Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mp06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 7CFE33800009F; Sun, 23 Sep 2012 09:03:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TFlpJ-0000xy-PF for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2012 14:02:25 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TFlpJ-0000xp-5y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2012 14:02:25 +0100 Received: from imr-ma03.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.41]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TFlpG-0003JZ-5T for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2012 14:02:24 +0100 Received: from mtaout-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.2]) by imr-ma03.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q8ND2B6Z018598; Sun, 23 Sep 2012 09:02:11 -0400 Received: from White (nrbg-4d072de3.pool.mediaWays.net [77.7.45.227]) by mtaout-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPA id D4071E00009D; Sun, 23 Sep 2012 09:02:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: From: "Markus Vester" To: Cc: References: <7F2208077DA448F78F384AF5B55DECA0@White> <505DD1D8.70901@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <829FB31FADAD4D4682EC509D2416C9F4@AGB> <005d01cd98fe$74bc6030$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <0865DC8F-C867-4D80-8149-D2474B51ED63@gmail.com> <505E55F3.8020502@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <004d01cd9926$26739b50$6401a8c0@JAYDELL> <6ECF47A4215C4DED9E68C3058165ACD5@White> <000001cd996c$4d5fe3e0$e81faba0$@com> <42E019CF30CD43129FAFAEE3B1884DE9@White> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 15:02:08 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 12.0.1606 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V12.0.1606 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20110426; t=1348405331; bh=qAjK4OxJH6yL6qbjKkj80bnKF63YDfyNSlDJyMYqRGc=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=wmaC5niqHc7DU2pvOUFRcP7TMIUMIPDXnCtqS/FzqFpTrXvzRM2O6G2ielx+psBZ/ xmx+1PQelX/SNoB/rQNFBRrtvicrEnEnZflKg9skHW4+4Cg7CL0tyEh5W1X4fWdBVZ mJhKrUBOf7G1ETIxDnQKCM56OvTdw28DG1sNcOto= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:377901824:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) 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: Overlapping emails with Stefan ;-) Ok, we'll both be on 136164 then. If all goes well I'll start at 13:30 UT, repeating on odd half hours. 73, Markus From: Markus Vester Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 2:55 PM To: LF: WSPR-32 Test [...] Content analysis details: (-0.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [64.12.206.41 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (markusvester[at]aol.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.8 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: bb13d668bd6c56d236c8970bb5dcbf33 Subject: Re: LF: WSPR-32 Test Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0016_01CD999C.66ED0650" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE, MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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-AUTHENTICATION: mtain-mp06.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : mx.aol.com DKIM : pass x-aol-sid: 3039ac1dc14a505f089060f2 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Dies ist eine mehrteilige Nachricht im MIME-Format. ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01CD999C.66ED0650 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Overlapping emails with Stefan ;-) Ok, we'll both be on 136164 then. If = all goes well I'll start at 13:30 UT, repeating on odd half hours. 73, = Markus From: Markus Vester=20 Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 2:55 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Cc: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk=20 Subject: LF: WSPR-32 Test Hi Terry, the setup for wspr-32_rx is identical to -8, and the same fc edits would = have to be made. Yes you can split accelerated slow WSPR from incoming = normal WSPR. Using audio routing options a (two soundcards and analog = cable) or c (VAC) will intrinsically do that. With option b (analog = loopback through mixer) it depends on the choice of frequencies. I have = now been using fc =3D 3000 Hz from SndOutpt to WSPR, which is well out = of the passband of the SSB RX, so WSPR sees only the converted audio. If you like I will start a WSPR-32 transmission this afternoon, using = odd half hours and 136160 Hz RF (ie. 4 Hz below Stefan's current = WSPR-8). As my antenna can only operate in fair weather I'm not sure how = long I will be able to transmit tonight. =20 Best 73, Markus (DF6NM) From: Terry GW0EZY=20 Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 11:17 AM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: RE: LF: Re: Experimental software for WSPR-8 and -32 Hi Markus =20 Thanks for the opportunity to participate in the experiment! I finally = managed to get it working with spots sent to WSPRnet with your correct = frequency. Unfortunately, I see I am also decoding = =E2=80=9Cnormal=E2=80=9D WSPR because both audio streams are seen by = WSPR. Is it possible to separate? =20 As you have distributed the WSPR32 file I would like to try. Other than = running the bat is there any difference in the set-up? =20 =20 73 Terry =20 From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org = [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Markus Vester Sent: 23 September 2012 09:53 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Cc: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk Subject: Re: LF: Re: Experimental software for WSPR-8 and -32 =20 Thanks very much Jay, Terry and Chris for taking the effort to receive = and report our experiment, and of course to Stefan for suggesting it in = the first place. I think the expected gain in sensitivity is evident, = even though there is no "miracle machine" of course. I have now ended = the WSPR-8 transmission from Nuernberg for today.=20 =20 How would you like to proceed from here? Try WSPR-32 next? Perhaps a = slow WSPR experiment on MF? Or wait for Joe's 8-FSK mode JT8 which might = knock off another dB? =20 BTW I don't use a transverter for MF, but an FE-5680A Rubidium = synthesizer which can be controlled to generate WSPR directly. =20 Best wishes, and have a nice Sunday, Markus (DF6NM) =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01CD999C.66ED0650 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Overlapping emails with Stefan ;-) Ok, = we'll both=20 be on 136164 then. If all goes well I'll start at 13:30 UT, = repeating on=20 odd half hours. 73, = Markus

Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 2:55 PM
Subject: LF: WSPR-32 Test

Hi Terry,
 
the setup for wspr-32_rx is identical = to -8, and=20 the same fc edits would have to be made. Yes you can split = accelerated slow=20 WSPR from incoming normal WSPR. Using audio routing options a (two = soundcards=20 and analog cable) or c (VAC) will intrinsically do that. With option b = (analog=20 loopback through mixer) it depends on the choice of frequencies. I have = now been=20 using fc =3D 3000 Hz from SndOutpt to WSPR, which is well out of the = passband of=20 the SSB RX, so WSPR sees only the converted audio.
 
If you like I will start = a WSPR-32=20 transmission this afternoon, using odd half hours and 136160 Hz RF (ie. = 4 Hz=20 below Stefan's current WSPR-8). As my antenna can only operate in fair = weather=20 I'm not sure how long I will be able to transmit=20 tonight.  
 
Best 73,
Markus (DF6NM)

Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 11:17 AM
Subject: RE: LF: Re: Experimental software for WSPR-8 and=20 -32

Hi=20 Markus

 

Thanks=20 for the opportunity to participate in the experiment! I finally managed = to get=20 it working with spots sent to WSPRnet with your correct frequency.=20 Unfortunately, I see I am also decoding =E2=80=9Cnormal=E2=80=9D WSPR = because both audio streams=20 are seen by WSPR. Is it possible to separate?

 

As=20 you have distributed the WSPR32 file I would like to try. Other than = running the=20 bat is there any difference in the set-up?

 

 

73=20 Terry

 

From:=20 owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org = [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]=20 On Behalf Of Markus Vester
Sent: 23 September 2012=20 09:53
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Cc:=20 rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk
Subject: Re: LF: Re: = Experimental=20 software for WSPR-8 and -32

 

Thanks very = much Jay,=20 Terry and Chris for taking the effort to receive and = report our=20 experiment, and of course to Stefan for suggesting it in the first = place. I=20 think the expected gain in sensitivity is evident, even=20 though there is no "miracle machine" of course. I have = now=20 ended the WSPR-8 transmission from Nuernberg for today.=20

 

How would = you like to=20 proceed from here? Try WSPR-32 next? Perhaps a slow WSPR experiment on = MF?=20 Or wait for Joe's 8-FSK mode JT8 which might knock off another = dB?

 

BTW I don't = use a=20 transverter for MF, but an FE-5680A Rubidium synthesizer = which=20 can be controlled to generate WSPR directly.

 

Best = wishes, and have=20 a nice Sunday,

Markus=20 (DF6NM)

 

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01CD999C.66ED0650--