Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mc06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id EC5C3380000B7; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:25:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TyVDL-0005vF-5e for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:24:07 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TyVDK-0005v2-KR for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:24:06 +0000 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TyVDJ-0007kr-09 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:24:05 +0000 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r0OMO4Iq017824 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 23:24:04 +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 r0OMO3bh027811; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 23:24:03 +0100 Message-ID: <5101B47E.9020506@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 23:23:58 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-15?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, Joe Taylor X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) 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: LF, I've added a temporary grabber window to the YV grabber, http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74746618/LF/YV7MAE_LF_Grabber.html which displays the WSPR-15 LF range. The spectrogram uses the same scroll rate and FFT settings as the typical QRSS-60 grabber windows. The idea is to compare the SNR indicated by WSPR-15 to the subjective visual SNR. Of course the RF energy is spread out to a few FFT bins, so the brightness or SNR must be lower compared to a QRSS trace. But anyway it will be interesting and give some idea about the performance of WSPR-15 compared to QRSS-60 or DFCW-90. [...] Content analysis details: (-2.3 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [129.206.210.211 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: cc2e5baae40f8f7a09b47e6877ef0bfb Subject: LF: WSPR-15 test spectrogram in YV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; 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: 3039ac1d604e5101b4cf3a40 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none LF, I've added a temporary grabber window to the YV grabber, http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74746618/LF/YV7MAE_LF_Grabber.html which displays the WSPR-15 LF range. The spectrogram uses the same scroll rate and FFT settings as the typical QRSS-60 grabber windows. The idea is to compare the SNR indicated by WSPR-15 to the subjective visual SNR. Of course the RF energy is spread out to a few FFT bins, so the brightness or SNR must be lower compared to a QRSS trace. But anyway it will be interesting and give some idea about the performance of WSPR-15 compared to QRSS-60 or DFCW-90. 73, Stefan/DK7FC