Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Crystal\s+vs\.\s+DSP\s+Filtering\:\s+Tnx\s+4\s+ur\s+help\!\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Crystal\s+vs\.\s+DSP\s+Filtering\:\s+Tnx\s+4\s+ur\s+help\!\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Crystal vs. DSP Filtering: Tnx 4 ur help! (score: 1): Author: John Pfeifer <jpfeifer@gci.net>; Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 16:48:49 -0900; Hello all, Thanks for all the replies! I think my problem was largely the result of operator error... The suggestion to use the PBT control proved most helpful. I found that if I tuned the weak CW si; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-12/msg00074.html (7,656 bytes)
2. Re: [TenTec] Crystal vs. DSP Filtering: Tnx 4 ur help! (score: 1): Author: "Steve Baron - KB3MM" <SteveBaron@StarLinX.com>; Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 02:56:24 -0000; 259\0 Hz is pretty narrow <gr> operator error... if I tuned the weak CW signal in as close to 600 Hz as possible using a fairly wide bandwidth, I could then turn both 250 Hz filters on and "fine tune; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-12/msg00080.html (9,116 bytes)
3. Re: [TenTec] Crystal vs. DSP Filtering: Tnx 4 ur help! (score: 1): Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>; Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 22:07:36 -1000; Hi John and all, It sounds like you have already figured it out. Another way to explain it that might help others get it, is to say: The passband tuning only moves the passband of the second (6.3 MHz; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-12/msg00086.html (8,192 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]