Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+FSK\s+is\s+bad\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+FSK\s+is\s+bad\?\s*$/: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Lee Roberts <ham@n0sq.us>; Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 13:27:27 -0600; When I first started in RTTY, FSK was the thing to do. Now, a lot of people are saying that it has multiple issues and are now telling me that AFSK is the way to go. But, I've heard that pFSK has no; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00306.html (6,583 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Don AA5AU <aa5au@bellsouth.net>; Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:25:31 +0000 (UTC); It's all relative Lee. FSK is not bad, it's just the way some radios transmit FSK causes the signal to be wide. If we all had Elecraft K3's, we could reshape the FSK signal bandwidth and all would be; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00308.html (8,933 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:30:55 +0000; I think the way I would characterize it is as follows: radios In the long run and with a real world population, #1 usually is the lesser of the two evils. Al AB2ZY ___________________________________; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00309.html (9,656 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Scott Schultz <schultz0530@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:40:13 -0500; To: RTTY@contesting.com <javascript:;> "Multiple Issues"? I guess this could be a little more vague but I don't see how! And exactly how many people is "a lot"? 73, de Scott N0IU ___________________; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00310.html (7,689 bytes)
5. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: "Jeff AC0C" <keepwalking188@ac0c.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 16:09:31 -0500; I think this list of Al's is right but the conclusion is pessimistic and not in the traditional ham spirit. There are so many good signals on the bands now days that when you run across a guy who's s; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00313.html (12,574 bytes)
6. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Thom <ki8w@ki8w.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 22:32:25 +0000; I hope that once I get my new interface for true FSK and get it set up someone from the list will look at my signal and tell me how wide it actually is. That way I will know how close I can get to so; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00315.html (13,090 bytes)
7. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:04:59 -0400; There is an entire PSK and JT69 band segment of younger users who have managed to pilot those systems to success without a crutch like FSK. PSK31 and JT65/JT9 operators have been browbeaten to keep; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00322.html (8,916 bytes)
8. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 05:45:28 +0000; All this FSK vs AFSK discussion has me wondering. I run a FlexRadio 6300 - the basic model - and I'm wondering which it uses. It looks and feels like FSK but I'm not sure. Does anyone know? 73, Bill; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00326.html (7,638 bytes)
9. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 05:58:13 +0000; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: It should be pointed out that this pressure to use only low power has nothing to do with the mode, but rather the wide bandwidth at the receiver end to e; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00327.html (8,761 bytes)
10. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Thom <ki8w@ki8w.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:23:25 +0000; Uh, I was always under the impression that transmitted bandwidth is determined in digital modes by the data rate rather than power output. The "dirtier" the digital signal the greater bandwidth gener; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00329.html (10,364 bytes)
11. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 17:07:39 +0000; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: The basic RTTY signal is a carrier, frequency modulated by a square wave, and if the corners of the square wave are really "sharp", the harmonic content; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00330.html (9,238 bytes)
12. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: "James Wolf" <jbwolf@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 17:18:28 -0400; The data rate on an OOK (on off keying) waveform dictates how fast you have to turn a signal off and on. You can modify the waveform by shaping the ramp up and ramp down transition between the dwell; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00336.html (8,689 bytes)
13. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Thom <ki8w@ki8w.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 21:22:09 +0000; and exactly how do I change that shaping? 73 Thom KI8W On 10/25/2016 21:18, James Wolf wrote: The data rate on an OOK (on off keying) waveform dictates how fast you have to turn a signal off and on.; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00338.html (9,438 bytes)
14. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <rtty@w7ay.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 14:51:25 -0700; With FSK, you are at the mercy of the rig manufacturer. Some rigs use the "FSK" facility in the synthesizer chips, so even the rig manufacturer has no control of it, the chip manufacturer does. And; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00340.html (9,489 bytes)
15. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: "Jeff AC0C" <keepwalking188@ac0c.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:59:43 -0500; You change the shaping by moving from FSK where you have zero control over to AFSK where you have full control. Another advantage of AFSK is that you get to set the tone pair where it sounds good to; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00341.html (11,698 bytes)
16. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <rtty@w7ay.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:14:04 -0700; "you have full control" is perhaps a little overstated. It should be "the software developer" has full control :-) :-). 73 Chen, W7AY _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing lis; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00342.html (8,386 bytes)
17. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Thom <ki8w@ki8w.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:30:11 +0000; Then I guess I am the mercy of Kenwood, who built my TS-480sat. I am thinking they did things right. I have been using AFSK but I do not like the actual transmit offset ( based on the displayed frequ; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00343.html (9,404 bytes)
18. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 23:35:02 +0000; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: MMTTY allows you to choose from many different tone pairs in FSK mode. The difference is not really in the transmitter, its in the receiver. For years I; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00346.html (8,685 bytes)
19. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: "Jeff AC0C" <keepwalking188@ac0c.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:49:36 -0500; That's true. But you do have a few good software choices in the case of AFSK, and the change from one to the next is not too painful. In the case of FSK, if you don't like what you have, only a rig c; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00347.html (9,162 bytes)
20. Re: [RTTY] FSK is bad? (score: 1): Author: Bob Burns W9BU <w9bu_lists@rlburns.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:24:39 -0400; Late model Icom radios, including the IC-7600 that I use, gives the user the option of setting the RTTY FSK Mark Frequency to 1275, 1615, or 2125 Hz. The default is 2125 Hz. The downside of selecting; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-10/msg00348.html (9,820 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]