Fully agree with this. A super-WSPR would be a great complement to JT9-x if 
combining the 2 is not sensible. 

73s
Roger G3XBM


On 28 Oct 2012, at 22:30, <[email protected]> wrote:

>> The question in my mind is the degree to which beacon-like features should 
>> be mixed with a mode designed for making QSOs.  If beaconing behavior is 
>> desired, why not use WSPR?  If it's important to have, say, 10 dB better 
>> sensitivity than WSPR, then maybe a "slow WSPR" mode should be developed and 
>> used, rather than JT9.
> 
>> -- 73, Joe, K1JT
> 
> 
> <2 cents>
> 
> Joe ... agree with your assessment that JT9 should be kept as a QSO mode 
> program and not a combination QSO / beacon mode program. The two sets of 
> requirements are significantly different and trying to make a combination 
> program may end up being a compromise. WSPR does such a good job for beacon 
> mode and the database works so well it may make more sense to develop that 
> further. A number of us have been testing 'slow' WSPR modes (thanks to the 
> work of Marcus and Wolf) and the results have been impressive ... although 
> the 'proof of concept' arrangement using additional software is rather 
> 'clunky'. If it were possible to modify WSPR for several slower speeds, equal 
> the performance of WSJT-X JT9 and continue to use the WSPR database that 
> sounds like a good plan. It would really be something if WSPR could decode 
> stations running different speeds simultaneously ... and indicate in the 
> decoded information / database which mode was decoded ... but that may be too 
> much to ask.
> 
> Jay W1VD  WD2XNS  WE2XGR/2
> 
> </2 cents>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Taylor" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 3:25 PM
> Subject: Re: LF: JT9 buggy issues
> 
> 
>> Hi Roger,
>> 
>>> After about 1 minute or so, the program just closes itself and disappears
>>> from the PC screen.
>> 
>> Please open a command-prompt window and start the program from there. For 
>> example,
>> 
>> C:\> cd \wsjtx
>> C:\> wsjtx
>> 
>> When the program dies, send me any error message left in the command-prompt 
>> window.
>> 
>>> I am using a SignalLink VOX controlled sound card interface that I use for
>>> WSPR. Also, when I reload the program I have to reload my callsign, grid
>>> etc.every time.
>> 
>> This makes it sound like you may have ignored the installation advice in the 
>> Quick-Start Guide: "Under Vista or Windows 7 be sure to install WSJT-X into 
>> its own directory (the suggested default is c:\wsjtx) rather than C:\Program 
>> Files\wsjtx."  Please confirm.
>> 
>>> Although I very much hope to use the mode for QSOs please do not
>>> underestimate the value of a weak signal beaconing function with an
>>> internet database. This has proved extremely valuable on WSPR as people
>>> sometimes leave a RX and PC running to monitor when they are busy and not
>>> available for QSOs. There will be far more people able to receive and
>>> report than TX on MF/LF. This is especially true on 136kHz.
>> 
>> Yes, I understand these points, and beacons have their place.  WSPR would 
>> not be there if I did not believe this.
>> 
>> The question in my mind is the degree to which beacon-like features should 
>> be mixed with a mode designed for making QSOs.  If beaconing behavior is 
>> desired, why not use WSPR?  If it's important to have, say, 10 dB better 
>> sensitivity than WSPR, then maybe a "slow WSPR" mode should be developed and 
>> used, rather than JT9.
>> 
>> -- 73, Joe, K1JT
> 
>