Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+Best\s+MMTTY\s+profile\s+for\s+noise\s+and\s+weak\s+signals\?\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Stephen/Marilyn Haines" <steveandmarilynhaines@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 08:10:21 -0300
I would love some direction about MMTTY profiles from more knowledgeable operators. I run 60-80 watts to a poor homemade vertical only a few feet from the side of our duplex. Several times Charles KK
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00419.html (8,195 bytes)

2. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 09:37:30 -0800
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: One of the best approaches, if you want to go to the trouble, is to run two instances of MMTTY and have them set to different profiles. The advantage is you don't have to swi
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00483.html (9,115 bytes)

3. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Stephen/Marilyn Haines" <steveandmarilynhaines@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 16:29:59 -0300
Thanks Bill. Yes, I am playing with Dave's FIR512 profile right now. I probably don't have enough computer to run two separate instances of MMTTY. I'm not sure if I will try the UK RTTY test. If I he
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00487.html (9,783 bytes)

4. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: Dick Flanagan <dick@k7vc.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:00:09 -0800
When running, can AFC be used to affect this critical tuning? Dick -- Dick Flanagan K7VC dick@k7vc.com _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lis
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00489.html (8,115 bytes)

5. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:15:23 -0800
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: I always use AFC when running. I'll see this weekend how well AFC works with the new profile. If the tuning requirements are so tight that even AFC is not enough, I probably
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00491.html (8,724 bytes)

6. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 16:54:10 -0800
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Yes, I have only used it on a few signals but AFC seems to do the job ok when running. 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@c
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00501.html (8,479 bytes)

7. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Jeff Blaine" <keepwalking188@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 14:58:04 -0600
Guys, The tuning sensitivity comes down to two factors. First, the 512 refers to the number of "taps" the program uses in its' digital filtering process. Just consider a higher number as equating to
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00543.html (11,468 bytes)

8. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Dave AA6YQ" <aa6yq@ambersoft.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 16:17:00 -0500
--Original Message-- From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jeff Blaine Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2011 3:58 PM To: dezrat1242@yahoo.com; Dick Flanagan C
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00546.html (9,477 bytes)

9. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Jeff Blaine" <keepwalking188@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 15:24:44 -0600
Dave, What did you find as the "sweet spot" for the FW setting? 73, Jeff ACØC www.ac0c.com --Original Message-- From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jeff
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00547.html (9,810 bytes)

10. Re: [RTTY] Best MMTTY profile for noise and weak signals? (score: 1)
Author: "Dave AA6YQ" <aa6yq@ambersoft.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 16:52:51 -0500
Dave, What did you find as the "sweet spot" for the FW setting? Setting the Bandpass Filter's FW to 35 is optimal; this value is what's specified in the AA6YQ-FIR-BPF profile. It's also what's used
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-01/msg00548.html (9,065 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu