Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+2\s+tone\s+vs\s+MMTTY\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+2\s+tone\s+vs\s+MMTTY\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 09:24:46 -0600; During the W1AW/0 Colorado event a number of the guys reported that they felt 2 tone did a better job than MMTTY. This all anecdotal. I have been using both on and off and most time while chasing DX; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00154.html (6,587 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: "John GW4SKA" <ska@bartg.org.uk>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 18:02:29 +0100; I have been running MMTTY and 2Tone side by side in contests for a while. Using the standard profiles/setups, 2Tone has consistently out-performed MMTTY on 10/15/20M. Often a misprinted word on MMTTY; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00156.html (8,944 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: " Dave AA6YQ" <aa6yq@ambersoft.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 13:32:14 -0400; WinWarbler, a component of the free-ware DXLab Suite, includes both the MMTTY engine and the 2Tone engine, and simultaneously displays the text that each decodes. I have seen circumstances in which 2; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00157.html (7,763 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: Glenn Anderson <wb5tuf@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 13:22:28 -0500; I've used both in contests and casual operating. I haven't seen any dramatic difference. Personally, I like MMTTY better and it supports FSK. Glenn WB5TUF <div>-- Original message --</div><div>From; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00160.html (9,093 bytes)
5. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: Salvatore Irato <iw1ayd@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 23:51:27 +0200; TU Dave for the informative replay, I'd appreciated a lot. What you wrote would mean that it's better to use 2tone on higher tones and FLDIGI for somewhat not so higher tones. Isn't? 2Tone for tones; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00168.html (7,974 bytes)
6. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: "Don Hill AA5AU" <aa5au@bellsouth.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 19:22:15 -0500; I have spent many hours comparing 2Tone and MMTTY. 2Tone is nearly always better especially on very weak signals. However, during W1AW/5 the past week I noticed that when operating split and tuning t; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00176.html (9,517 bytes)
7. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: "Ed Muns" <ed@w0yk.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 21:00:36 -0700; By design, 2Tone has a 2-3 character delay before print appears on the screen. That seems negligible, but in high rate situations, it is intolerable. OTOH, that part of the decoding algorithm is prob; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00180.html (8,090 bytes)
8. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 21:27:27 -0700; The trade off between a "low-latency crummy decoder" and a "high-latency better decoder" can be solved if you allow new GUI elements into your modem. Run two demodulators. The low-latency one prints; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00181.html (8,380 bytes)
9. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: "Ed Muns" <ed@w0yk.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 23:55:44 -0700; Meanwhile, many of us run multiple parallel decoders to approximate this more elegant approach. ;>) Ed W0YK -- The trade off between a "low-latency crummy decoder" and a "high-latency better decoder"; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00182.html (8,859 bytes)
10. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: "David G3YYD" <g3yyd@btinternet.com>; Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 09:14:46 -0500; Yes like all engineering there are some tradeoffs to be made between "Cost" and "Benefit". Ideally 2Tone would do an early decode and then a while later would update the earlier decode with an improv; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00185.html (13,204 bytes)
11. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 10:06:02 -0400; I think this is an important point. RTTY contesting can be very engaging, watching multiple decoder windows and simultaneously using ears and applying brain and thought to getting correct copy, then; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00186.html (8,241 bytes)
12. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:30:28 -0600; Since N1MM is going through an upgrade I tossed this idea off one of the N1MM RTTY guys. He said that the concept is pretty cool but he did not see a way to easily integrate in to the new program. Mi; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00198.html (9,924 bytes)
13. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: Jeff Stai <wk6i.jeff@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 18:33:05 -0700; For contests with longer exchanges - an extreme example being the WAE with QTCs - having the option to switch on improved decoding with longer delays seems desirable. Not to mention good old ragchews; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00202.html (9,129 bytes)
14. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: "Kermit $aka Ken$ via RTTY" <rtty@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 21:50:46 -0400 (EDT); Hi, This was a thread a couple of weeks ago, just when I got kicked off the reflector for too many bounces (due to my efforts to filter out the horrendous crap and clutter at that time). I had wanted; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00269.html (10,004 bytes)
15. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: John Becker <johnb3030@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 14:40:36 -0500; I have both MMTTY and 2Tone running under WinWarbler, and I'm not seeing the superior performance of 2Tone that so many other users are reporting. If anything, MMTTY is decoding better for me. What s; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00273.html (8,209 bytes)
16. Re: [RTTY] 2 tone vs MMTTY (score: 1): Author: "David G3YYD" <g3yyd@btinternet.com>; Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 16:28:15 -0500; John Assuming you have the correct sound card set up and mark and space frequencies. Then there is only one thing to change and that is the propagation type. Two of the four types will cover most of; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-06/msg00274.html (10,146 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 16
Page: [1]