Re: [digitalradio] ARRL proposal removes baud rate limitations on HF
YES - IT IS A PROBLEM - Original Message - From: "Tim Gorman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 11:41 PM Subject: [digitalradio] ARRL proposal removes baud rate limitations on HF > Is anyone else on here concerned that the ARRL bandwidth regulation proposal > removes all baud rate limitations on signals in the HF bands and 2 meters? > The only limitation will be the bandwidth limitation that will cap the baud > rate. > > Removal of 97.307(f) limitations means we will see 3500 baud rate signals in > the phone bands of 75m, 40m, 30m, 20m, 17m, 15m, and 10m. > > I haven't thought this through all the way but I see a couple of possible > consequences. > > If higher data rates are to be used with these baud rates, BIG power outputs > will be needed in order to make the quantization levels larger than the noise > level. In fact, in order to make these baud rates usable with only a single > bit per baud, BIG signals will be needed. With multiple bits per baud, it is > reasonable that the power crest factors for these signals will be low (i.e. > high average power outputs). > > I have a bad feeling that we will shortly be seeing Pactor IV signals on the > phone bands running average power outputs of 750watts or so with data rates > of 15khz or so. > > Is that a problem for anyone else or is that what the digital users want to > see happen? > > tim ab0wr > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > Other areas of interest: > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 1/27/2006 > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] ARRL proposal removes baud rate limitations on HF
Is anyone else on here concerned that the ARRL bandwidth regulation proposal removes all baud rate limitations on signals in the HF bands and 2 meters? The only limitation will be the bandwidth limitation that will cap the baud rate. Removal of 97.307(f) limitations means we will see 3500 baud rate signals in the phone bands of 75m, 40m, 30m, 20m, 17m, 15m, and 10m. I haven't thought this through all the way but I see a couple of possible consequences. If higher data rates are to be used with these baud rates, BIG power outputs will be needed in order to make the quantization levels larger than the noise level. In fact, in order to make these baud rates usable with only a single bit per baud, BIG signals will be needed. With multiple bits per baud, it is reasonable that the power crest factors for these signals will be low (i.e. high average power outputs). I have a bad feeling that we will shortly be seeing Pactor IV signals on the phone bands running average power outputs of 750watts or so with data rates of 15khz or so. Is that a problem for anyone else or is that what the digital users want to see happen? tim ab0wr Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: DonioEX
At 09:21 PM 1/29/06, you wrote: >USB everywhere as far as I know, all digital modes use USB. The none sound card modes are LSB. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: DonioEX
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "n0ziz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Which sideband is used for Dominoex? > Dan N0ZIZ > Dan, USB everywhere as far as I know, all digital modes use USB. 73 Steve Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] DonioEX
Which sideband is used for Dominoex? Dan N0ZIZ Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Digital voice on HF
Not using current techniques. A SSB signal 6db above the noise level provides a usable signal for communications. The current digital voice techniques that are available typically require a +10db signal to noise ratio. tim ab0wr On Sunday 29 January 2006 17:20, kd4e wrote: > Question re: > > At 3khz bandwidth you might as well use SSB > > (it would sound better). > > On the AM-BC band one of the main values to switching to > digital vs analog is that the noise is eliminated via the > transmit/receive processing. > > While an analog SSB signal at 3KHz may sound better would > a digitized 3KHz signal travel through rough band conditions > and often result in more successful communications than > analog SSB? Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
This was my opinion also. In order to get 5600baud, even in a 6khz bandwidth, significant power levels will be needed to reach a signal to noise ratio sufficient to allow the baud rate to be realized. Even a 5600bps rate in a 2400hz ratio is going to require a HUGE signal to noise ratio be maintained. That's why I ask about how much interference we are going to see with a 3500bad signals in 3500hz bandwidths on the HF bands like the ARRL bandwidth proposal will allow. I suspect we haven't even begun to imagine what the interference level to existing phone operations is going to be from signals running enough power to make a 3500baud rate signal a reality. tim ab0wr On Sunday 29 January 2006 17:09, KV9U wrote: > A more complete context of the proposal would include the following: > > - - - - - > > "10. The real catalyst for change, however, is the need to permit higher > speed data in the Amateur bands from 1.8 MHz to 450 MHz, above which > there are no limits except to contain the transmitted signal within the > allocation edges. A recent example of the concern was an inquiry > received by ARRL from a technical experimenter, Mr. Steve Waterman, > licensee of Amateur Station K4CJX, concerning the symbol rate > restrictions of HF amateur communications: > > …[A]bout the potential to test a new mode with a symbol rate of nearly > 5600 baud and a bandwidth of 2.4 kHz. The amateur rules currently > restrict symbol rates to 1200 baud on 10 meters and 300 baud on all > other HF bands. [ARRL staff] suggested that an experimental license > might be a possibility." > - - - - - > > The ability to use even 300 baud on HF is problematic since ISI and > other issues surface with baud rates that exceed around 50, unless > conditions are excellent. Anything higher would seem unworkable, even if > it would ever be permitted on HF which is very unlikely. > > I wonder if they really meant to say 5600 bps rather than baud rate? > > Since I think K4CJX is on this group, he should be able to explain what > was meant by his inquiry to the ARRL. > > 73, > > Rick, KV9U > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: knock it off "RANT"
On Sunday 29 January 2006 15:43, Dr. Howard S. White wrote: > You quote the RSGB statement of the fact that: > > "-The IARU Region 1 HF Bandplan has served the amateur community very well > for many years," > > Need I say any more... Yes, you do! As usual you leave out the operative part: "However, in recent years, it has been observed that a) an increasing number of Amateur Radio operators can be heard operating data and telephony modes as well as beacons that transmit position and propagation data within the CW communication sub-bands: b) non-Morse stations within the CW sub-bands are getting more aggressive and more confident, believing that they are "entitled" to do what they do." > > What few minor non compliance issues that exist are being addressed by the > Ham community themselves and not by the slow and heavy hand of inflexible > Government Regulations. It is not minor non-compliance issues that caused three countries to submit documents to the IARU Region 1 Plenary saying basically the same thing as above. It is why the RSGB says: " -national societies could do more to improve compliance with IARU bandplans." and says: "2) That each national society (or, initially, a small 'pilot' group of national socieites) work together to develop common and consistent methods for bandplan compliance by a) logging incidents of non-compliance within their national borders; b) producing regular reports that summarise the non-compliances. It apparently is NOT being addressed by the ham community itself. If it were it would be getting better instead of worse. Yet it is NOT getting better, it is getting worse each year. > > Why are you so afraid to trust the US Ham Community - which has to be the > most respectful of the rules in the worldnot to comply with a Voluntary > BandPlan? > Because it isn't a matter of trust. It is a matter of barriers to protect ALL users, not just users using the most power or the most aggressive ARQ mode. tim ab0wr Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] 160 Meter Digital Ops Tonight
Just got my Yaesu FT-890 hooked up but don't yet
have the computer connected.
Am I hearing you right now?
Ooops! Somehting real strong just popped up on freq,
also digital.
> Thomas Giella KN4LF wrote:
> My operating schedule:
> Monday January 30, 2006
> -0030 UTC 1807.500 PSK31
> 0030-0100 UTC 1807.500 OLIVIA 500/8
--
~~
Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e
|_|___|_|
| | & | |
{|
/\ {|
/ \ {|
/\{|
/ @ \ {|
| |~_||
| -| ||
\ # http://bibleseven.com/kd4e.html
KD4E =
West Central Florida
~~~
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
Again, this is a way to get 5600 bits per second into a 2400hz bandwidth by sending 2.4 bits per symbol. It won't help get 5600 symbols per second into a 2400 hz bandwidth. tim ab0wr On Sunday 29 January 2006 09:00, Jose Amador wrote: > Yes, 16QAM or 8PSK, if possible. QPSK with its > sidebands would be broader than 2400 Hz. > > Jose, CO2JA > > --- Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Respectfully, you are talking about compressing the > > content. That won't help > > with cramming a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz > > bandwidth. It might help send > > more content faster - making a slower circuit "look" > > like a 5600 baud > > circuit, but it won't help put a 5600 baud circuit > > into a 2400hz bandwidth. > > > > Anybody else got any ideas? > > > > tim ab0wr > > > > > > > > On Saturday 28 January 2006 19:51, Dave Bernstein > > > > wrote: > > > If there is redundancy in the data -- e.g. images, > > > > or natural language > > > > > text -- loss-less compression before transmission > > > > and decompression > > > > > after reception might get you there. > > > > > > 73, > > > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tim Gorman > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Question for the digital experts: > > > > > > > > How do you get a 5600 baud circuit to fit into a > > > > 2400hz bandwidth? > > > > > > tim ab0wr > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to > > > > Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > > > The MixW Reflector : > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > > > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol > > > > (band plan policy > > > > > discussion) > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > Other areas of interest: > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > discussion) > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Best program?
DXLab applications are more sensitive to operating system than processor performance. Members of the Windows 9X family will limit the number of applications that can be simultaneously run. This family suffers from an architectural kernel defect that forces all applications to share a fixed pool of resources. Some members of the family, notably Windows ME, compound the problem by becoming progressively unstable as the pool is consumed. Windows NT, 2000, XP, and Vista are based on a later kernel that eliminates the fixed pool. Using these versions of Windows, there are DXLab users running the full suite on ~400 mHz processors. That said, digital mode applications can be consumptive of CPU cycles. Enabling PSK broadband decoding and callsign extraction in WinWarbler, for example, can consume an incremental 20% of a 1.5 gHz CPU. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you use Multipsk along with DXLab, it can act as the CAT control for > MultiPSK and much more depending upon which modules you select. Then you > will have most all sound card modes available to you. I have been very > surprised how well it works. It does require a pretty good computer. > > 73, > > Rick, KV9U > > > > > Danny Douglas wrote: > > > Put in a software that handles all three, for instance the DXLab suite of > > software contains WinWarbler that will handle all that, plus do CW and > > Voice > > keying. Great number of users who are very helpful in getting > > newbies, and > > some of us oldies straightened out in how to use it. The author is always > > available and does updates as requested by users, and the best of all, its > > FREE. http://dxlab.ky1v.com/Info/download.htm Will get you to a page to > > start getting info and needed downlaods for not on Winwarbler but all the > > other portions that you are going to find needed in the long run, such > > as an > > ideal CAT control program, DXKeeper (the logging program), propagation > > program, spot collector, etc. Take a look. I have been thru several > > different sets of software and have wound up here with this one, as > > the very > > best of all. > > Danny > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
A more complete context of the proposal would include the following: - - - - - "10. The real catalyst for change, however, is the need to permit higher speed data in the Amateur bands from 1.8 MHz to 450 MHz, above which there are no limits except to contain the transmitted signal within the allocation edges. A recent example of the concern was an inquiry received by ARRL from a technical experimenter, Mr. Steve Waterman, licensee of Amateur Station K4CJX, concerning the symbol rate restrictions of HF amateur communications: …[A]bout the potential to test a new mode with a symbol rate of nearly 5600 baud and a bandwidth of 2.4 kHz. The amateur rules currently restrict symbol rates to 1200 baud on 10 meters and 300 baud on all other HF bands. [ARRL staff] suggested that an experimental license might be a possibility." - - - - - The ability to use even 300 baud on HF is problematic since ISI and other issues surface with baud rates that exceed around 50, unless conditions are excellent. Anything higher would seem unworkable, even if it would ever be permitted on HF which is very unlikely. I wonder if they really meant to say 5600 bps rather than baud rate? Since I think K4CJX is on this group, he should be able to explain what was meant by his inquiry to the ARRL. 73, Rick, KV9U Tim Gorman wrote: > You would think so but the proposal specifically states: > > "potential to test a new mode with a symbol rate of nearly 5600 baud > and a > bandwidth of 2.4khz." > > That's not very ambiguous. "symbol rate" and "baud" go together. It's > kind of > hard to confuse that with "bit rate" and "bits per second". > > It's especially interesting when that statement is followed by the > statment: > "The amateur rules currently restrict symbol rates to 1200 baud on 10m > and > 300 baud on all other HF bands. The ARRL suggested that an experimental > license might be a possibility." > > I guess I missed the part in the proposal where they DELETE the > requirement > that symbol rates can't be above 300baud on HF [97.307(f)(3)] > > I'm going to have to think about this one. What kind of interference > will a > 3500 baud signal in the phone bands cause? > > tim ab0wr > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: K3UK Telnet Address
Its 22:55 and I can not connect to the cluster Andy, Problems here or there? Ron W4LDE obrienaj wrote: >Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org is the address you enter. > >Andy K3UK > >-- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Giella KN4LF" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Anyone know the exact address to type into the telnet window in >> >> >MixW to access the K3UK Digital Telnet? I guess the port is 4?! > > >>Also my WWV data is no longer updating in the DX Cluster window. I >> >> >have /dxs/wwv250.html? in the WWV Page box and it seems to be the >correct address?! > > >>73, >>Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF >>Lakeland, FL, USA >>Grid Square EL97AW >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >>Proof Of God Through Science: >> >> >http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/audio/newevidence.htm > > >>KN4LF Amateur & SWL Radio History: http://www.kn4lf.com >>KN4LF MF Radio Propagation Theory Notes: >> >> >http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf8.htm > > >> >> >> >>No virus found in this outgoing message. >>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: >> >> >1/27/2006 > > > > > > > > >Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > >Other areas of interest: > >The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ >DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Best program?
If you use Multipsk along with DXLab, it can act as the CAT control for MultiPSK and much more depending upon which modules you select. Then you will have most all sound card modes available to you. I have been very surprised how well it works. It does require a pretty good computer. 73, Rick, KV9U Danny Douglas wrote: > Put in a software that handles all three, for instance the DXLab suite of > software contains WinWarbler that will handle all that, plus do CW and > Voice > keying. Great number of users who are very helpful in getting > newbies, and > some of us oldies straightened out in how to use it. The author is always > available and does updates as requested by users, and the best of all, its > FREE. http://dxlab.ky1v.com/Info/download.htm Will get you to a page to > start getting info and needed downlaods for not on Winwarbler but all the > other portions that you are going to find needed in the long run, such > as an > ideal CAT control program, DXKeeper (the logging program), propagation > program, spot collector, etc. Take a look. I have been thru several > different sets of software and have wound up here with this one, as > the very > best of all. > Danny Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
At 12:21 PM 1/29/06, Dave Bernstein wrote:
>If Nyquist is the governing limit, how do computer modem designers
>get 56 kbps through a 3 khz telphone line? That's a C/B of more than
>18.
A v.90 modem achieves 53 kbps on the rx (downstream) side by using DC
output ("pulse coded modulation") on a baseband connection that goes
directly to the user (no audio carrier). The symbol rate is 8000
/sec. This requires the bandwidth of the phone line be 4 kHz (at
baseband) over the twisted copper pair that runs from the CO (or
modem pool) to the user.
The tx (upstream) side of a v.90 connection uses v.34 modulation
techniques which limits its speed to 33.6 kbps. v.34 is trellis coded
modulation of an 1800 Hz carrier at a symbol rate of 3429 /sec. This
requires a 3.4 kHz bandwidth from the phone line, but now the signal
must go through the phone company CODECs etc.
73,
Mike K1MK
Michael Keane K1MK
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Digital voice on HF
Question re:
> At 3khz bandwidth you might as well use SSB
> (it would sound better).
On the AM-BC band one of the main values to switching to
digital vs analog is that the noise is eliminated via the
transmit/receive processing.
While an analog SSB signal at 3KHz may sound better would
a digitized 3KHz signal travel through rough band conditions
and often result in more successful communications than
analog SSB?
--
~~
Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e
|_|___|_|
| | & | |
{|
/\ {|
/ \ {|
/\{|
/ @ \ {|
| |~_||
| -| ||
\ # http://bibleseven.com/kd4e.html
KD4E =
West Central Florida
~~~
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Digital voice on HF
That depends entirely on the modulation method. At 8 bits per symbol, that could be as low as 375hz. Eight bits per symbol is very sensitive to noise though, and probably isn't interesting to this group. PSK31 sends one bit per Hz bandwidth and is much more robust on HF, and is probably a better reference. At 3khz bandwidth you might as well use SSB (it would sound better). Here are some samples I created with this codec when I was investigating it (try using WinAmp if you have any trouble with your player): 3193bps: http://www.lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Codecs/Interconnects_F0.wav 4812bps: http://www.lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Codecs/Interconnects_F1.wav 6836bps: http://www.lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Codecs/Interconnects_F2.wav 12148bps: http://www.lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Codecs/Interconnects_F5.wav 16bits 32khz (source): http://www.lekstutis.com/Artie/Ham/Interconnects_32K16B.wav Later, Artie Lekstutis KC2MFS >What kind of RF bandwidth would the 3 Kbs require? > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: knock it off "RANT"
You quote the RSGB statement of the fact that: "-The IARU Region 1 HF Bandplan has served the amateur community very well for many years," Need I say any more... What few minor non compliance issues that exist are being addressed by the Ham community themselves and not by the slow and heavy hand of inflexible Government Regulations. Why are you so afraid to trust the US Ham Community - which has to be the most respectful of the rules in the worldnot to comply with a Voluntary BandPlan? __Howard S. White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 ex-AE6SM KY6LAWebsite: www.ky6la.com "No Good Deed Goes Unpunished""Ham Antennas Save Lives - Katrina, 2003 San Diego Fires, 911" - Original Message - From: Tim Gorman To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 6:10 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: knock it off "RANT" from the RSGB, Improving Bandplan Compliance, paper number 138-An increasing proportion of the Amateur Radio community is using non-CW modes and deploying beacons within the CW communication sub-bands.-national societies could do more to improve compliance with IARU bandplans.-Note: The authors believe that the degree of compliance within the CW sub-bands in particular is indicative of the respect for IARU bandplans in general.-The IARU Region 1 HF Bandplan has served the amateur community very well for many years, and has always been made available by the IARU member societies through a range of printed publications and internet resources. However, in recent years, it has been observed that a) an increasing number of Amateur Radio operators can be heard operating data and telephony modes as well as beacons that transmit position and propagation data within the CW communication sub-bands: b) non-Morse stations within the CW sub-bands are getting more aggressive and more confident, believing that they are "entitled" to do what they do.-from the Conclusions section2) That each national society (or, initially, a small 'pilot' group of national socieites) work together to develop common and consistent methods for bandplan compliance by a) logging incidents of non-compliance within their national borders; b) producing regular reports that summarise the non-compliances.***On Sunday 29 January 2006 02:14, Dr. Howard S. White wrote:> Thank You Brad for you usual clear headed analysis of the US situation.>> It is indeed a very sad statement about some US hams that they do not trust> others to abide by a Gentlemen's agreement and that they believe that very> parochial attitudes must apply to the rest of the world who share the same> bands.>> There is something called the Law of Psychological Reciprocity" which> roughly paraphrases as "I will trust you will do to me what I would do to> you" The lack of trust seems to imply that those who do not trust their> fellow hams to behave properly do so because they do not trust themselves> to obey the rules. Since you and I have lived in countries with> regulation by bandwidth, we know it works and that you can trust the vast> your fellow hams to obey the "Gentlemen's Agreements"> __> Howard S. White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 ex-AE6SM KY6LA> Website: www.ky6la.com> "No Good Deed Goes Unpunished"> "Ham Antennas Save Lives - Katrina, 2003 San Diego Fires, 911" Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[digitalradio] Need G-tor / Pactor test pse
All: I use an old Kam Plus and N1MM software for contest RTTY, and would like to use it for the rare Pactor or G-tor QSO. Finished setting up the macros and would like to run a test to see if all is working correctly in TOR mode. Is there anyone out there with Pactor or G-tor capability who can sked with me this evening? I'm QRV on 20 through 80 meters. 73 Tony KT2Q Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] 160 Meter Digital Ops Tonight
My operating schedule: Monday January 30, 2006 -0030 UTC 1807.500 PSK31 0030-0100 UTC 1807.500 OLIVIA 500/8 0100-0130 UTC 1837.500 PSK31 0130-0200 UTC 1837.500 OLIVIA 500/16 0200-0230 UTC 1807.500 PSK31 0230-0300 UTC 1807.500 OLIVIA 500/8 0300-0330 UTC 1837.500 PSK31 0330-0400 UTC 1837.500 OLIVIA 500/16 0400-0430 UTC 1807.500 PSK31 0430-0500 UTC 1807.500 OLIVIA 500/8 73, Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF Lakeland, FL, USA Grid Square EL97AW [EMAIL PROTECTED] KN4LF Amateur & SWL Radio History: http://www.kn4lf.com KN4LF MF Radio Propagation Theory Notes: http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf8.htm -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 1/27/2006 Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Best program?
Put in a software that handles all three, for instance the DXLab suite of software contains WinWarbler that will handle all that, plus do CW and Voice keying. Great number of users who are very helpful in getting newbies, and some of us oldies straightened out in how to use it. The author is always available and does updates as requested by users, and the best of all, its FREE. http://dxlab.ky1v.com/Info/download.htm Will get you to a page to start getting info and needed downlaods for not on Winwarbler but all the other portions that you are going to find needed in the long run, such as an ideal CAT control program, DXKeeper (the logging program), propagation program, spot collector, etc. Take a look. I have been thru several different sets of software and have wound up here with this one, as the very best of all. Danny - Original Message - From: "zl1gbb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 7:07 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Best program? > Greetings All > I have just got my PSK31 operational. Now I am looking around for RTTY > and FSK software. So which is best? > > cheers Graeme zl1gbb > > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > Other areas of interest: > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 1/27/2006 > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
You would think so but the proposal specifically states: "potential to test a new mode with a symbol rate of nearly 5600 baud and a bandwidth of 2.4khz." That's not very ambiguous. "symbol rate" and "baud" go together. It's kind of hard to confuse that with "bit rate" and "bits per second". It's especially interesting when that statement is followed by the statment: "The amateur rules currently restrict symbol rates to 1200 baud on 10m and 300 baud on all other HF bands. The ARRL suggested that an experimental license might be a possibility." I guess I missed the part in the proposal where they DELETE the requirement that symbol rates can't be above 300baud on HF [97.307(f)(3)] I'm going to have to think about this one. What kind of interference will a 3500 baud signal in the phone bands cause? tim ab0wr On Sunday 29 January 2006 13:03, Dave Bernstein wrote: > I suspect they mean 5600 bits per second. > > 73, > > Dave, AA6YQ > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > Most telephone circuits have a bandwidth of about 2400hz which > > will support a > > > symbol rate of 2400baud. They just use a modulation scheme that > > allows > > > multiple bits per baud to be be sent, eg 32QAM or higher. > > > > They can't shove more than 2400 symbol changes per second down a > > pipe of > > > 2400hz however. > > > > I still can't figure out how the ARRL figures that they can do it - > > - and why > > > our regulation paradigm needs to be changed in order to allow > > something that > > > is impossible. > > > > tim ab0wr > > > > On Sunday 29 January 2006 11:21, Dave Bernstein wrote: > > > If Nyquist is the governing limit, how do computer modem > > designers > > > > get 56 kbps through a 3 khz telphone line? That's a C/B of more > > than > > > > 18. > > > > > >73, > > > > > >Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > No, the claim I am investigating is concerning a statement that > > > > > > there is a > > > > > > > need in amateur radio for a new mode with a symbol rate of > > > > > > 5600baud and a > > > > > > > bandwidth of 2400hz. > > > > > > > > I'm very interested in how such a feat can be accomplished. > > > > > > > > I'm with you. My first thought is that such a thing would be > > > > > > impossible > > > > > > > because of Nyquist. > > > > > > > > But I thought I would ask to see if someone knows of a new > > > > > > development in the > > > > > > > Electrical Engineering field that has invalidated Nyquist. > > > > > > > > tim ab0wr > > > > > > > > On Saturday 28 January 2006 22:41, Michael Keane K1MK wrote: > > > > > At 10:32 PM 1/28/06, you wrote: > > > > > >Respectfully, you are talking about compressing the content. > > > > > > That won't > > > > > > > > > help with cramming a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz > > > > > > bandwidth. It might > > > > > > > > > help send more content faster - making a slower > > circuit "look" > > > > like a > > > > > > > > > 5600 baud circuit, but it won't help put a 5600 baud > > circuit > > > > into a > > > > > > > > > 2400hz bandwidth. > > > > > > > > > > > >Anybody else got any ideas? > > > > > > > > > > > >tim ab0wr > > > > > > > > > > One encounters a fundamental problem with Nyquist in > > attempting > > > > to > > > > > > > > use a signaling rate that's more than twice the baseband > > > > > > bandwidth. > > > > > > > > If the baseband signal is then translated to RF with a > > balanced > > > > > > modulator, the occupied bandwidth doubles. In this case a > > > > > > signaling > > > > > > > > rate equal to the occupied RF bandwidth, i.e. 2400 baud for a > > > > > > 2400 Hz > > > > > > > > bandwidth, is the limit. > > > > > > > > > > That said, it's readily possible to fit a 5600 bit per second > > > > > > data > > > > > > > > stream into a 2400 Hz bandwidth by picking a modulation > > scheme > > > > that > > > > > > > > has a bandwidth efficiency of greater than 2.33 bits/s per > > Hz; in > > > > > > this case, 8-PSK at a signaling rate of 1867 baud is but one > > way > > > > to > > > > > > > > send 5600 bits per second over a 2400 Hz BW channel. > > > > > > > > > > 73, > > > > > Mike K1MK > > > > > > > > > > Michael Keane K1MK > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to > > > > > > Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > > > > > > > The MixW Reflector : > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > > > > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan > > policy > > > > > > discussion) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to > > Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.c
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
As a non-engineer I am struggling to keep up here. ;-\
> ... it is the Shannon limit, which is s/n based, that
> governs bits, and the Nyquist limit that governs symbols
> (baud).
Can you explain why the "symbol" (symbol rate) construct
"allows" more efficient communications than a "bit"?
I understand that a bit is an "on" or "off" or a "1" or "0"
---
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
In digital communications, the symbol rate is the bit rate
divided by the number of bits transmitted in each symbol.
The symbol rate is identical to the Baud rate but the more
recent term avoids the confusion that exists around Baud
rate. It is particularly relevant to digital modulation
where the number of symbols allowed in the modulation
scheme is a key factor in determining how many
bits-per-second the communications system can transmit.
Symbol rate is measured in symbols-per-second.
---
> Leigh L Klotz, Jr. wrote:
> This is a commonly confused area. And you asked the right question.
> Nyquist is not the governing limit. The Nyquist limit applies to
> symbols/sec, not bits/sec. A symbol can carry more than one bit.
--
~~
Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e
|_|___|_|
| | & | |
{|
/\ {|
/ \ {|
/\{|
/ @ \ {|
| |~_||
| -| ||
\ # http://bibleseven.com/kd4e.html
KD4E =
West Central Florida
~~~
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
This is a commonly confused area. And you asked the right question. Nyquist is not the governing limit. The Nyquist limit applies to symbols/sec, not bits/sec. A symbol can carry more than one bit. (Interestingly, one of the first such applications was early wire telegraphy systems that used multiple current levels to carry superimposed Morse messages.) The limit to the amount of information that can be carried is related to the S/N ratio. 56kbit/sec modems are really 52kbits/sec because of regulatory power limits over PSTN, which set the S/N. Also, they know the characteristics of the digitization of the audio that the telco uses and designed to meet it. I believe that without that final opimization they could only get to about 32kbits/sec over the analog link with the specified power limit and achievable s/n. I am sure some telco people know more than this can can clarify the v.90 modem details, but in a nutshell, it is the Shannon limit, which is s/n based, that governs bits, and the Nyquist limit that governs symbols (baud). Leigh/WA5ZNU On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 9:24 am, Dave Bernstein wrote: > If Nyquist is the governing limit, how do computer modem designers get > 56 kbps through a 3 khz telphone line? That's a C/B of more than > 18. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
I suspect they mean 5600 bits per second. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Most telephone circuits have a bandwidth of about 2400hz which will support a > symbol rate of 2400baud. They just use a modulation scheme that allows > multiple bits per baud to be be sent, eg 32QAM or higher. > > They can't shove more than 2400 symbol changes per second down a pipe of > 2400hz however. > > I still can't figure out how the ARRL figures that they can do it - - and why > our regulation paradigm needs to be changed in order to allow something that > is impossible. > > tim ab0wr > > > On Sunday 29 January 2006 11:21, Dave Bernstein wrote: > > If Nyquist is the governing limit, how do computer modem designers > > get 56 kbps through a 3 khz telphone line? That's a C/B of more than > > 18. > > > >73, > > > >Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > No, the claim I am investigating is concerning a statement that > > > > there is a > > > > > need in amateur radio for a new mode with a symbol rate of > > > > 5600baud and a > > > > > bandwidth of 2400hz. > > > > > > I'm very interested in how such a feat can be accomplished. > > > > > > I'm with you. My first thought is that such a thing would be > > > > impossible > > > > > because of Nyquist. > > > > > > But I thought I would ask to see if someone knows of a new > > > > development in the > > > > > Electrical Engineering field that has invalidated Nyquist. > > > > > > tim ab0wr > > > > > > On Saturday 28 January 2006 22:41, Michael Keane K1MK wrote: > > > > At 10:32 PM 1/28/06, you wrote: > > > > >Respectfully, you are talking about compressing the content. > > > > That won't > > > > > > > help with cramming a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz > > > > bandwidth. It might > > > > > > > help send more content faster - making a slower circuit "look" > > > > like a > > > > > > > 5600 baud circuit, but it won't help put a 5600 baud circuit > > > > into a > > > > > > > 2400hz bandwidth. > > > > > > > > > >Anybody else got any ideas? > > > > > > > > > >tim ab0wr > > > > > > > > One encounters a fundamental problem with Nyquist in attempting > > > > to > > > > > > use a signaling rate that's more than twice the baseband > > > > bandwidth. > > > > > > If the baseband signal is then translated to RF with a balanced > > > > modulator, the occupied bandwidth doubles. In this case a > > > > signaling > > > > > > rate equal to the occupied RF bandwidth, i.e. 2400 baud for a > > > > 2400 Hz > > > > > > bandwidth, is the limit. > > > > > > > > That said, it's readily possible to fit a 5600 bit per second > > > > data > > > > > > stream into a 2400 Hz bandwidth by picking a modulation scheme > > > > that > > > > > > has a bandwidth efficiency of greater than 2.33 bits/s per Hz; in > > > > this case, 8-PSK at a signaling rate of 1867 baud is but one way > > > > to > > > > > > send 5600 bits per second over a 2400 Hz BW channel. > > > > > > > > 73, > > > > Mike K1MK > > > > > > > > Michael Keane K1MK > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to > > > > Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > > > > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > > > > discussion) > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > > discussion) > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
Most telephone circuits have a bandwidth of about 2400hz which will support a symbol rate of 2400baud. They just use a modulation scheme that allows multiple bits per baud to be be sent, eg 32QAM or higher. They can't shove more than 2400 symbol changes per second down a pipe of 2400hz however. I still can't figure out how the ARRL figures that they can do it -- and why our regulation paradigm needs to be changed in order to allow something that is impossible. tim ab0wr On Sunday 29 January 2006 11:21, Dave Bernstein wrote: > If Nyquist is the governing limit, how do computer modem designers > get 56 kbps through a 3 khz telphone line? That's a C/B of more than > 18. > >73, > >Dave, AA6YQ > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > No, the claim I am investigating is concerning a statement that > > there is a > > > need in amateur radio for a new mode with a symbol rate of > > 5600baud and a > > > bandwidth of 2400hz. > > > > I'm very interested in how such a feat can be accomplished. > > > > I'm with you. My first thought is that such a thing would be > > impossible > > > because of Nyquist. > > > > But I thought I would ask to see if someone knows of a new > > development in the > > > Electrical Engineering field that has invalidated Nyquist. > > > > tim ab0wr > > > > On Saturday 28 January 2006 22:41, Michael Keane K1MK wrote: > > > At 10:32 PM 1/28/06, you wrote: > > > >Respectfully, you are talking about compressing the content. > > That won't > > > > > help with cramming a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz > > bandwidth. It might > > > > > help send more content faster - making a slower circuit "look" > > like a > > > > > 5600 baud circuit, but it won't help put a 5600 baud circuit > > into a > > > > > 2400hz bandwidth. > > > > > > > >Anybody else got any ideas? > > > > > > > >tim ab0wr > > > > > > One encounters a fundamental problem with Nyquist in attempting > > to > > > > use a signaling rate that's more than twice the baseband > > bandwidth. > > > > If the baseband signal is then translated to RF with a balanced > > > modulator, the occupied bandwidth doubles. In this case a > > signaling > > > > rate equal to the occupied RF bandwidth, i.e. 2400 baud for a > > 2400 Hz > > > > bandwidth, is the limit. > > > > > > That said, it's readily possible to fit a 5600 bit per second > > data > > > > stream into a 2400 Hz bandwidth by picking a modulation scheme > > that > > > > has a bandwidth efficiency of greater than 2.33 bits/s per Hz; in > > > this case, 8-PSK at a signaling rate of 1867 baud is but one way > > to > > > > send 5600 bits per second over a 2400 Hz BW channel. > > > > > > 73, > > > Mike K1MK > > > > > > Michael Keane K1MK > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to > > Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > > > discussion) > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > Other areas of interest: > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > discussion) > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
Do you need 5600 baud or 5600 bits/second? (i.e. do you need 5,600 symbols per second or bits per second?) -ps Tim Gorman wrote: > Question for the digital experts: > > How do you get a 5600 baud circuit to fit into a 2400hz bandwidth? > > tim ab0wr Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Digital TV (off topic)
Sorry if this seem obvious, but it needs to be asked: what video is the store feeding their sets? A standard DVD player? (yes, some stores are that lame.) You'll never see the difference that way. An HD set has to have a HD signal to show you what it can do. Since a DTV can't display a HDTV signal, it can be difficult for the store to show the same picture on both sets unless they end up feeding a DTV signal to both. - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 9:33 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Digital TV (off topic) I like the idea of a widescreen TV and have begun looking around for one. For the life of me, I don't see the $5000 plasma screen pictures (in stores) as a whole lot better than the picture I currently get from my satellite provider (standard definition). I looked carefully at a 42 inch DTV and a 42 HDTV , with a $3000 price diference, I could see NO difference. The salemans said he saw a big difference, maybe I am digitalblind.Andy K3UK Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) SPONSORED LINKS Ham radio Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply Icom ham radio Yaesu ham radio YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
If Nyquist is the governing limit, how do computer modem designers get 56 kbps through a 3 khz telphone line? That's a C/B of more than 18. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > No, the claim I am investigating is concerning a statement that there is a > need in amateur radio for a new mode with a symbol rate of 5600baud and a > bandwidth of 2400hz. > > I'm very interested in how such a feat can be accomplished. > > I'm with you. My first thought is that such a thing would be impossible > because of Nyquist. > > But I thought I would ask to see if someone knows of a new development in the > Electrical Engineering field that has invalidated Nyquist. > > tim ab0wr > > On Saturday 28 January 2006 22:41, Michael Keane K1MK wrote: > > At 10:32 PM 1/28/06, you wrote: > > >Respectfully, you are talking about compressing the content. That won't > > > help with cramming a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz bandwidth. It might > > > help send more content faster - making a slower circuit "look" like a > > > 5600 baud circuit, but it won't help put a 5600 baud circuit into a > > > 2400hz bandwidth. > > > > > >Anybody else got any ideas? > > > > > >tim ab0wr > > > > One encounters a fundamental problem with Nyquist in attempting to > > use a signaling rate that's more than twice the baseband bandwidth. > > > > If the baseband signal is then translated to RF with a balanced > > modulator, the occupied bandwidth doubles. In this case a signaling > > rate equal to the occupied RF bandwidth, i.e. 2400 baud for a 2400 Hz > > bandwidth, is the limit. > > > > That said, it's readily possible to fit a 5600 bit per second data > > stream into a 2400 Hz bandwidth by picking a modulation scheme that > > has a bandwidth efficiency of greater than 2.33 bits/s per Hz; in > > this case, 8-PSK at a signaling rate of 1867 baud is but one way to > > send 5600 bits per second over a 2400 Hz BW channel. > > > > 73, > > Mike K1MK > > > > Michael Keane K1MK > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > > discussion) > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Best program?
Howdy Graeme: For all-around digital ops, I like MixW. It has a ton of modes to play with and has a pretty nice interface. I believe MultiPSK also has a bunch of modes and is free. I prefer MixW because the user interface is a bit easier to navigate. 73, Kev - K4VD On 1/29/06, zl1gbb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Greetings All > I have just got my PSK31 operational. Now I am looking around for RTTY > and FSK software. So which is best? > > cheers Graeme zl1gbb Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: K3UK Telnet Address
Andy: More often than not, I do not connect to your cluster. In fact, very rarely have I actually made it in. Human nature leads me to suspect it can't be my fault but that generally is not the case. Maybe you can give me a pointer. I put Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org into my browser (either IE or FireFox). A Command window opens up and says: Connecting to cluster.dynalias.org... It never shows anything else, but after a minute or less the Command prompt just goes away. I do an nslookup and come up with the following: Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:\Documents and Settings\kderkind>nslookup cluster.dynalias.org Server: dslrouter Address: 192.168.1.1 Non-authoritative answer: Name:cluster.dynalias.org Address: 66.24.209.66 C:\Documents and Settings\kderkind> I try pinging 66.24.209.66 and get request timeouts. I do a tracert to that address and I'm getting out to the Internet. After many hops (17), I start timing out around at a router with the end of the name nyroc.rr.com. This scenario happens all the time to me. Am I broke or is the cluster down a lot? Kev - K4VD On 1/29/06, obrienaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org is the address you enter. > > Andy K3UK Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Best program?
Greetings All I have just got my PSK31 operational. Now I am looking around for RTTY and FSK software. So which is best? cheers Graeme zl1gbb Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: K3UK Telnet Address
Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org is the address you enter. Andy K3UK -- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Giella KN4LF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anyone know the exact address to type into the telnet window in MixW to access the K3UK Digital Telnet? I guess the port is 4?! > > Also my WWV data is no longer updating in the DX Cluster window. I have /dxs/wwv250.html? in the WWV Page box and it seems to be the correct address?! > > 73, > Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF > Lakeland, FL, USA > Grid Square EL97AW > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Proof Of God Through Science: http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/audio/newevidence.htm > KN4LF Amateur & SWL Radio History: http://www.kn4lf.com > KN4LF MF Radio Propagation Theory Notes: http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf8.htm > > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 1/27/2006 > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
Yes, 16QAM or 8PSK, if possible. QPSK with its sidebands would be broader than 2400 Hz. Jose, CO2JA --- Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Respectfully, you are talking about compressing the > content. That won't help > with cramming a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz > bandwidth. It might help send > more content faster - making a slower circuit "look" > like a 5600 baud > circuit, but it won't help put a 5600 baud circuit > into a 2400hz bandwidth. > > Anybody else got any ideas? > > tim ab0wr > > > > On Saturday 28 January 2006 19:51, Dave Bernstein > wrote: > > If there is redundancy in the data -- e.g. images, > or natural language > > text -- loss-less compression before transmission > and decompression > > after reception might get you there. > > > > 73, > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tim Gorman > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Question for the digital experts: > > > > > > How do you get a 5600 baud circuit to fit into a > 2400hz bandwidth? > > > > > > tim ab0wr > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to > Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > The MixW Reflector : > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol > (band plan policy > > discussion) > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: knock it off "RANT"
from the RSGB, Improving Bandplan Compliance, paper number 138 -An increasing proportion of the Amateur Radio community is using non-CW modes and deploying beacons within the CW communication sub-bands. -national societies could do more to improve compliance with IARU bandplans. -Note: The authors believe that the degree of compliance within the CW sub-bands in particular is indicative of the respect for IARU bandplans in general. -The IARU Region 1 HF Bandplan has served the amateur community very well for many years, and has always been made available by the IARU member societies through a range of printed publications and internet resources. However, in recent years, it has been observed that a) an increasing number of Amateur Radio operators can be heard operating data and telephony modes as well as beacons that transmit position and propagation data within the CW communication sub-bands: b) non-Morse stations within the CW sub-bands are getting more aggressive and more confident, believing that they are "entitled" to do what they do. -from the Conclusions section 2) That each national society (or, initially, a small 'pilot' group of national socieites) work together to develop common and consistent methods for bandplan compliance by a) logging incidents of non-compliance within their national borders; b) producing regular reports that summarise the non-compliances. *** On Sunday 29 January 2006 02:14, Dr. Howard S. White wrote: > Thank You Brad for you usual clear headed analysis of the US situation. > > It is indeed a very sad statement about some US hams that they do not trust > others to abide by a Gentlemen's agreement and that they believe that very > parochial attitudes must apply to the rest of the world who share the same > bands. > > There is something called the Law of Psychological Reciprocity" which > roughly paraphrases as "I will trust you will do to me what I would do to > you"The lack of trust seems to imply that those who do not trust their > fellow hams to behave properly do so because they do not trust themselves > to obey the rules. Since you and I have lived in countries with > regulation by bandwidth, we know it works and that you can trust the vast > your fellow hams to obey the "Gentlemen's Agreements" > __ > Howard S. White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 ex-AE6SM KY6LA > Website: www.ky6la.com > "No Good Deed Goes Unpunished" > "Ham Antennas Save Lives - Katrina, 2003 San Diego Fires, 911" Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
No, the claim I am investigating is concerning a statement that there is a need in amateur radio for a new mode with a symbol rate of 5600baud and a bandwidth of 2400hz. I'm very interested in how such a feat can be accomplished. I'm with you. My first thought is that such a thing would be impossible because of Nyquist. But I thought I would ask to see if someone knows of a new development in the Electrical Engineering field that has invalidated Nyquist. tim ab0wr On Saturday 28 January 2006 22:41, Michael Keane K1MK wrote: > At 10:32 PM 1/28/06, you wrote: > >Respectfully, you are talking about compressing the content. That won't > > help with cramming a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz bandwidth. It might > > help send more content faster - making a slower circuit "look" like a > > 5600 baud circuit, but it won't help put a 5600 baud circuit into a > > 2400hz bandwidth. > > > >Anybody else got any ideas? > > > >tim ab0wr > > One encounters a fundamental problem with Nyquist in attempting to > use a signaling rate that's more than twice the baseband bandwidth. > > If the baseband signal is then translated to RF with a balanced > modulator, the occupied bandwidth doubles. In this case a signaling > rate equal to the occupied RF bandwidth, i.e. 2400 baud for a 2400 Hz > bandwidth, is the limit. > > That said, it's readily possible to fit a 5600 bit per second data > stream into a 2400 Hz bandwidth by picking a modulation scheme that > has a bandwidth efficiency of greater than 2.33 bits/s per Hz; in > this case, 8-PSK at a signaling rate of 1867 baud is but one way to > send 5600 bits per second over a 2400 Hz BW channel. > > 73, > Mike K1MK > > Michael Keane K1MK > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > Other areas of interest: > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > discussion) > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Digital voice on HF
What kind of RF bandwidth would the 3 Kbs require? Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are voice encoding schemes that require much less. I've > experimented with this codec (for example), and found it quite good even > at 3k bits per second: > http://www.hawksoft.com/hawkvoice/ > > It's not lossless mind you, but quite intelegible and almost natural > sounding. > > Artie Lekstutis > KC2MFS > > >What would it take to provide a similar connection on HF? Assume you'll need > >*at least* a 30kb data channel. Most of the protocols I have seen today will > >get you about 2bits/hz on HF. That means you'll need at least a 15khz wide > >data channel. > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: 5600 baud circuit in 2400hz
At 10:32 PM 1/28/06, you wrote: >Respectfully, you are talking about compressing the content. That won't help >with cramming a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz bandwidth. It might help send >more content faster - making a slower circuit "look" like a 5600 baud >circuit, but it won't help put a 5600 baud circuit into a 2400hz bandwidth. > >Anybody else got any ideas? > >tim ab0wr One encounters a fundamental problem with Nyquist in attempting to use a signaling rate that's more than twice the baseband bandwidth. If the baseband signal is then translated to RF with a balanced modulator, the occupied bandwidth doubles. In this case a signaling rate equal to the occupied RF bandwidth, i.e. 2400 baud for a 2400 Hz bandwidth, is the limit. That said, it's readily possible to fit a 5600 bit per second data stream into a 2400 Hz bandwidth by picking a modulation scheme that has a bandwidth efficiency of greater than 2.33 bits/s per Hz; in this case, 8-PSK at a signaling rate of 1867 baud is but one way to send 5600 bits per second over a 2400 Hz BW channel. 73, Mike K1MK Michael Keane K1MK [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Digital TV (off topic)
Have several wide screen HD TV's... Spent $5,500 for a 51" plasma about 2 years ago.. which I bought online at what was then a good price... By comparison, the latest one was just spent $949 for a 32" LCD at Costco which currently sits over my radio station desk and looks really cool during contests displaying contest data and digital waterfalls.Costco has lots of big HD TV's well under $2K now that are more than good enough... Don't waste your money on the extended warranty as the prices are dropping so fast if it breaks that you could replace with a new one for the cost of the warranty. Picture Quality... You gotta be visually challenged.. no comparison whatsover between HD and DTV. Just look at a football game in HD and see the brand of beer they are drinking in the stands.. you could never see that on DTV... Seriously though.. after 2/17/09 every tv broadcast will be HD.. so why waste money on old soon to be obsolete technology AND expect a lot of TV Sales after the Superbowl as they try to get rid of unsold inventory... __Howard S. White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 ex-AE6SM KY6LAWebsite: www.ky6la.com "No Good Deed Goes Unpunished""Ham Antennas Save Lives - Katrina, 2003 San Diego Fires, 911" - Original Message - From: obrienaj To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 9:33 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Digital TV (off topic) I like the idea of a widescreen TV and have begun looking around for one. For the life of me, I don't see the $5000 plasma screen pictures (in stores) as a whole lot better than the picture I currently get from my satellite provider (standard definition). I looked carefully at a 42 inch DTV and a 42 HDTV , with a $3000 price diference, I could see NO difference. The salemans said he saw a big difference, maybe I am digitalblind.Andy K3UK--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "SHERMON HALL, JR." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> Rick> > I agree with you I have a big screen. It makes it a lot easier for my old eyes to see what is happening.> > SHERMON HALL> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Original Message - > From: KV9U > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 3:17 PM> Subject: [digitalradio] Digital TV (off topic)> > > The cable and satellite companies will provide whatever the public wants > and for as long as the public wants it. To do otherwise would lose > market share in a very competitive market.> > I have actually been very disappointed how slo the change has been > coming. I am not usually an early adopter and prefer to be at least a > bit back of the bleeding edge, but I wanted a large screen HDTV mainly > for watching DVD's and so a few years ago went for a fairly large screen > with older CRT technology which was a good choice. I added a tuner a > while ago and can get off air from the major networks due to my ridge > top location. But the stations are still mostly tx on low power. One of > them is about 40 miles away and running 1 KW (to a gain antenna at a low > height) and I can rx OK, so when they finally switch and put the digital > signals on the "good" antennas and higher power, I think things will be > pretty easy to rx.> > Of course no local stuff is HDTV and a lot of network isn't either. > Considering that at one time we were going to turn off analog about now > (spring of 2006). But of course it never happened and will take many > more years from what it looks like.> > I would point out that the Japanese HD system is analog and so they have > to abandon their system if they wish to switch to digital. At least we > are going to make the switch here in the U.S. from a horrible inferior > analog system to a fairly decent HD system in one jump. Once you watch > HDTV on a big screen, it is hard to tolerate even DVD quality. Imagaine > what will happen all over again (just like going from video tape to DVD) > with the switch in a few years from DVD to Blu-Ray or HD-DVD whichever > (or both) wins in the marketplace. We will likely want to buy some of > our movies all over again in the new higher definition format:)> > 73,> > Rick, KV9U> > SHERMON HALL, JR. wrote:> > > Danny> > > > Yes you cable company will say this so will the satellite companies, > > because the FCC has mandated that they must provide converter. But > > this will only be for a few years and then they are to go away.> > > > I have worked in electronics and broadcast now for more years than I > > want to think about.> > > > What the FCC is doing is what they want to do. The broadcaster's > > didn't want the change. The f
Re: [digitalradio] Re: knock it off "RANT"
Thank You Brad for you usual clear headed analysis of the US situation. It is indeed a very sad statement about some US hams that they do not trust others to abide by a Gentlemen's agreement and that they believe that very parochial attitudes must apply to the rest of the world who share the same bands. There is something called the Law of Psychological Reciprocity" which roughly paraphrases as "I will trust you will do to me what I would do to you" The lack of trust seems to imply that those who do not trust their fellow hams to behave properly do so because they do not trust themselves to obey the rules. Since you and I have lived in countries with regulation by bandwidth, we know it works and that you can trust the vast your fellow hams to obey the "Gentlemen's Agreements" __Howard S. White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 ex-AE6SM KY6LAWebsite: www.ky6la.com "No Good Deed Goes Unpunished""Ham Antennas Save Lives - Katrina, 2003 San Diego Fires, 911" - Original Message - From: Brad To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 12:41 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: knock it off "RANT" --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]...> wrote:>> Can the Moderator, please stop this rubbish.> Can US hams please realise that this is a worldwide group and it isread by hams around the world.> If you want to discuss your internal US problems do it somewhere else.> > Ross> ZL1WN>Hear Hear. This has got to be the most long winded, irrelevant, parochial threadever. And it all comes down to lack of trust. Americans do not trusteach other to comply with a Gentlemans Agreement. It's sad.Brad VK2QQ Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) SPONSORED LINKS Ham radio Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply Icom ham radio Yaesu ham radio YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
