Glen, Thanks for the reply. That's what I meant - more energy/bit.
What kind of gear do you use for 10 GHz? I've only got a couple of Gunn oscillators, and they're way to unstable for any sort of narrowband work. > On Jan 29, 2019, at 3:38 PM, glen english <[email protected]> wrote: > > IMO There's no need to conserve BW on the ham bands > > IMO we should be reducing information rate, sure, which reduces energy > required to transmit > > But while 4FSK is easy (2 bits per symbol) , if we used the whole 16kHz > channel and adopted something like FSK-64 (6 bits per symbol) , the symbol > rate would be 1/3 of 4FSK, leading to lower SNR requirements. > > I'm playing with FSK-256 for 10 GHz EME codec-2.... > > > > On 30/01/2019 7:15 AM, Steve wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:54 PM David Tiller <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Wouldn't using FM eliminate the spectral efficiency of 4-FSK? >> I was thinking about a PL-Tone and a nice wide signal. Obviously 4FSK >> on the lower freqs would be better to use SSB. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Freetel-codec2 mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2 >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freetel-codec2 mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2 _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
