Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X vs JTDX sensitivity comparison

2021-09-18 Thread Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
On 9/18/2021 10:08 AM, Joe Taylor via wsjt-devel wrote: It turns out that Mike, W3IP, was using WSJT-X for FT8 with the "Decode | Fast" setting. With nearly any modern computer one should use "Decode | Deep" for maximum FT8 sensitivity. Was in the shack today, and checked WSJT-X setting and

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X vs JTDX sensitivity comparison

2021-09-18 Thread Joe Taylor via wsjt-devel
Hi all, In case you had wondered about the following post from K1HTV: On 9/14/2021 1:55 PM, Rich - K1HTV via wsjt-devel wrote: After this past weekend's ARRL VHF contest, one of the top SOHP scorers, Mike, W3IP, posted a note to the PVRC reflector along with the breakdown of his score. In his

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X vs JTDX sensitivity comparison

2021-09-15 Thread Roeland Jansen via wsjt-devel
then, like always -- use the right tool for the right job? On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 11:12 AM Jim Brown via wsjt-devel < wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > On 9/14/2021 11:43 PM, Laurie, VK3AMA via wsjt-devel wrote: > > That has been my experience as well. On the surface JTDX offers a > >

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X vs JTDX sensitivity comparison

2021-09-15 Thread Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
On 9/14/2021 11:43 PM, Laurie, VK3AMA via wsjt-devel wrote: That has been my experience as well. On the surface JTDX offers a greater number of decodes, but many were false decodes. If I made the QSO and it shows up on LOTW, it wasn't a false decode! And, BTW, WSJT-X is not without false

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X vs JTDX sensitivity comparison

2021-09-15 Thread Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
On 9/14/2021 10:55 AM, Rich - K1HTV via wsjt-devel wrote: *"When operating on FT8, I ran WSJT-X and JTDX in parallel. The JTDX decode capability on weak signals is significantly better - but JTDX doesn't recognize contest mode. I had several contacts that decoded only on JTDX so I had to

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X vs JTDX sensitivity comparison

2021-09-15 Thread Laurie, VK3AMA via wsjt-devel
On 15/09/2021 4:27 pm, Saku via wsjt-devel wrote: f wsjt-x decode is set to "Normal" or "Deep" I would rather say "slightly better, in some cases". That has been my experience as well. On the surface JTDX offers a greater number of decodes, but many were false decodes. If JTDX is truly

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X vs JTDX sensitivity comparison

2021-09-15 Thread Saku via wsjt-devel
HI ! My opinion: I have also tested this some time ago running both programs in parallel with same linux PC, same rig IC7300, OCF dipole 80-10m. If wsjt-x decode is set to "Normal" or "Deep" I would rather say "slightly better, in some cases". But difference is so small that it did not cause

[wsjt-devel] WSJT-X vs JTDX sensitivity comparison

2021-09-14 Thread Rich - K1HTV via wsjt-devel
After this past weekend's ARRL VHF contest, one of the top SOHP scorers, Mike, W3IP, posted a note to the PVRC reflector along with the breakdown of his score. In his comments he compared the FT8 sensitivity of WSJT-X vs JTDX. Mike is a technically sharp guy and I trust what he has reported. Here