| To: | "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] [Bulk] Re: Q-Signals for Contesting |
| From: | RT Clay <rt_clay@bellsouth.net> |
| Reply-to: | RT Clay <rt_clay@bellsouth.net> |
| Date: | Wed, 13 May 2015 14:43:53 +0000 (UTC) |
| List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
>On Wednesday, May 13, 2015 8:37 AM, Joe <nss@mwt.net> wrote: > > >Vlad how about a signal SSB so processed it's barely understandable? Obviously you give them more than "5" on the "readability" rating to indicate they "turned the processing knob to 11" 59 = perfect audio69 = slight over-processing, some syllables lost 99 = loud but unintelligible TorN4OGW _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] TO7A debacle, Jeff Kinzli |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Re. TO7A Debacle, Richard F DiDonna NN3W |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: Q-Signals for Contesting, V. Sidarau |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] [Bulk] Re: Q-Signals for Contesting, Zack Widup |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |