Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-de03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 16DD238000081; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 05:10:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TaNtc-0007Hu-4E for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:44:04 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TaNtb-0007Hl-DI for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:44:03 +0000 Received: from out1.ip02ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.238]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TaNtZ-0001yp-Mh for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:44:02 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApsBAJz+qVBcGSo//2dsb2JhbAANOMRVAoINAQEBAQM4EUALCQsECRYPCQMCAQIBRRMIAQEXtAOTEow0gWaDJwOVfJMy X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.83,278,1352073600"; d="scan'208";a="409949647" Received: from host-92-25-42-63.as13285.net (HELO [192.168.2.3]) ([92.25.42.63]) by out1.ip02ir2.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 19 Nov 2012 09:44:00 +0000 Message-ID: <50A9FF63.9040405@psk31.plus.com> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:44:03 +0000 From: g3zjo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <50A39DC2.6050703@psk31.plus.com> <50A39E57.3070006@psk31.plus.com> <50A50963.70307@gmx.net> <50A510FE.4000305@psk31.plus.com> <50A532E3.7010803@psk31.plus.com> <50A641BA.6080108@princeton.edu> <50A66ACB.6010008@psk31.plus.com> <50A97F8F.4010608@princeton.edu> In-Reply-To: <50A97F8F.4010608@princeton.edu> 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: HI Joe, Tobias, LF That's great, it brings back some logic into the observed symptoms. Thank goodness the files I have been flooding Joe with have proved useful, I was beginning to feel I was a complete pain. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Scan-Signature: e6de17d69e46ff4ea8db042ef2cd7e46 Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: JT9-2 failed now JT9-1 500khz + 1400hz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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: 3039ac1d40cb50aa05b07adc X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none HI Joe, Tobias, LF That's great, it brings back some logic into the observed symptoms. Thank goodness the files I have been flooding Joe with have proved useful, I was beginning to feel I was a complete pain. The next version could prove quite exciting. 73 Eddie G3ZJO On 19/11/2012 00:38, Joe Taylor wrote: > Hi Eddie, Tobias, and all, > > I've solved the riddle of Eddie's local JT9-2 transmissions that > failed to decode. > > The problem is, as originally suspected, the result of small frequency > drifts -- in this case acting together with the Gray-coding applied to > the data. > > I will work on a solution this week, including an appropriate > algorithm for measuring and removing small amounts of frequency drift > as part of the decoding process. > > In the meantime, if you're experiencing this problem it's best to > stick with JT9-1 because that sub-mode has the largest tone spacing. > > -- 73, Joe, K1JT > > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2629/5404 - Release Date: 11/18/12 > >