Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+SL\.\s+47\s+uHz\s+vs\.\s+16\s+uHz\s+\@\s+8270\.005\s+Hz\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+SL\.\s+47\s+uHz\s+vs\.\s+16\s+uHz\s+\@\s+8270\.005\s+Hz\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. LF: SL. 47 uHz vs. 16 uHz @ 8270.005 Hz (score: 1): Author: "PA1SDB, Peter" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:55:54 +0100; Hello VLF. Just a experience message ! It seems that there is somewhere a perfect setting in "Width of FFT-bin", but where ? Measurements below in SL by noise and peak: 47 uHz - DJ8WX = noise -157 /; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2014-02/msg00232.html (10,915 bytes)
2. Re: LF: SL. 47 uHz vs. 16 uHz @ 8270.005 Hz (score: 1): Author: wolf_dl4yhf <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:44:33 +0100; Hi Peter and all, Am 28.02.2014 16:21, schrieb PA1SDB, Peter: Hello VLF. Just a experience message ! It seems that there is somewhere a perfect setting in "Width of FFT-bin", but where ? A good que; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2014-02/msg00634.html (11,259 bytes)
3. Re: LF: SL. 47 uHz vs. 16 uHz @ 8270.005 Hz (score: 1): Author: "PA1SDB, Peter" <[email protected]>; Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 17:59:06 +0100; Tnx Wolf for the quick explanation ! Perhaps 100uHz is the limit here, or perhaps 30 uHz. Experiment continues :-) -- Original Message -- From: [email protected] wolf_dl4yhf To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksh; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2014-02/msg00635.html (12,162 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]