WriteLog
[Top] [All Lists]

[WriteLog] Writelog & RITTY

To: <writelog@contesting.com>
Subject: [WriteLog] Writelog & RITTY
From: gbright@bellsouth.net (Grant Bright, Ph.D.)
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 19:05:02 -0400
Hi Andy and ListMates,

Thanks for your post about RITTY. It was very interesting and timely
for me. I very much agree with you about using good DOS programs.

Your situation is most interesting because it provides me a basis to
know that RITTY is very good on weak signals. Your comparison is
valuable as I know how RTTyrite performs. It is exactly the point you
mention, weak and marginal signals, that NONE of the sound card modems
or PK232 w/DSP I am using
does well in printing.

These kinds of comparisons are very interesting for all of us.

73s,
Grant
W4OJC


----- Original Message -----
From: "Anders Larsson" <DF3IAL@t-online.de>
To: <writelog@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 5:24 AM
Subject: Re: [WriteLog] Writelog & RITTY


>
> Don,
> Different opinion:
>
> In my location with a high local noise level and with my invisible
dipoles
> on the balcony signals are often marginal. I have been using RITTY
on a
> laptop and WriteLog with RTTYrite on the logging computer with the
same
> audio signal in recent contests. The difference in my situation is
big!
> RITTY consistently copies marginal signals better than RTTYrite. For
strong
> signals there is no difference. This must be seen to be believed.
>
> I have also used WriteLog and RITTY together. What I then miss is
the dual
> receive feature in WriteLog.
>
> If you are not interested in dual receive without TNC and if you
have a
> compatible sound card I would say that RITTY instead of RTTYrite
with
> WriteLog is a profitable investment.
>
> Sure DOS is out but that does not mean that we must stop using good
> available programs which do work well in a Windows environment.
> I stopped using WF1B however......
>
>
> 73
> Andy DF3IAL
> df3ial@t-online.de
>
>
> > W1ZT is the only one I know of that has successfully used RITTY
with
> WriteLog
> > in actual contest conditions (there may be others I just don't
know of
> them).
> >
> > I tried RITTY with WriteLog a few weeks ago.  My problem was that
RITTY
> > would not work with either of the sound cards I had in my
computers.  I
> was
> > able to successfully install it and have the appropriate small
tuning
> window show
> > up in WriteLog.  It just didn't decode anything.  So I'm not sure
what
> your
> > problem could be.  If it works in DOS it should work with
WriteLog.
> >
> > My opinion in all this is that it's really not worth it to have
RITTY work
> with
> > WriteLog.  Why would you want to use a DOS program with an already
capable
> > Windows program?  RTTYrite works great with any sound card in
Windows.
> >
> > I admit I have never used RITTY successfully.  But I can't
possibly see
> where
> > it could be significantly better than RTTYrite in contest
situations.  I
> run three
> > different combinations here, PK232, DXP38 and sound cards (2).
Under
> contest
> > conditions, either of them copy better than the other under
certain
> situations.
> >
> > Now that Wayne has added a split window for Wide Band Decode,
you'd be
> > better off chucking RITTY altogether.  I have nothing against
Brian,
> K6STI.
> > Many operators are using his software.  If you want to use it,
perhaps
> you'd be
> > better off sticking with WF1B.
> >
> > Please don't take this as an insult.  I look for you in every RTTY
> contest.  I'm normally
> > Low Power so it's always a great pleasure to get you in the log
and I hope
> to see
> > you in the next RTTY contest.  Just my opinion.  DOS is out,
Windows is
> in.
> >
> > 73, Don AA5AU

snip



--
WWW:                      http://www.writelog.com/
Submissions:              writelog@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  writelog-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-writelog@contesting.com


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