To: | <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org> |
---|---|
Subject: | LF: RE: Re: WSPR -2 SNR |
From: | "Clemens Paul" <cpaul@gmx.net> |
Date: | Mon, 18 Mar 2013 22:09:57 +0100 |
In-reply-to: | <005101ce23fa$952aa840$6d01a8c0@DELL4> |
References: | <3309.377f234c.3e76743b@aol.com> <FFC1611B9A6F4AB69BE4E33D769E1ABA@SV8CSHP> <BE2EB53F93EA48A984BB90D26B5E26D0@White> <CAK59VFPeJ8kzU1kVq_-8q+XVzDZnf2dTV0j7AFpX91wrFvH-0g@mail.gmail.com> <op.wt5atzkqyzqh0k@pc-roelof> <005101ce23fa$952aa840$6d01a8c0@DELL4> |
Reply-to: | rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org |
Sender: | owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org |
Thread-index: | Ac4j+qqFiuSJR9oXTlq1m2QOzYX/VAAIUxow |
>It has been shown in the past that a receiver bandwidth >significatly less than 2500 Hz artificially inflates the >reported WSPR s/n. Yes,that was also my own experience and below is Joe*s correspondent comment from a private email: "The calculation of S/N in WSPR assumes that the "baseline" noise spectrum is approximately flat over 2 kHz or so. If you use a much narrower filter the program's estimate of background noise level may be incorrect, and this will affect the computer values of S/N. -- 73, Joe, K1JT " 73 Clemens DL4RAJ >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >[mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of >jrusgrove@comcast.net >Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 6:04 PM >To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >Subject: LF: Re: WSPR -2 SNR |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: LF: Re: Psk-Reporter 477k, Graham |
---|---|
Next by Date: | LF: DK7FC, SV8CS- Spiros Chimarios |
Previous by Thread: | Re: LF: Re: WSPR -2 SNR, Roelof Bakker |
Next by Thread: | Re: LF: RE: Re: WSPR -2 SNR, Roelof Bakker |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |