Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | <[email protected]> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | LF: RE: Re: WSPR -2 SNR |
| From: | "Clemens Paul" <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Mon, 18 Mar 2013 22:09:57 +0100 |
| In-reply-to: | <005101ce23fa$952aa840$6d01a8c0@DELL4> |
| References: | <[email protected]> <FFC1611B9A6F4AB69BE4E33D769E1ABA@SV8CSHP> <BE2EB53F93EA48A984BB90D26B5E26D0@White> <CAK59VFPeJ8kzU1kVq_-8q+XVzDZnf2dTV0j7AFpX91wrFvH-0g@mail.gmail.com> <op.wt5atzkqyzqh0k@pc-roelof> <005101ce23fa$952aa840$6d01a8c0@DELL4> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
| 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: [email protected]
>[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
>[email protected]
>Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 6:04 PM
>To: [email protected]
>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] |