different.
73
Patrick
- Original Message -
From: Tony
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 7:44 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Contestia 1K vs MT63?
All,
I was playing with the Contestia mode in an attempt to duplicate the wpm rate
of MT63. I
PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 5:02 AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Contestia 1K vs MT63?
Hello Tony,
According to my measures (under noise only):
* 16-1K: Fast 16 tones, bandwidth=1000 Hz, speed=62.5 bauds, 78.2 wpm,
lowest S/N =-9 dB,
* MT63
...
A Contestia 32 / 1K could be a better alternative than the 16/1K.
73
Patrick
- Original Message -
From: Tony
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Contestia 1K vs MT63?
Patrick,
I get the same minimum SNR
Tony wrote:
Patrick,
I get the same minimum SNR for Contestia but can squeeze -8db out of
MT63 when using DM780 and IZ8BLY.
Yesterday I had no luck with DM780 while monitoring Tony's QSO's on
14106. Of course, I have not calibrated DM780, so that is no surprise.
Propagation was not
All,
I was playing with the Contestia mode in an attempt to duplicate the wpm rate
of MT63. I configured Contestia with 16 tones and a bandwidth of 1K. The
sensitivity of the two seemed to be the same and the wpm rate appeared to be
close.
I then tested both modes with the HF path simulator
