I have updated the database of Digital Radio Century Club ahead of the
European PSK Club PSK63 QSO party. The database is at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/database
I updated it to include all recent new members of this group, at least
those that had a callsign in their subscription
In my opinion time delay is not even necessary, it is a matter of
choosing the right compression at the right level.
If I had time I would start the following project:
* choose an existing speech-to-text converter (open source)
* use cbh compression on the text, as normally no more than 250
Jose A. Amador wrote:
Most likely the module for the old NIC is no longer adequate for the new
NIC. Look for the proper module and install it.
Hi Jose,
I know that the module for the old NIC (module ne) is no longer
adequate, but also realized that Mdk 9.1 did not offer a module for
Robert,
Thanks for pointing this out. The link is for 1999.
Regarding WF1F/RITTY.
The 1998 manual I have for WF1B (a DOS program) shows support for
RITTY as a DOS TSR. Earlier manuals don't show it. I recall trying
to get a sound card going in DOS. It was a real bear-- at least for
the
Hi Mike.
I studied some aspects of voice recognition about 10 years ago when I thought
of joining a research group at Czech Technical University in Prague. I have a
260 pages text book on my book shelf on voice recognition.
Voice signal has high redundancy if compared to a text transcription.
Here is the overnight 40M PSK31 report for 17/11/07. Stations heard in
Western New York State, antenna= Inverted V at 40 feet. Stations Heard list
and signal strength calculations were generated by Winwarbler while I
slept!
Callsign DXCCCountryFreq Signal
Brian,
You're welcome. Yeah, back then the PC and soundcard technology was in its
infancy compared to the technology we use today. I was aware of the RTTY-RITTY
capability because Brian had sent me code to test before he released RITTY for
sale. Ray and Brian were working together to make sure
Hi All;
Yesterday used ALE400 in a long QSO with EA3AFR, Txema, on 14094.5 .
Conditions were not the best, yet
We were able to chat for about 30 minutes despite some QRM/QSB. The software
was very impressive,
Working well even down to my noise floor.
Under poor conditions it is important
Hello John,
TKS for the report of this long QSO.
Under poor conditions it is important to avoid collisions by typing and ending
with an over sign, be it BT,K or
In the last test version, I have integered a Sholto Fisher idea to limit
collisions, which is the following:
If A receives a
When using Simon's DM780 for MFSK16, I get a lot of question marks ?
in the received text display. If I quickly switch to MultiPSK I don't
get the question marks. It's kind of a pain.
I assume the question mark is displayed because some unknown character
has been received. Is there any way of
Not at the moment...
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
- Original Message -
From: Bob Christenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When using Simon's DM780 for MFSK16, I get a lot of question marks ?
in the received text display. If I quickly switch to MultiPSK I don't
get the question marks. It's kind of a
Leigh,
I hope to have the project used throughout the world in less then a
year, once I get started. My problem is that I need someone to help me
start. If I don't find someone, the project will die with my two papers.
73's
Mike n6ief
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, pa0r [EMAIL
KB: 5100 and counting..
Mike
Bob Christenson wrote:
When using Simon's DM780 for MFSK16, I get a lot of question marks ?
in the received text display. If I quickly switch to MultiPSK I don't
get the question marks. It's kind of a pain.
I assume the question mark is displayed because some
Look at:
http://rttycontesting.com/2007survey/2007octsurveyresults.html
It reflects the comments of over 500 RTTY contesters.
One major conclusion: More RTTY contests wanted.
This is despite the fact that there are at least 32 now.
So if you think RTTY contests are going to disappear, think
Brian A wrote:
Look at:
http://rttycontesting.com/2007survey/2007octsurveyresults.html
http://rttycontesting.com/2007survey/2007octsurveyresults.html
It reflects the comments of over 500 RTTY contesters.
One major conclusion: More RTTY contests wanted.
This is despite the fact that
Roger,
What about shared resoures don't you understand?
There isn't any RTTY portion of the band for US licensees other than
what is contained in the regs. For example on 20M:
14.025-14.150 MHz: CW, RTTY/Data (for several classes of licenses.)
There simply isn't enough room to fit 500
Brian A wrote:
Roger,
What about shared resoures don't you understand?
I don't particularly care for the tone of your post. Thanks for the
lecture. Conversation ended. SK
de Roger W6VZV
On Nov 17, 2007 5:47 PM, Brian A [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roger,
What about shared resoures don't you understand?
The resoures part. Some sort of sour candy ?
:)
Andy.
I have a few radios (ARC-210-1851, PSC-5D, PRC-117F) at work that operate in
MELP for a vocoder Mixed Excitation Linear Prediction. We have found MELP
to be superior (more human-like voice qualities less Charlie Browns
teacher) to LPC-10 but we use far larger bandwidths than 100 khz. I do
Hey, Andy - we have these great numbers now. How about we do something
with them? Maybe something like a short-duration digital WAS contest?
Maybe 6 to 12 hours, all bands (WARC excluded, of course) or something
similar? Or even a DRCC DXCC digital contest? Even just a work all
the DRCC numbers
20 matches
Mail list logo
