choke off the nois= e from the AC power line coming out of the ground - its awful.
 relates to MTA Palmer Alaska solutions ADSL

 
Laurence KL= 1 X
 
> From: james.moritz@btopenworld.com
> To: rsgb= _lf_group@blacksheep.org
> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:10:53 +0100
= > Subject: Re: LF: MOFMT ADSL noise
>
> Dear Pete, Paul-Henrik,
>
> M0FMT wrote:
> ....> Well I can on= ly conclude it is ADSL because it is just raising the
> noise floor= it is very subtle not really identifiable like say TV LTB, it's
>= a mush...>
>
> I have problems with ADSL on 500kHz at my= QTH - it sounds like "white noise"
> with no audible distinctive= features I can detect. The noise can be about
> 10 - 20dB over the= band noise here over a fairly wide bandwidth in the MF
> range. It= does not seem to be a problem at 136k, perhaps because this is in
>= ; the guard band between upstream and downstream ADSL signals. It is easy= to
> tell if you are experiencing noise from your own ADSL connect= ion -
> disconnect the incoming phone line (probably just unpluggin= g the modem from
> the phone socket will be enough) and there will= be a reduction in noise
> level. Unfortunately, there also seems= to be a significant level of similar
> noise here from other sources, prob= ably my neighbors' ADSL via the overhead
> phone lines.
> > I have had some success with a noise-cancelling arrangement here, wh= ere the
> ADSL noise is sampled using a current transformer made by= passing the
> incoming phone line through a ferrite core, and summ= ed with the signal from
> loop antennas via a variable phase-shifti= ng and gain-adjusting network,
> which is adjusted for a null in th= e noise. Also, moving the loop around the
> QTH shows some position= s are better than others. Actually, life is a bit
> more complicate= d at this particular QTH, since there also seems to be
> wide-band= noise originating as very low-level sidebands from the local
> bro= adcast stations. This requires a second noise-cancelling network to null=
> noise from that direction. Also, it was necessary to insert a re= lay in
> series with the loading coil to disconnect the TX antenna on rec= eive,
> otherwise this coupled more noise into the receiving antenn= as. But when it
> is all adjusted properly, the overall noise level= can be reduced in
> favourable directions by about 20dB, which is= worth doing.
>
> Cheers, Jim Moritz
> 73 de M0BMU
= >
>

Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft=E2=80=99s powerful SPAM protection.= Sign up now.
<= br> =20 --0-1031628079-1255523795=:81731--