Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mi04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 2AA0F380000EA; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:48:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TTGqJ-00033o-CO for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 18:47:15 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TTGqI-00033f-Iz for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 18:47:14 +0000 Received: from mail-bk0-f43.google.com ([209.85.214.43]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TTGqF-0002Ew-QP for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 18:47:13 +0000 Received: by mail-bk0-f43.google.com with SMTP id w5so350718bku.16 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:47:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:references:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index :in-reply-to:x-mimeole:x-gm-message-state; bh=qSoMg/Arzr7ubHXr7ENYYfCJe4L14CscYVK8L2rxVPo=; b=KUNcz9PHn18FDtvf6qH57+kBaM0bYJRqjO2u30E4bTDTa5WVJwllKt+Hdb+lmx7cAy 7eueTkC6Mi7hEj5N7ONAEkVOgf3mAdW5Or/w40Mqa9VullvlBJC1Ll/g5A3NG7qzM9tZ MPWTIfNANZd8Gj7O3AtUev5Qh9OOrjTpaopjvbOi2SWIXTBGExQcVgR5ZOVPLJwEi+// pslmgu6UeZaXYEwMwL9ssDl890wN3NBs4D1L+wimw5csLzjuYXPxcJMGsBMxPWJWF1HF fvJQjSrx1pJS1BGYgzFByuDkiNCBnxeIPsRXdU/JwE4BiKdlYFGkEtUr6rH0Kf0HLbJf EZ7Q== Received: by 10.204.9.3 with SMTP id j3mr10850051bkj.15.1351622830625; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:47:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from intelp4 (host81-135-21-245.range81-135.btcentralplus.com. [81.135.21.245]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 1sm1948179bks.3.2012.10.30.11.47.08 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:47:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Terry GW0EZY To: References: <508D92BE.2040500@broadpark.no> <508ED047.1000504@broadpark.no> <508EEDA9.7070905@princeton.edu> <50901CB0.2040405@princeton.edu> Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 18:47:07 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Ac22zTZZLll+tbBqSZKgws7+FKk3ZAAAQe+g In-Reply-To: <50901CB0.2040405@princeton.edu> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmD7pVFBf15WeLWZaYp5l3O9O77Idlhg6NPOh5Bv48I2IfIbH0ayCocIeHOeIMs4dQj+TGqZp3u1+ybuZrF9+j7lM4NDChuBah8u+5iep6BETXUXKhDhBexPRHIbsqQHjr3Aaj6sUWeM+blgBIYCDaNkBKsgZiiYYhX6cBjKlgXTnJYR7DvIykMtAgmz6BXhODgmYT4 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: Joe Many thanks for the new version and for continuing to work on it under your difficult circumstances. Looking forward to the eventual upgrade of WSJT - especially handling soundcards without having to reset each time Win7 renumbers cards - looks like you've solved it in X?? [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.85.214.43 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Scan-Signature: 622b0ca3461797caf37867321c193763 Subject: LF: RE: WSJT-X v0.2, r2706 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=none 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-sid: 3039ac1d7b8c509020e4599d X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Joe Many thanks for the new version and for continuing to work on it under your difficult circumstances. Looking forward to the eventual upgrade of WSJT - especially handling soundcards without having to reset each time Win7 renumbers cards - looks like you've solved it in X?? Are you intending to post this message on the Yahoo rsgb_lf group? Unfortunately we have two groups and I know there are some on the other group also trying WSJT-X. 73 Terry GW0EZY -----Original Message----- From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Joe Taylor Sent: 30 October 2012 18:30 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk Subject: LF: WSJT-X v0.2, r2706 Our big storm was as severe as expected. The two large cities closest to me, Philadelphia and New York, are basically shut down. I am without power at home, and will probably remain so for some days. I write this message from my Princeton University office. I have posted an installation file for WSJT-X revision 2706 on the WSJT web site. The link for direct download is http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/WSJTX_02r2706.exe Changes since r2702 include the following: 1. The problem with "ghost" signals is fixed. 2. A problem causing very long decode times under certain circumstances has been fixed. Please note: decode times on any recent PC should no more than a few seconds! 3. I have re-directed the program's fatal error messages so they will be sent to the command-prompt window from which you started the program. Please send me full reports on any such messages you observe, preferably with details on how to reproduce the problem. ######################################################################### Some additional information ... 1. Yes, the JT9 modes require good stability in all system oscillators. The present JT9 bdecoder does not attempt to track frequency drifts. Such capability will be added, however. We have been using digital modes for EME for nearly ten years now, at 144 MHz and higher. There are more than 1000 WSJT users on EME, using all kinds of rige. We have learned how to deal with reasonable rates of drift. Surely if we can do these things at VHF, we can do them much more easily at MF and LF. 2. If you're sure that you have seen degraded JT9 performance because of frequency stability issues, don't just complain on the LF reflector. Document your case and send me an example file with a drifting JT9 signal. Making WSJT-X and JT9 better is partly YOUR responsibility! 3. In other ways as well, test files are needed. I can make many tests myself, but I can't foresee all the problems others will have. That's what the "Save All" function is for! In these early tests, always run with "Save All" checked, just in case you will want to refer back to something that happened. You may want to send me the file in question. You can always clean out your "Save" directory by using "File | Delete all *.wav files in SaveDir". I need good examples of signals that fail to decode for any unknown reason. Also some good examples of atmospheric or other impulsive noise, for testing the noise blanker. 4. I have added a page of "Hints for New Users" to the online WSJT-X User's Guide, http://www.physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/WSJT-X_Users_Guide.pdf . Please read it! ... and let me know if you find other operational details of WSJT-X that need explanation. This will likely be especially true for those not already familiar with older versions of WSJT. 5. An operational suggestion: In many ways the different JT9 submodes are treated as distinct modes. If you receive a JT9-x signal in a different submode than the one you have selected, you won't decode it. For this reason, if JT9 is to become popular we'll probably need to choose one or two of the submodes for general use, and perhaps assign a narrow slice of the band to each one. Note that "message averaging" in the Rx software can make two or three JT9-2 transmissions as good as one JT9-5 transmission, with the advantage that you will copy sooner if signals are better than required for JT9-5. Message averaging is not yet present in the JT9 decoder... but in future it can be. Again, we have dealt with such issues very effectively on EME -- and can do so at MF/LF, for sure. 6. On the topic of CW, Beacons, WSPR, JT9, etc. I really don't understand what all the fuss is about. Surely there is room for everybody? Maybe I'm just too new here to understand? (Mal, is this mostly just a matter of "Mal being Mal"???) On the HF bands, the WSPR sub-band is just 200 Hz wide. If we did the same on 630 m, the WSPR sub-band would take up less than 3% of the 7 kHz band. If that's too much, we could cut it in half, or even less, and still have enough WSPR space. Moreover, a "slow WSPR", if warranted, would require even less bandwidth. Similar comments apply to JT9. The bandwidth of JT9 signals is significantly less than that of CW, for comparable information rates. There should be enough spectrum for both, even in our narrow MF and LF bands. 7. As for performance comparisons between JT9 and WSPR: WSPR is a mature program, and its decoder has been optimized and tweaked over a period approaching five years. You are playing with JT9 in infancy. With help (as opposed to simple complaints) from users, it will improve rapidly. That's all for today! Here's hoping that we get power restored before too long, and that other aspects of this weather disaster will in time be manageable. -- 73, Joe, K1JT