RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] The Problem with AFSK ...

To: rtty@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] The Problem with AFSK ...
From: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:48:41 -0500
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
On 1/19/2013 12:00 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> With all the recent talk that AFSK is cleaner than FSK, this morning
> on 12 meters I watched a classic example of the problems with using
> AFSK and the reason I would rather put up with the "hard" keying of
> some FSK implementations rather than supposedly "cleaner" AFSK.

[snip]

Let me go where angels fear to tread --and put on my asbestos suit -- before I put in my 2 cents worth...

1) AFIK, there are two types of "FSK":

a) FSK that is generated internal to the rig where the manufacturer 'keys' an audio tone -- an 'internal' AFSK if you will, that the rig manufacturer calls 'FSK'. This can be OK as hopefully the rig maker is controlling many of the variables such as level, mark/space switching, etc versus the operator jamming his sound card into the mic jack.

b) What I call 'true' FSK as implemented in my old Drake T-4XB and TenTec Omni 6. This true FSK switches a varicap diode off and on, changing the frequency of the VFO by adding capacitance. IMHO, this is the best/cleanest way of getting on RTTY.

2) AFSK:

There are two things to be careful of here; first and most obvious is the issue of levels. We have all heard the "ghost" signals from someone over driving their rig.

The second -- and more subtle -- issue is that "zero crossing" switching between mark and space should be implemented as Irv Hoff W6FFC (SK) used when he created his AK-1 (?) AFSK unit that went along with his ST-6 demodulator.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

Carter  K8VT

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>