Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dg05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id C63F53800014B; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:30:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SozSk-0000OT-A2 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:08:26 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SozSj-0000OK-R5 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:08:25 +0100 Received: from mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.49]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SozSi-0004DG-2z for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:08:24 +0100 Received: from aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20120711160823.PGHX15330.mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:08:23 +0100 Received: from [192.168.2.2] (really [82.5.252.56]) by aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.3.00.04.00 201-2196-133-20080908) with ESMTP id <20120711160823.LETB16631.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@[192.168.2.2]> for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:08:23 +0100 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:08:07 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <4FFDB2F7.23256.4AA6AB0@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> In-reply-to: References: , <4FFD5313.6103.333D978@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com>, X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41) Content-description: Mail message body X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=JvdXmxIgLJv2/GthKqHpGJEEHukvLcvELVXUanXFreg= c=1 sm=0 a=uObrxnre4hsA:10 a=9YlaCzn6_68A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=NLZqzBF-AAAA:8 a=F3M5lZpKAAAA:8 a=GoqwstHNAAAA:8 a=QZam-5MpAAAA:8 a=4mPj49EQmXN6MyQmguEA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=_dQi-Dcv4p4A:10 a=wk6s2zzMB60A:10 a=o5iCBryZS0UA:10 a=s9P2n0BsFJu6cwkL:21 a=XRuwOtN-IN--2cnH:21 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: OK, Graham, Many thanks for the helpful reply. Of course it helps if you have a bomb-proof radio that doesn't mind having close-in strong QRM. The main problem with my old IC-706 is the inability to switch off the AGC. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [81.103.221.49 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Scan-Signature: 1bc6486c2865e7dc2ff7578e6d7fc226 Subject: Re: LF: OPERA Question Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT 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=CASHCASHCASH 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-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:482381248:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d410d4ffdaa2202e3 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none OK, Graham, Many thanks for the helpful reply. Of course it helps if you have a bomb-proof radio that doesn't mind having close-in strong QRM. The main problem with my old IC-706 is the inability to switch off the AGC. de Mike ======= > Welcome to the crazy world of JR ! > > The basic explanation is the narrow filters increase the noise > power in a limited bandwidth , ringing due to the Q , similar to > CW , narrow filters tend to round the CW signal > > The DSP engine is better equipped to differentiate between > carrier and noise and has a much greater dynamic range , so > optimum results are obtained , when the signal is presented to the > interface, as close to to the original as possible , the DSP > filter profiles are tailored to the mode/speed in use > > This can be noticed with the new generation of SDR support > software , where audio/voice recovery can be superior to > conventional hardware based systems > > With hardware filtering , there are transit (group) delays which > can alter the amplitude / time , either from on/off keying or > with FSK, this can be observed when sending wide band FSK , > although the audio level remains constant and 'phase continuous' > , its possible some times to see a 'am modulation' envelope on > the carrier ... $$$$ can solve this problem , but for most > Ham kit its something that 'happens' > > Physical constraints , if there is a very large carrier in the > pass band and this is pushing the hardware into non-linearity / > A/D to over range , giving quantising errors, then , yes > filtering would help , but its more likely its the analogue path > that's causing intermod products .....reducing the rf/if gain will > provide the solution > > I think that's about the picture , if Jim's about , im sure he > will fill in the gaps > > 73 -G.. > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Mike Dennison" > Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 10:18 AM > To: ; > Subject: Re: LF: OPERA Question > > >> Narrow IF filters are not desirable and reduce the > >> performance of the demodulator , better simply use SSB filter > >> GL ..73 -G.. > > > > Graham, > > > > Why is that the case? What does the considerable extra bandwidth > > achieve? Is the SSB bandwidth optimal, or would it be even better > > with 10kHz bandwidth, or 100kHz?. Why is 3kHz better than perhaps > > 1kHz or 2kHz? > > > > At first glance it appears crazy to let in all sorts of adjacent > > channel QRM (the bandwidth is more than ten times the size of the > > entire Opera window) when using a mode that occupies a fraction of > > 1Hz. > > > > Is it simply that the 1.7kHz Tx tone is high enough for the SSB > > filter to kill its harmonics, and on receive it is difficult to get > > a 1.7kHz tone out of a CW filter, even with passband shifting. > > > > Am I missing something? > > > > 73 de Mike, G3XDV > > g3xdv.blogspot.co.uk > > ================ > > > > > > >