Rember Jay,
I was listing to a solid S9 tone and new exactly what to listen for. In
my second test I could definitely here band noise between the snaps and
crackles which makes me think I could have heard a dit once and awhile.
Actually hearing a single dit on a single space is unlikely; howeve
there must be serious problems here...
I can get up to 7 words a minute, thats it ... I can barely make out
signals between dits..
25 wpm... no way... not here anyway..
SDR1K /w HPSDR P4 3.2 ghz 1gb pc2700
W9RAY
Ed Russell wrote:
> I can't reproduce this result. On a 3ghz quad core, with
Hi Ed,
I want to thank you guys for responding.
I also get all the pops and crackles and the panadapter display flashing
on and off drives me crazy, but yes I believe I could hear the 200 hz
offset solid S9 tone. Useful band noise? I doubt I would have heard a
dit or a dah!
What would be rea
I can't reproduce this result. On a 3ghz quad core, with 192khz
sample rate and cpu at 8%, sending 25wpm, I hear no usable band sound
between dots. Only pops and crackles.
73 Ed W2RF
On 25 Apr 2008 at 15:15, Robert Dennison wrote:
> Hey Jerry,
>
> You've probably noticed my post just pervious
Hi Rob
You have QSK with a SDR-1000 at 25 WPM CW? Please confirm that you
can hear band activity under these conditions - maybe QSO someone
and ask him to break you as you tx - then see if you can actually hear him.
Is your SDR-1000 unmodified in respect to rx/tx switching - i.e, the
standa
Hey Jerry,
You've probably noticed my post just pervious to yours. With a 3Ghz
Pentium 3D and nothing but v1.10.4 running, I had QSK to 25 Wpm. A
Pentium 3D is a bit of a dog so I bet a top end box gets 40WPM...
How about giving us your QSK performance limit? Your machine and
Windows info.
Quoting Jerry Flanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Fri 25 Apr 2008
02:04:13 PM PDT:
> At 03:35 PM 4/25/2008, Jim Lux wrote:
>> Quoting Jerry Flanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Fri 25 Apr 2008
>> 11:30:57 AM PDT:
>>
>>
>>> I am beginning to wonder if CW in the production software is broken
>>> and only
At 03:35 PM 4/25/2008, Jim Lux wrote:
>Quoting Jerry Flanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Fri 25 Apr 2008
>11:30:57 AM PDT:
>
>
>>I am beginning to wonder if CW in the production software is broken
>>and only we in the field notice it. Or perhaps the production version
>>does not presently include feat
Hi Jerry,
I think QSK results are highly "processor," Windows version and
associated executing apps dependent.
With flexRadio we all have to be careful about the performance of our
computer when making high end performance statements. Performance
statements are meaningless with out a the defi
Quoting Jerry Flanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Fri 25 Apr 2008
11:30:57 AM PDT:
> I am beginning to wonder if CW in the production software is broken
> and only we in the field notice it. Or perhaps the production version
> does not presently include features of the version used by Bob above?
In topic Re: [Flexradio] CW QSK ability
At 11:24 AM 4/25/2008, Dave Blaschke wrote:
>OK, here is my final word on this topic.
>
>PowerSDR/SDR-5000 is an outstanding performer, in my opinion. So it
>is my hope that this QSK topic will be given due consideration by the
>PowerSDR programming team. CW
11 matches
Mail list logo
