Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dl01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id ACCE638000097; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:43:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TbeXz-0008H4-JJ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:42:59 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TbeXy-0008Gv-Vo for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:42:58 +0000 Received: from smtp-out-02.simnet.is ([194.105.232.27]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TbeXw-0002Be-LE for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:42:57 +0000 Authentication-Results: smtp-out-02.simnetpro.is; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-SBRS: 4.5 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AoYCANqarlDCaehFkWdsb2JhbABEgkm/Ng4BAQEBFBIUJ4IeAQEFCAIjWQMCCREEAQEoBxktCQgCBBMLBYgBv3mMN4RRA4gpjViFWIkNhEw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.83,303,1352073600"; d="scan'208,217";a="841657908" Received: from z-proxy-03.simnet.is (HELO mail.simnet.is) ([194.105.232.69]) by smtp-out-02.simnetpro.is with ESMTP; 22 Nov 2012 21:42:35 +0000 Received: from tomasarhagi (85-220-9-104.dsl.dynamic.simnet.is [85.220.9.104]) by mail.simnet.is (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68346900F0 for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:42:35 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Halld=F3r?= To: References: <50AE3388.6040503@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <50AE3FBB.2010202@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <98F81F1DE60D4ADBA02F08350A669EAC@White> <50AE9318.2010705@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <32170B9A68124B478A79DB8E907611B5@White> <015901cdc8f9$81b7f120$8527d360$@simnet.is> In-Reply-To: <015901cdc8f9$81b7f120$8527d360$@simnet.is> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:43:09 -0000 Message-ID: <016c01cdc8fa$5d471090$17d531b0$@simnet.is> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-index: AQIFo91bTjzbE9cBbNV8psO9y4TNjAJwPu8jAvJ6QX0CU5O5VQKbG3EpApAra2EDQj7ZNJcFjkSA Content-Language: is X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-) 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, one from Stefan 2130 10 -21 0.4 1021.48 0.00 DK7FC JN49IK Halldór [...] Content analysis details: (-1.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [194.105.232.27 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 5c5b8e1c608c920535b1da14f570e3ff Subject: RE: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_016D_01CDC8FA.5D498190" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_60_70,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-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d4acf50ae9c9b6d36 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_016D_01CDC8FA.5D498190 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ok, one from Stefan =20 2130 10 -21 0.4 1021.48 0.00 DK7FC JN49IK =20 Halld=F3r =20 From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Halld=F3r Sent: 22. n=F3vember 2012 21:37 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: RE: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz =20 Just got this decode. =20 2120 4 -37 0.9 1026.60 0.00 DK7FC DF6NM K =20 But no decode so far from Stefan. =20 Halld=F3r =20 From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Markus Vester Sent: 22. n=F3vember 2012 21:18 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz =20 ... sorry Stefan, I think there was a clock error on my side, which = might also have caused the missing decodes. Have restarted the NTP software = again. I'm using wsjtx v0.4 r2746 here which runs nice and smooth. =20 73, Markus =20 From: Stefan Sch=E4fer =20 Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 10:03 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz =20 Thanks Markus,=20 What do you think about the -2.2 time delay? I don't know where it may = come from. The program is driving the transmit converter directly, you know. I was running a very old version of WSJT-9 and updated to the latest one = a few minutes ago. However i think that should make no difference on the transmitter side. Is there any noticable difference now? 73, Stefan Am 22.11.2012 21:45, schrieb Markus Vester:=20 Hi Stefan, =20 got the first decode 10 minutes after starting the WSJT-X monitor: =20 2010 10 14 -2.2 1919.89 0.00 DK7FC JN49IK =20 but for some reason nil from your latest over at 20:30. Your signal = strength now appears to be at its usual level. =20 BTW I don't think it was Joe's intention that we should use below 1.1 = kHz audio. I guess he just didn't yet get around to implement an option to = shift the waterfall display range, with us keeping him so busy on the = decoder... =20 Best wishes, Markus (DF6NM) =20 From: Stefan Sch=E4fer =20 Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 4:07 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz =20 Oh, i just remember and see that JT9-10 is intended to run on = 1000...1100 Hz audio frequencies. However the bandplan says that digimodes are at 137.4...137.6 kHz.=20 So one has to change to 5 FFT bins/pixel to reach 1420 Hz anyway or = simply choose 136.4 kHz "dial" and set the center frequency to 1020 Hz. 73, Stefan/DK7FC ------=_NextPart_000_016D_01CDC8FA.5D498190 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Ok, one from Stefan

 

2130=A0 10=A0 -21=A0=A0 0.4 1021.48=A0 0.00=A0=A0 DK7FC = JN49IK

 

Halld=F3r

 

From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org = [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of = Halld=F3r
Sent: 22. n=F3vember 2012 21:37
To: = rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: RE: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 = kHz

 

Just got this decode.

 

2120   4  -37   0.9 1026.60  = 0.00   DK7FC DF6NM K

 

But no decode so far from Stefan.

 

Halld=F3r

 

From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@bl= acksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_g= roup@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Markus = Vester
Sent: 22. n=F3vember 2012 21:18
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 = kHz

 

... sorr= y Stefan, I think there was a clock error on my side, which might also = have caused the missing decodes. Have restarted the NTP software = again. I'm using wsjtx v0.4 r2746 here which runs nice and = smooth.

 

73, = Markus

 <= /o:p>

From:= = Stefan Sch=E4fer =

Sent:= = Thursday, November 22, 2012 10:03 PM

Subject: Re: LF: = JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz

 

Thanks = Markus,

What do you think about the -2.2 time delay? I don't = know where it may come from. The program is driving the transmit = converter directly, you know.

I was running a very old version of = WSJT-9 and updated to the latest one a few minutes ago. However i think = that should make no difference on the transmitter side.

Is there = any noticable difference now?

73, Stefan


Am 22.11.2012 = 21:45, schrieb Markus Vester:

Hi = Stefan,

 

got the = first decode 10 minutes after starting the WSJT-X = monitor:

 

2010 10 14 = -2.2 1919.89 0.00 DK7FC JN49IK

 

but for some = reason nil from your latest over at 20:30. Your signal = strength now appears to be at its usual = level.

 

BTW I don't = think it was Joe's intention that we should use below 1.1 = kHz audio. I guess he just didn't yet get around to implement an option = to shift the waterfall display range,  with us keeping = him so busy on the decoder...<= /span>

 <= /o:p>

Best = wishes,<= /span>

Markus = (DF6NM)<= /span>

 <= /o:p>

From:= = Stefan Sch=E4fer =

Sent:= = Thursday, November 22, 2012 4:07 PM

Subject: Re: LF: = JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz

 

Oh, i = just remember and see that JT9-10 is intended to run on 1000...1100 Hz = audio frequencies. However the bandplan says that digimodes are at = 137.4...137.6 kHz.
So one has to change to 5 FFT bins/pixel to reach = 1420 Hz anyway or simply choose 136.4 kHz "dial" and set the = center frequency to 1020 Hz.

73, = Stefan/DK7FC

------=_NextPart_000_016D_01CDC8FA.5D498190--