Hi John, 

> "JOHN MACKEY" <jmac...@...> wrote:
> Of course, if there is no COS provided, then VOX has 
> to be used.  But my question specifically referenced 
> someone using Echolink, which provides COS!!

I'm not a user of Echolink... but I could think of a 
few reasons... the first being a true audio derived 
Kerchunk Filter.

s. 

> ------ Original Message ------
> Received: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 03:02:15 PM PDT
> From: "skipp025" <skipp...@...>
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Audio Delay
> 
> > 
> > > "JOHN MACKEY" <jmackey@> wrote:
> > > Then why not do all that using the COS provided?
> > 
> > What if there is no provided COS..?  Just an audio 
> > source... 
> > 
> > s. 
> > 
> > > ------ Original Message ------
> > > Received: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:53:51 PM PDT
> > > From: "skipp025" <skipp025@>
> > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Audio Delay
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Step right up... welcome to the show...  Can any of you 
> > > > tell it's a Friday?
> > > > 
> > > > > "JOHN MACKEY" <jmackey@> wrote:
> > > > > WHY would someone be using VOX in a system linked to 
> > > > > a repeater (such as Echolink)?
> > > > 
> > > > To delay the audio long enough for the vox circuit to 
> > > > first detect and provide COS/COR/PTT logic. The first 
> > > > portion of the inbound audio is not chopped off. 
> > > > 
> > > > s. 
> > > > 
> > > > > ------ Original Message ------
> > > > > Received: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:49:01 PM PDT
> > > > > From: "skipp025" <skipp025@>
> > > > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Audio Delay
> > > > > SNIP
> > > > > > > Helping my echolink node not get confused about  
> > > > > > > what it is supposed to listen to is my primary purpose 
> > > > > > > for having the delay.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Audio delay lines are killer (great) for use with VOX 
> > > > > > (voice) operated logic... and a must have for many 
> > > > > > simulcast transmission packages.
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> > 
> > 
> >
>


Reply via email to