Re: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement

[Barry <w2up@comcast.net>]

Regardless of speed, it always seems the fade/QRN is synchronized with 
the callsign and you miss the same letters each time  :-)
Barry W2UP

On 8/22/2019 8:27 AM, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:
> I always thought speed was dependent on the length of fades and type of
> burst noise.
>
> Faster would attempt to catch short fades whereas slower would catch longer
> fades but weak S/N?
>
> On topband my strategy is around 20wpm and sometimes slower repeats. On
> higher bands I would go as fast as I can (which isn’t very fast) and then
> slow down for weak signals or ops who have trouble.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 7:38 PM Bernie McClenny, W3UR <bernie@dailydx.com>
> wrote:
>
> > For me, and I suspect for many other Topband ops, when QRN/QRM is involved
> > slower is better than faster! 18-20 WPM is about the right speed.
> >
> > Bernie McClenny, W3UR
> >
> > Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
> >             The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
> >             How's DX? (1999-2019)
> >
> > Two week trial -
> > http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/
> > https://twitter.com/dailydx
> > 410-489-6518
> >
> > > On Aug 21, 2019, at 4:26 PM, Bob Shohet, KQ2M <kq2m@kq2m.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I have never had the opportunity before to hear differences in signal
> > strength by 1 db increments.  +1 db is clearly an advantage and a +2 db
> > difference nearly obliterates the weaker signal.  Remarkable.  I wish I had
> > heard this 20 years ago!    ;-)
> > > The differences in copy between different CW speeds is very interesting
> > too.  I suspect that most contest ops will generally do better with the
> > higher speeds unless they are exhausted to the point of mental impairment,
> > in which case the slower speeds might work better.
> > > Thanks for posting this Frank and a special thanks to AB7E for creating
> > these audio recordings with explanations!
> > > 73
> > >
> > >
> > > Bob, KQ2M
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: donovanf@starpower.net
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 11:15 AM
> > > To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> > > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal
> > strength improvement
> > > These recordings are an impressive demonstration of the benefit of
> > > one dB of signal strength improvement in a weak signal situation.
> > > Click on the links on this website:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > www.ab7e.com/weak_signal/mdd.html
> > >
> > >
> > > 73
> > > Frank
> > > W3LPL
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >
> > > From: "David Gilbert" <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
> > > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 7:02:21 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KPA500 Coax size requirements
> > >
> > >
> > > That's not a universally true statement.
> > >
> > > Several years ago I was trying to decide which antenna to buy, and my
> > > choice came down to two antennas that were 2 db apart. I created some
> > > audio files by recording typical band noise and then overlaying them
> > > with recorded CW messages at various strengths. The difference between
> > > 1 dB above the noise level and 2 dB above the noise level can make the
> > > difference between no copy and copy. The files and testing methodology
> > > can be found here:
> > >
> > > http://www.ab7e.com/weak_signal/mdd.html
> > >
> > > If you're ragchewing it doesn't matter, but if you're trying to make a
> > > contact and your signal is at the level of the mud it does.
> > >
> > > 73,
> > > Dave AB7E
> > >
> > > On 8/20/2019 9:18 PM, Jim Danehy wrote:
> > > > ONE DB loss is the LEAST DETECTABLE amount a human can detect. Hardly
> > if not impossible to notice.
> > > > Jim
> > > > W9VNE/VA3VNE
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest