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
>
>
|
