Joe,
What are you talking about? That statement cannot be factual. Just because
it's easier to generate a lousy signal with AFSK does not logically requite
that an AFSK signal is of lower quality.
I do marketing for my day job. And that got me to thinking. Maybe what you
mean is "AFSK with lesser interfaces is often substandard compared to FSK.
However, with a fine and dandy Microham interface (like the two I have),
your AFSK signal can be just as sweet and tight as a FSK signal." Right?
73/jeff/ac0c
www.ac0c.com
alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
-----Original Message-----
From: Kok Chen
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 6:20 PM
To: RTTY Reflector
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Fw: ARLB006 NTIA: No Objection to Additional Data Modes
on60 Meters
On Mar 29, 2012, at 4:13 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
> AFSK is the RTTY mode for technological novices ... those who do not
> know how to operate their transceivers in the way the manufacturer
> designed them to operate.
I would like you to substantiate that statement, Joe.
I haven't transmitted using FSK for years now. There is so many more
technological advantages to using AFSK.
73
Chen, W7AY
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|