Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mp05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 48A0B3800009A; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:52:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TbegC-0008VV-8A for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:51:28 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TbegB-0008VJ-JU for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:51:27 +0000 Received: from imr-ma02.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.40]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tbeg9-0002Gf-6u for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 21:51:26 +0000 Received: from mtaout-mb02.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-mb02.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.66]) by imr-ma02.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id A9BC91C00008D for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:51:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from White (nrbg-4dbe6c34.pool.mediaWays.net [77.190.108.52]) by mtaout-mb02.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPA id 4BEBAE0000A9 for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:50:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: From: "Markus Vester" 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> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:50:56 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 12.0.1606 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V12.0.1606 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20110426; t=1353621063; bh=suWE45PW/tiHW2rjJp4Z1Pt0tT+zgh/iy6x7ZAtUz7c=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=bSGaD6KR9H8Mw2Yy1cupfBnzYn/0N9qIsZ5BNN0H0Wm4OcABLSfUcR1FupixLxw6J wtdwheGPLQDsow+O1R0h8zpfSRm/OuAWZqPtcFRb/wJYr2QAtuBsFT14He3ZcUbuwa 9TknWxm2KbXRotAGYCEB+p8Gp/FLCN51UeIly9W8= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:492855008:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) 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 very much for the spot Haldór, glad my little 0.5W ERP are making it your way! My clock should be spot on now, and I'm reading Stefan's last one: 2130 10 12 -1.3 1919.89 0.00 DK7FC JN49IK ... hmmm, still -1.3 s offset. Would that mean that the transmission was ahead of the receiver, or vice versa? [...] Content analysis details: (-0.4 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [64.12.206.40 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (markusvester[at]aol.com) -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 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 7ac7ee35f057d93c45272d71554a4074 Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01CDC903.D52C7D80" 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=HTML_60_70,HTML_MESSAGE, MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mtain-mp05.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : mx.aol.com DKIM : pass x-aol-sid: 3039ac1dc14950ae9e833a7b X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Dies ist eine mehrteilige Nachricht im MIME-Format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CDC903.D52C7D80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks very much for the spot Hald=F3r, glad my little 0.5W ERP are = making it your way! My clock should be spot on now, and I'm reading Stefan's last one: 2130 10 12 -1.3 1919.89 0.00 DK7FC JN49IK ... hmmm, still -1.3 s offset. Would that mean that the transmission was = ahead of the receiver, or vice versa?=20 Best 73, Markus (DF6NM) From: Halld=F3r=20 Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 10:37 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: RE: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz 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_0008_01CDC903.D52C7D80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks very much for the spot Hald=F3r, = glad my=20 little 0.5W ERP are making it your way!
 
My clock should be spot on now, = and I'm=20 reading Stefan's last one:
2130 10 12 -1.3 1919.89 0.00 DK7FC JN49IK
... hmmm, still -1.3 s offset. Would = that mean=20 that the transmission was ahead of the receiver, or vice=20 versa? 
 
Best 73,
Markus (DF6NM)

From: Halld=F3r
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 10:37 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20
Subject: RE: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz

Just=20 got this decode.

 

2120  =20 4  -37   0.9 1026.60  0.00   DK7FC DF6NM=20 K

 

But=20 no decode so far from Stefan.

 

Halld=F3r

 

From:=20 owner-rsgb_lf_group@bl= acksheep.org=20 [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Markus=20 Vester
Sent: 22. n=F3vember 2012 21:18
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
Subject:=20 Re: LF: JT9-10 on 137.42 kHz

 

... sorry=20 Stefan, I think there was a clock error on my side, which might also = have=20 caused the missing decodes. Have restarted the NTP software = again. I'm=20 using wsjtx v0.4 r2746 here which runs nice and=20 smooth.

 

73,=20 Markus

 

From: Stefan = Sch=E4fer=20

Sent: Thursday, = November=20 22, 2012 10:03 PM

To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20

Subject: Re: LF: = JT9-10 on=20 137.42 kHz

 

Thanks Markus,

What do you think about the = -2.2 time=20 delay? I don't know where it may come from. The program is driving the = transmit=20 converter directly, you know.

I was running a very old version of = WSJT-9=20 and updated to the latest one a few minutes ago. However i think that = should=20 make no difference on the transmitter side.

Is there any = noticable=20 difference now?

73, Stefan


Am 22.11.2012 21:45, = schrieb Markus=20 Vester:

Hi=20 Stefan,

 

got the = first decode=20 10 minutes after starting the WSJT-X = monitor:

 

2010 10 14 = -2.2=20 1919.89 0.00 DK7FC JN49IK

 

but for = some reason=20 nil from your latest over at 20:30. Your signal strength = now=20 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=20 audio. I guess he just didn't yet get around to implement an option=20 to shift the waterfall display range,  with us keeping = him so=20 busy on the decoder...

 

Best=20 wishes,

Markus=20 (DF6NM)

 

From: Stefan = Sch=E4fer=20

Sent: Thursday, = November=20 22, 2012 4:07 PM

To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20

Subject: Re: LF: = JT9-10 on=20 137.42 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 = digimodes are=20 at 137.4...137.6 kHz.
So one has to change to 5 FFT bins/pixel to = reach 1420=20 Hz anyway or simply choose 136.4 kHz "dial" and set the center frequency = to 1020=20 Hz.

73, Stefan/DK7FC

------=_NextPart_000_0008_01CDC903.D52C7D80--