Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1170; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id t4QNrfD3017932 for ; Wed, 27 May 2015 01:53:42 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1YxOcj-0005Wi-V3 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 27 May 2015 00:51:05 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1YxOcj-0005WZ-Bm for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 27 May 2015 00:51:05 +0100 Received: from omr-m01.mx.aol.com ([64.12.143.75]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1YxOcg-00030s-PI for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 27 May 2015 00:51:04 +0100 Received: from mtaout-mbb02.mx.aol.com (mtaout-mbb02.mx.aol.com [172.26.254.110]) by omr-m01.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id D020570545D91 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 19:50:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from White (ipb21bee4a.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de [178.27.238.74]) by mtaout-mbb02.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPA id 1632938000083 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 19:50:58 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: From: "Markus Vester" To: References: <55649E42.3070906@freenet.de> <8D265EC08008761-1BC8-16D9E@webmail-vm124.sysops.aol.com> <5564B58B.8010802@gmx.net> Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 01:50:57 +0200 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 x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20140625; t=1432684259; bh=FecPcmGY9skJdTjGNxs5yiR2IkIDD95LNc8mo/w/5j8=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=RltHgs9SYf84h186DkpWyV3CQeegtBTH00+eB/Z9KOmPSfSocQhxKtjJOYohLQag2 eSKE6/UqtgZn5nIgfX/chsKeCFMU56o5+tKIdfgMbsreHnm2I7lQ+o4u0BCnzmm4e/ ivoNYQmTtcmSZs2yP4ZZPxfZ6Q4n+1OUOlcpdy04= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1afe6e556506e23de6 X-AOL-IP: 178.27.238.74 X-Scan-Signature: c7a664e36c9ca637ce420897bb72a08a Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0016_01D0981F.9325F1D0" 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.10 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3302 Dies ist eine mehrteilige Nachricht im MIME-Format. ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01D0981F.9325F1D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ... like before, I am running two instances on the same WSPRX = installation (in c:\Programme\wsprx\ on an XP machine). This seems to = work flawlessly, with -2 and -15 decodes uploaded and interleaved = correctly in ALL_WSPR.TXT. The only surprise was that some .c2 and one = .wav file were left over in the save subdirectory, which is normally not = the case. Using spearate DDS hardware and control program, I did a couple of low = power transmissions at either speed (not simultaneously though ;-). = Power was about 25 W into my TX Marconi at half-height, maybe 0.1 W = radiated power or so. Well I have to admit neglecting my QRO duties to = novices tonight ;-) But I was just too lazy to push out the mast, only = to pull it in again before leaving to work tomorrow morning. All the best, Markus (DF6NM) From: Tobias DG3LV=20 Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 8:03 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15? Hi Wolf, Markus ! For testing purposes you could run WSPR-2-mode twice as well instead of=20 -15 and -2. Better use two installations of WSPR-X into two separate directories=20 from Root C:\, as WSPR writes temporary *.wav and *.C2-files to its=20 "save"-subdirectory (even at save=3Dnone). They are deleted immediately=20 after decode. Maybe one instance deletes the file of the concurrent=20 instance. At WSPR-15 and WSPR-2 both beginn their cycle at 00:00 and=20 00:30, so the filenames may be identical, leaving to confusion. There=20 will be NO errormessages warning you! At the beginning of WSPR-X we learned that whitespace characters in=20 directory-names as well as local characters (German "Umlaute") are a bad = idea. This has not changed. Best use old-fashioned DOS names like=20 C:\wspr_2 and C:\wspr_15 or similar. There are no errormessages or=20 crash, it just will not decode anything. (experience of Stefan DK7FC at=20 that time) 73 de dg3lv Tobias Am 26.05.2015 um 18:56 schrieb Markus Vester: > Hi Wolf, > that's exactly what I did too, with same results: wspr-2 running and > uploading fine, no chance to test -15 due to lack of signals. But if > signals had been present on both bands, wouldn't both instances try to > access the same files in the same directory, eg. ALL_WSPR.TXT or > settings? Well, with Andy on -15 we may find out tonight. > All the best, > Markus (DF6NM) > BTW I decoded DF1VB for a while with 6.5 seconds latency, and then no > more - might have been a too large clock offset. > > > -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung----- > Von: wolf_dl4yhf > An: rsgb_lf_group > Verschickt: Di, 26 Mai 2015 6:27 pm > Betreff: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15? > > rrr Stefan and Markus - thanks for the info. > > I have two instances of WSPR-X running, launched from the same > directory, one configured (manually) for WSPR-2 and the other for -15. > Not a single decode from the latter yet. > > I guess as long as they run, the two instances don't interfear (:o) > > 73, > Wolf DL4YHF . > > > Am 26.05.2015 02:19, schrieb Markus Vester: >> Wolf, as far as I know the only way to separate them in the database >> seems to be sorting by frequency (which is not very useful = otherwise). >> There is a peculiarity in that the hh:15 and hh:45 timestamps in the >> database seem to be "rectified" to even minutes (hh:16 and hh:46) at >> midnight UT (just happened to G4JNT entries). >> Stefan, I'm not sure about not using -15 on MF. Even though fading is >> faster and deeper, the WSPR decoder seems to cope well with it. After >> all WSPR-2 is useful on HF where fading happens in seconds. The >> spectrogram of Andy's transmission last night sometimes showed two >> deep fades in one sequence, but it was decoded ok. It has been argued >> that a very short and strong maximum might be utilized by -2 and not >> by -15, and maybe there's not all of the theoretical 9 dB gain, but I >> reckon on average it's not much less. >> Laurence yes your frequencies are correct, dial *474.2 kHz*, RF: = 475.6 >> - 475.8 WSPR-2, 475.8 - 475.825 WSPR-15. >> I wonder if it is possible to run two instances of WSPRX side by side >> on the same machine, one for -2 and one for -15? Or would they crash >> one another? >> 73, Markus >> >> *From:* DK7FC >> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM >> *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org = >> *Subject:* Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A >> >> Am 25.05.2015 22:55, schrieb wolf_dl4yhf: >>> p.s. is there a possibility to filter / display only WSPR-15 decodes >>> from the database, and how widespread is the use of that mode ? >> >> ...there have been a few MF TA tests in WSPR-15 in the early 630m >> days, showing that this mode is to slow for the path on that band. >> These tests have not been very extended though. But most likely there >> is not a 'gain' of 9 dB over WSPR-2. I would assume that successful >> detections are even less likely in that mode over the pond. >> >> 73, Stefan > ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01D0981F.9325F1D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
... like before, I am running two = instances on the=20 same WSPRX installation (in c:\Programme\wsprx\ on an XP machine). This = seems to=20 work flawlessly, with -2 and -15 decodes uploaded and interleaved = correctly=20 in ALL_WSPR.TXT. The only surprise was that some .c2  and one = .wav=20 file were left over in the save subdirectory, which is = normally not=20 the case.
 
Using spearate DDS hardware and control = program, I=20 did a couple of low power transmissions at either speed (not = simultaneously=20 though ;-). Power was about 25 W into my TX = Marconi at=20 half-height, maybe 0.1 W radiated power or so. Well I have to admit = neglecting my QRO duties to novices tonight ;-) But I was = just too=20 lazy to push out the mast, only to pull it in again before = leaving to=20 work tomorrow morning.
 
All the best,
Markus (DF6NM)
 

Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15?

Hi Wolf, Markus !

For testing purposes you could = run=20 WSPR-2-mode twice as well instead of
-15 and -2.

Better use = two=20 installations of WSPR-X into two separate directories
from Root C:\, = as WSPR=20 writes temporary *.wav and *.C2-files to its
"save"-subdirectory = (even at=20 save=3Dnone). They are deleted immediately
after decode. Maybe one = instance=20 deletes the file of the concurrent
instance. At WSPR-15 and WSPR-2 = both=20 beginn their cycle at 00:00 and
00:30, so the filenames may be = identical,=20 leaving to confusion. There
will be NO errormessages warning = you!

At=20 the beginning of WSPR-X we learned that whitespace characters in=20
directory-names as well as local characters (German "Umlaute") are a = bad=20
idea. This has not changed. Best use old-fashioned DOS names like=20
C:\wspr_2 and C:\wspr_15 or similar. There are no errormessages or=20
crash, it just will not decode anything. (experience of Stefan DK7FC = at=20
that time)

73 de dg3lv Tobias

Am 26.05.2015 um 18:56 = schrieb=20 Markus Vester:
> Hi Wolf,
> that's exactly what I did too, = with same=20 results: wspr-2 running and
> uploading fine, no chance to test = -15 due to=20 lack of signals. But if
> signals had been present on both bands, = wouldn't=20 both instances try to
> access the same files in the same = directory, eg.=20 ALL_WSPR.TXT or
> settings? Well, with Andy on -15 we may find out = tonight.
> All the best,
> Markus (DF6NM)
> BTW I = decoded=20 DF1VB for a while with 6.5 seconds latency, and then no
> more - = might=20 have been a too large clock offset.
>
>
> = -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche=20 Mitteilung-----
> Von: wolf_dl4yhf <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
> An:=20 rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= >
>=20 Verschickt: Di, 26 Mai 2015 6:27 pm
> Betreff: Re: LF: 630M WSPR = T/A -=20 WSPR-15?
>
> rrr Stefan and Markus - thanks for the=20 info.
>
> I have two instances of WSPR-X running, launched = from the=20 same
> directory, one configured (manually) for WSPR-2 and the = other for=20 -15.
> Not a single decode from the latter yet.
>
> I = guess as=20 long as they run, the two instances don't interfear (:o)
>
> = 73,
>    Wolf DL4YHF .
>
>
> Am=20 26.05.2015 02:19, schrieb Markus Vester:
>> Wolf, as far as I = know the=20 only way to separate them in the database
>> seems to be = sorting by=20 frequency (which is not very useful otherwise).
>> There is a=20 peculiarity in that the hh:15 and hh:45 timestamps in the
>> = database=20 seem to be "rectified" to even minutes (hh:16 and hh:46) at
>> = midnight=20 UT (just happened to G4JNT entries).
>> Stefan, I'm not sure = about not=20 using -15 on MF. Even though fading is
>> faster and deeper, = the WSPR=20 decoder seems to cope well with it. After
>> all WSPR-2 is = useful on HF=20 where fading happens in seconds. The
>> spectrogram of Andy's=20 transmission last night sometimes showed two
>> deep fades in = one=20 sequence, but it was decoded ok. It has been argued
>> that a = very=20 short and strong maximum might be utilized by -2 and not
>> by = -15, and=20 maybe there's not all of the theoretical 9 dB gain, but I
>> = reckon on=20 average it's not much less.
>> Laurence yes your frequencies = are=20 correct, dial *474.2 kHz*, RF: 475.6
>> - 475.8 WSPR-2, 475.8 - = 475.825=20 WSPR-15.
>> I wonder if it is possible to run two instances of = WSPRX=20 side by side
>> on the same machine, one for -2 and one for = -15? Or=20 would they crash
>> one another?
>> 73,=20 Markus
>>
>> *From:* DK7FC <mailto:selberdenken@posteo.de&= gt;
>>=20 *Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM
>> *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20 <mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksh= eep.org>
>>=20 *Subject:* Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A
>>
>> Am 25.05.2015 = 22:55,=20 schrieb wolf_dl4yhf:
>>> p.s. is there a possibility to = filter /=20 display only WSPR-15 decodes
>>> from the database, and how=20 widespread is the use of that mode ?
>>
>> ...there = have been=20 a few MF TA tests in WSPR-15 in the early 630m
>> days, showing = that=20 this mode is to slow for the path on that band.
>> These tests = have not=20 been very extended though. But most likely there
>> is not a = 'gain' of=20 9 dB over WSPR-2. I would assume that successful
>> detections = are even=20 less likely in that mode over the pond.
>>
>> 73,=20 Stefan
>

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01D0981F.9325F1D0--