[Top] [All Lists]

[TenTec] Old Modes never die... they just get soundcard support!

To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: [TenTec] Old Modes never die... they just get soundcard support!
From: ghoffman@spacetech.com (Gary Hoffman)
Date: Fri Apr 4 14:47:22 2003
I can offer my thoughts on RTTY.

First of all, I use both PSK31 and RTTY.  I also do slow scan TV.  I use
my sound card and software for all of these.  So to me, it's not a hardware
or software issue that determines which one I prefer.

PSK31 is certainly more efficient.  In point of fact, it is only slightly
less efficient than morse code itself.  As you all know very well, you can
hold five or six qso's simultaneously within one filter bandwidth of say 2.4
kHz, and
not have them interfere with each other.  You can do even better with an
external DSP filter.

But I have to say that RTTY is my favorite digital mode.  It does use more
bandwidth, and so of course is inferior to PSK in that area.  As a result
you often need to run an amp to get through.  But, it is simple to use, and
today's advanced software easily handles the syncing and other issues.
Maybe I just plain like it better ! I know it's silly of me... I shouldn't
try to have FUN in the hobby !  <grin>

73 de Gary, AA2IZ

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Clifford" <johnclif@ix.netcom.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 2:01 PM
Subject: [TenTec] Old Modes never die... they just get soundcard support!

> Interesting thread about preferability of FSK over AFSK for RTTY... but it
> leads to a question.
> One poster moaned that the old modes like CW and RTTY were dying.  With
> resurgence in popularity of QRP CW I don't think that CW is dying, but I
> think RTTY's days are numbered.
> To most CW fans, Morse is special because it is the only digital mode that
> can be sent and received without a computer.  It also has the advantages
> low bandwidth, efficiency (can make contacts on lower power than other
> modes), and relative independence from fluency in different languages to
> complete casual contacts due to Q-signs.  To me, the major advantage of
> knowing Morse and keeping it alive is that it is the one mode that could
> used in a pinch with a cobbled-up radio.  I have also found that many
> who get their General with the idea that they'll learn just enough Morse
> pass the test try CW and find it very enjoyable... the people who hate CW
> the most are those who have never actually had a CW QSO.
> I dont' understand the attachment to RTTY unless it is an emotional one.
> The newer HF digital modes offer the benefits of RTTY without its
> (wide bandwidth, not error free, have to 'sync' with the transmitting
> to be able to receive valid copy, multiple configurations make 'sync'-ing
> with others problematical sometimes).  RTTY does have faster throughput
> PSK31, but alternative PSK modes such as PSK125 (my favorite PSK variant)
> faster than RTTY, has a much smaller bandwidth, is easier to tune, works
> better in weak signal conditions, and is just an easier method of sending
> and receiving text via computer.  Too bad most hams try one new mode --
> PSK31 -- and never try any others.
> The one transmission mode I haven't bothered to re-align on my VI is FSK.
> don't run much RTTY (mostly use it via soundcard when I hear it and want
> see who's transmitting), and believe that a properly-adjusted
> computer/soundcard/rig will be indistinguishable from running FSK.
> Anyone have any reason why RTTY is preferable to the newer HF digital
>  - jgc
> John Clifford KD7KGX
> Heathkit HW-9 WARC/HFT-9/HM-9
> Elecraft K2 #1678 /KSB2/KIO2/KBT2/KAT2/KNB2/KAF2/KPA100
> Ten-Tec Omni VI/Opt1
> email: kd7kgx@arrl.net
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

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