Discovered the Waterfall was not extended to the full width of the segment so software didn't decode any signals past 1kc. After expanding the waterfall the software did decode properly but finished in a little more time than 1.5.
Bill W2PKY On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Bill Barrett <[email protected]> wrote: > I have noticed that the new 1.6.1 does not decode as well as 1.5 on > JT65-JT9 mode. > I have a Flex 6500 and can set up to 4 JT65 sessions. > When a new version comes out I always set up the old and new versions to > see if any improvement. > Sadly, 1.6.1 misses several "Q"s that the 1.5 displays on each minute > segment. > On a positive note the JT9 FAST works very well. > Have made a handful of contacts on 6M & 10M. > Hope this helps. > > Bill W2PKY > > > > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Bill Somerville <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 27/08/2015 22:50, Richard Stanley wrote: >> >> Hi Bill >> >> Hi Richard, >> >> >> My soundcard was on 44 changed it to 48 and it now decodes everything >> that the jt65-fh variants decode. >> I didn’t think jt65-hf in either variant would decode stuff that wsjt-x >> couldn’t and it was a wrong setting here. >> I will post the same info where I saw the original comment that got me to >> do the limited test. >> It was on 48 but recently upgraded to win10 and it must have reset it to >> 44 ? >> >> Thanks for the update, that is an interesting data point. It seems that >> the Windows 10 upgrade is not very robust in preserving user defined driver >> settings. Elsewhere I have seen reports of USB enumerations being reset >> during a Windows 10 upgrade also. >> >> >> Richard m0clz >> >> 73 >> Bill >> G4WJS. >> >> >> >> *From:* Bill Somerville <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Thursday, August 27, 2015 10:09 PM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] wsjtx decodes >> >> On 27/08/2015 22:01, Richard Stanley wrote: >> >> Hi Richard, >> >> >> I have been reading people saying that wsjt-x is missing decodes so I got >> jt65-hf and jt65-hf-hp9hqx but disabled ptt on the jt65hf versions and left >> them running. >> jt65-hf-hb9hqx consistently decodes stuff that wsjt-x misses out, at >> 19:13 wsjt-x reports nothing but the jt65-hf-hb9hqx decodes 2 signals ? >> They are all using the same soundcard and radio ? >> >> I have attached a screenshot of the very limited test that I carried out. >> The wsjtx version was 5819 >> >> Ensure that you have set the default soundcard sample rate to at least >> 48kHz, this is required for WSJT-X to perform correctly. AFAIK the JT65-HF >> programs use an 11.25kHz sample stream which will be optimally derived from >> a soundcard set at 44.1kHz. 44.1kHz sample rate is usually the default and >> is considered the consumer maximum sample rate. >> >> You should be aware that the jt65-hf variants all use the same decoding >> engine which was released with an old variant of WSJT and we are quite >> confident that the decoding ability of the current WSJT-X is considerably >> improved in both speed and resolution over that rather ancient version. >> >> >> Richard m0clz >> >> 73 >> Bill >> G4WJS. >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> wsjt-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >> >> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
