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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+What\'s\s+cleaner\:\s+FSK\s+or\s+AFSK\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] What's cleaner: FSK or AFSK? (score: 1): Author: RLVZ@aol.com; Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 20:31:33 -0500 (EST); Hi Guys, I really appreciate _rtty@contesting.com_ (mailto:rtty@contesting.com) as I've still got a lot to learn about RTTY. Am I understanding recent comments correctly that say "FSK stations typica; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-02/msg00141.html (8,073 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] What's cleaner: FSK or AFSK? (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@wildblue.net>; Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 17:39:15 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: (may be snipped) On 2/5/2014 5:31 PM, RLVZ@aol.com wrote: Am I understanding recent comments correctly that say "FSK stations typically have worse RTTY sidebands and clicks than pro; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-02/msg00143.html (7,247 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] What's cleaner: FSK or AFSK? (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 21:28:04 -0500; With the K3 it doesn't matter - the K3 DSP passes both AFSK and FSK through a narrow filter *after* the modulation stage. The one limit is that you cant go clicking around on the waterfall in AFSK be; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-02/msg00144.html (9,271 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] What's cleaner: FSK or AFSK? (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>; Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 20:19:49 -0800; Unfortunately, the K3 has high transmit (PA) IMD, which keeps it from working at full potential. As Joe mentioned, you can use waveshaped AFSK, or the FSK-D on the K3 -- both cases produce a nice nar; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-02/msg00145.html (8,699 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]