Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-da06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 12AF238000283; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:04:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tbdw7-0007WA-Jf for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:03:51 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tbdw7-0007W1-1J for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:03:51 +0000 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.100.212]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tbdw3-0001ty-M0 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:03:49 +0000 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id qAML3PHk009331 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:03:25 +0100 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id qAML3PRS024798 for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:03:25 +0100 Message-ID: <50AE9318.2010705@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:03:20 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <50AE3388.6040503@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <50AE3FBB.2010202@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <98F81F1DE60D4ADBA02F08350A669EAC@White> In-Reply-To: <98F81F1DE60D4ADBA02F08350A669EAC@White> 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: 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. [...] 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 [129.206.100.212 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: e2fb1a5df1e2bc3146a6f486b4640b03 Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030009010404010206030605" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,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: 3039ac1d404e50ae936813d2 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030009010404010206030605 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by relay.uni-heidelberg.de id qAML3PHk009331 Thanks Markus, What do you think about the -2.2 time delay? I don't know where it may=20 come from. The program is driving the transmit converter directly, you kn= ow. I was running a very old version of WSJT-9 and updated to the latest one=20 a few minutes ago. However i think that should make no difference on the=20 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=20 > 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=20 > kHz audio. I guess he just didn't yet get around to implement an=20 > option to shift the waterfall display range, with us keeping him so=20 > busy on the decoder... > Best wishes, > Markus (DF6NM) > > *From:* Stefan Sch=E4fer > *Sent:* Thursday, November 22, 2012 4:07 PM > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > *Subject:* Re: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz > > Oh, i just remember and see that JT9-10 is intended to run on=20 > 1000...1100 Hz audio frequencies. However the bandplan says that=20 > digimodes are at 137.4...137.6 kHz. > So one has to change to 5 FFT bins/pixel to reach 1420 Hz anyway or=20 > simply choose 136.4 kHz "dial" and set the center frequency to 1020 Hz. > > 73, Stefan/DK7FC --------------030009010404010206030605 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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...
 
Best wishes,
Markus (DF6NM)

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
--------------030009010404010206030605--