Re: LF: WSPR 475 kHz

[wa3tts@verizon.net]

Stafan: I believe WSPR-X  version 2.0r  was worth the upgrade for me, having used version 1.9r for about a year. And the 1.9r version was a 

definite improvement from the prior version I was using, which I believe was 1.7r.  I believe I am in a moderate noise LF/MF/HF suburban environment, 

perhaps an LF/MF station in a queiter location may not notice as much difference. More reading on the subject is needed on my part to better understand

the improvements K1JT has made to sensitivity and signal decoding in these newer beta versions.

As always, many thanks for your beaconing.

73 Mike wa3tts

-----Original Message-----
From: DK7FC <selberdenken@posteo.de>
To: rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Sat, Nov 3, 2018 1:27 pm
Subject: Re: LF: WSPR 475 kHz

Hi Mike,

Interesting point. Is there a significant performance improvement of version 2.0 relative to 1.9r ? Or, is it worth the effort to upgrade?

73, Stefan

Am 03.11.2018 16:02, schrieb wa3tts@verizon.net:

Stefan & All:  Indeed the propagation at MF has been favorable the past 2 evenings, but I also believe the sensitivity improvements K1JT built into the 1.9r and 2.0r versions

of WSJT-X are making a noticeable difference versus what could be accomplished on WSPR2 a few years ago.  On the U.S. side, it may also help that a fair portion of the calls signs

shown below are those of operators withsome  weak signal VHF-UHF-SHF expereince.  There is likely some prior skill transfer involved in making the transition to MF-LF for a new spectrum experience.

KL7L has some very brief "days" coming soon, so it is not out of the realm of possibilty.  Perhaps even on 2200m with very low A & K index conditions....

73 Mike wa3tts