Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: WSJT-X 1.9 vs 1.8 WSPR decoding test

To: [email protected], "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: WSJT-X 1.9 vs 1.8 WSPR decoding test
From: Jan Damme <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 16:06:31 +0100
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=xW2/xOUEiz67vfkfVJKGcNuZgCUxyXSX0Zs9J3fcSgg=; b=rK63OWqQ9jJpp/c/9QsP+z1PzTLrnZUB2T91sG3Syi9sr/2P17s5MoEuDoDuMs5NVT Oz/viKHxhG1c4xh4H6cpWbxZhvcWr34l+mZVy3latLyPS3L9OJfma9srhhkAEO+InrMG 6wixRKlVpfdFMyxVNteYoKmu+m7bkTXtGEeRosRx/BRj2Z8tPjGENzM9+clYra6JhQI1 8Km/rzeFxR/1ru3HPqjQDZUlo59AsBjdTtRVobcAgJc5fYzp8vvpd97WYSZfwreBLa4I pzDM2/c9GRFJDRWfGvkfh1zyTJZZxbKK53WSxcuJI9pNaOe9oXqZq00Wa9bbak3rBLbz Ws0w==
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
The new WSJTX 1.9 RC release candidate has a feature I like .....

>>>> 4x tone spacing  in the advanced tab! <<<

Which means  you can drive 472kHz pa  with a normal TRX from 160m div 4!
Basicly the GW3UEP PA with CD4049 divider will suffice. (In NL we are restricted to 100W output)

I used to produce WSPR with a manipulated MP3 (4 times shift) so other modes are now available for me.

Jan/pa3abk

On 26-2-2018 13:57, N1BUG wrote:
Yesterday's release of WSJT-X 1.9.0rc2 came with this note: "Improved decoding performance for WSPR mode, especially effective at LF and MF". I wanted to put this to the test so overnight I ran four instances of WSJT-X:

1.8.0 on both LF and MF using the call sign N1BUG/1

1.9.0rc2 on both LF and MF using the call sign N1BUG

All spots were uploaded to WSPRnet.

Both decoders on LF were fed the same audio stream. The setup is a simple SDR providing I/Q input to a physical sound card, HDSDR software output into a virtual audio cable, both versions of WSJT-X taking input from the output of that virtual cable.

The MF setup was the same except using a different SDR feeding a different physical sound card.

I used identical settings in all four instances of WSJT-X with the exception of different input audio source (virtual cable) for LF and MF.

All of this was running in Windows 10.

I watched incoming spots very closely for the first several hours. There was not much activity on LF at the time but on MF I saw 1.9 decode many WSPR transmissions that 1.8 failed to decode. Some of these were extreme weak signal down to -32 with barely visible traces on the waterfall. Others were not with some clearly visible and decoding up to -23 in 1.9, yet no decode in 1.8 despite being very clear on the waterfall in that version. I did not see a single instance where 1.8 decoded something that 1.9 failed to decode.

This morning I took a quick look at statistics:

MF - During a 12 hour period ending 1145z, 1.9 decoded a total of 933 WSPR transmissions while 1.8 decoded only 883.

LF - During a 12 hour period ending 1150z, 1.9 decoded 253 WSPR transmissions while 1.8 decoded only 183.

In all of this I do not see any obvious spurious decodes from either version. No strange call signs or stations displaced on the map from where you would expect them to be.

I was not expecting to see such a large difference. I make no claim that this result is representative of what others will see. I am simply reporting the results of an experiment carried out here.

73,
Paul N1BUG



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>