Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-di03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 3E8E438000097; Tue, 19 Mar 2013 17:39:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UI3pa-0003NL-Cx for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:12:26 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UI3pZ-0003NC-Vz for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:12:25 +0000 Received: from smtp-vbr19.xs4all.nl ([194.109.24.39]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1UI3pY-0007kx-B6 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:12:24 +0000 Received: from pc-roelof (ndb.demon.nl [82.161.81.65]) by smtp-vbr19.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r2JLBwvF011350 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2013 22:12:03 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from roelof@ndb.demon.nl) To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <3309.377f234c.3e76743b@aol.com> <005101ce23fa$952aa840$6d01a8c0@DELL4> <173B435C07644894A07F177CB5DC86D5@Clemens0811> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 22:11:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Roelof Bakker" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <173B435C07644894A07F177CB5DC86D5@Clemens0811> User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.14 (Win32) X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner 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: Hello Clemens, Thank you for your help. This evening I did a rerun from my PERSEUS recording. This is a bit tricky in regard to timing, however it can be done. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [194.109.24.39 listed in list.dnswl.org] X-Scan-Signature: f62c7cf8eeb8e5a327b71719e9bffff1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes Subject: Re: LF: RE: Re: WSPR -2 SNR 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: 3039ac1da6075148db186144 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hello Clemens, Thank you for your help. This evening I did a rerun from my PERSEUS recording. This is a bit tricky in regard to timing, however it can be done. Instead of the original bandwidth of 540 Hz, I used a filter bandwidth of 2400 Hz. This time WG2XJM produced a SNR of -28, whilst with a bandwidth of 540 Hz the SNR was -33. The difference is 5 dB. The noise in a bandwidth of 540 Hz is 6.5 dB lower than in a bandwidth of 2400 Hz. Joe mentions a bandwidth of 2000 Hz and then the difference is 5.6 dB, which agrees a little better. Note that decoding was not compromised by using the wider filter. The reason that SNR's below -30 dB are rare, might be that in conventional receivers/transceivers it often is not possible to select a 500 Hz filter in USB mode and shift the passband center 1700 Hz in regard to the (suppressed) carrier. 73, Roelof, pa0rdt