RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] Shift 170 -vs- 200

To: RTTY Reflector <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Shift 170 -vs- 200
From: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 08:29:07 -0700
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
On Jun 9, 2011, at 5:51 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> Because some of the early "multi-mode" hardware boxes were designed
> around TI modem chips that implemented the Bell 103 standard with a 
> fixed 200 Hz shift.  

I believe part of the reason is that the TNC manufacturers were really selling 
the TNCs for HF Packet (200 Hz shift), with RTTY/Amtor (170 Hz shift) tagging 
along just to pad the specs sheet.

What probably hurt more than 200 Hz shift was the fact that the TNCs had such 
broad filters (needing to pass 300 baud HF Packet data rate). 

Even the TNCs that can change shift from 200 Hz to 170 Hz, such as the PK232 
and the Kantronics KAM Plus could not adapt to a narrower filter because their 
filters were implemented in hardware.

Garry NI6T had modified the PK-232 to narrow the filters down.  I forget now, 
but I recall vaguely that the filters use bi-quad topology with opamps, 
resistors and capacitors.  Garry had written it up in a Communications 
Quarterly article back then, and those PK-232 had gone to some DXpeditions.  I 
believe Garry himself had modified two of them.  One of them definitely went 
with Garry to the 3D2CU Conway expedition and he had also loaned a modified 
PK-232 to a few other DXpeditions that he didn't go himself to.  A number of 
you probably could thank the modifications for making it through HI HI.

I had modified a KAM Plus, which I still own, to also narrow it down for 45.45 
baud instead of 300 baud.  The KAM Plus was much easier to modify since it had 
used switched capacitor filters.  The only things that needed changing are a 
dozen or so 1% resistors.  You compute the resistor values, go buy them and 
that is all there was, no fuss and no muss since precision capacitors were not 
involved.  I ran that KAM for a number of years, until the Timewave DSP-599zx 
came out and I used the 599zx as the regenerator for the KAM.  The ST-8000 was 
later added as a regenerator ahead of another KAM to provide two-modem 
operation, but that second KAM need not be modified since it was just decoding 
from a clean regenerated AFSK signal from the ST-8000.

The problem with hardware mods of course is that they are not easily reversible 
by a switch.  So, once modified, they could no longer be used on HF Packet, 
which was fine by most of us who hate the wide HF Packet signals that use to 
QRM us when they ran up in the upper 14090 kHz region.

> When the signal is sufficiently strong one has plenty of reserve
> margin and 3 dB doesn't matter.  

The degradation from receiving a 200 Hz shift signal with a proper modem is not 
as bad as 3 dB.  However, if you don't tune a 200 Hz shift signal carefully 
under selective fading, one of the tones can bias the ATC of the decoder and 
throw all sorts of errors.  The way to mitigate it somewhat is to tune the 
signal so that the vertical and horizontal ellipses of a crossed banana are off 
by about equal angles.

The degradation is much worse when you use an unmodified TNC to receive a 
regular RTTY signal.  When you try to receive an RTTY signal with a demodulator 
that is matched to 300 baud, the degradation is a whopping 8 dB or so if the 
receiver does not have a narrow filter.  The transmitting end need to send 
about 7 times the power for you to copy them with an unmodified TNC.

You still see a number of 200 Hz shift signals during RTTY contests today.  Sad 
that people are still using TNCs, when software modems are literally free and 
can be used with the purchase of an inexpensive $30 sound card.  Unlike the PCI 
bus, days there are no longer any really "bad" USB sound cards (unless you buy 
the truly cheap $6 ones that are meant for USB boom headsets).  Remember how 
bad some of the early PCI Sound Blasters were? Now those same guys manufacture 
the outstanding E-MU 0404 and 0204.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>