Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dk06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 4D9D1380000CA; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:01:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TeT1O-0004ss-M2 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:00:58 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TeT1O-0004sj-9M for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:00:58 +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 1TeT1M-0006Ox-BG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:00:57 +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 qAUG0YVu024775 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 17:00:35 +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 qAUG0Y1q006362 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 17:00:34 +0100 Message-ID: <50B8D81D.1010306@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 17:00:29 +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: <50B8C724.7070906@princeton.edu> In-Reply-To: <50B8C724.7070906@princeton.edu> 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: Hi Joe/K1JT, A general question to the NB: What do you think about its performance in the current state? Normally NB is disabled when starting the program. Applying a NB to "remove" QRN makes a big effect on LF, you know. Is there an estimation like 2 dB improvement or so? [...] 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 X-Scan-Signature: 5c335215f1b3de26d890ee84d49616ce Subject: Re: LF: WSJT-X v0.5 r2788 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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=REMOVE_IN_QUOTES 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: 3039ac1db40a50b8d87236df X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Joe/K1JT, A general question to the NB: What do you think about its performance in the current state? Normally NB is disabled when starting the program. Applying a NB to "remove" QRN makes a big effect on LF, you know. Is there an estimation like 2 dB improvement or so? 73, Stefan Am 30.11.2012 15:48, schrieb Joe Taylor: > To: Users of WSJT-X > From: Joe Taylor, K1JT > > Revision 2788 of the experimental program WSJT-X has been posted. As > usual, a link to it appears on the WSJT web site: > > http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/wsjt.html > > The following is a direct link to the installation file: > > http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/WSJTX_05r2788.exe > > I have posted a ChangeLog of WSJT-X program revisions at > > http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/wsjtx_changelog.txt > > Henceforth you should check the ChangeLog for information on what has > been changed in new revisions. > > -- 73, Joe, K1JT