There is some truth here but it still doesn't discourage us QSKers from
pursuing our goal. Learning to live with no QSK is not an option for us.
Certainly, the breaker must send more than a few characters in order for
the breakee to hear him since some of the breakers characters will
coincide with the timing of the breakee's characters and not be heard.
Now for these guys going 100 wpm....By the time they are broken, the
breakee will have sent an entire paragraph and the breaker may have
forgotten why he broke in the first place. I don't think there is a whole
lot of duplex cw going on at 100 wpm but there are quiet a few at 30 wpm.
Noting is quite as satisfying as a full duplex cw qso. I find the silence
between the characters of semi-BKin eerie and frustrating, thinking all
along that something may be going on that I need to hear!
n4lq
-----Original Message-----
From: Lee Crocker <w9oy@yahoo.com>
To: tentec@contesting.com
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TenTec] DSP in CW transmit?
> But it's not just the generation of the waveform that
> is occurring in the DSP, it's also the time it takes
> when you go from transmit to receive for the received
> signal to get through the DSP filter and into your
> ears. This takes time, and is occuring during the
> time you would normally be listening for the
> "break-in" in the QSK cycle. Just about the time a
> breakin from the station you are working would occur,
> the audio is switched, you're back in transmit, and
> the side tone is now being routed to your ear.
>
> So the time that used to be devoted to listening for a
> break is now being used to process the received
> breakin signal and just as it is about to get to your
> ears, it then gets lost as the rig goes to transmit,
> and the next character is generated and transmitted.
> During this period of transmission the recieve
> processing is halted and its not until the received
> breakin signal starts into the DSP again that
> processing begins anew.
>
> Hence my original question, how much QSK is really
> necessary? Is it enough that you can be broken during
> during the 7 dit-length word space? Do you need to
> have keyers that extend the word-space period? I
> think it is unlikely a rig that is busy doing all this
> signal processing is going to ever be as good a QSK
> radio as my old 580 delta in therms of "breakin".
> Maybe if there were separate receive and transmit DSP,
> maybe if you had parallel co-processed transmitter and
> receiver so thing were not being done serially, you
> could approximate the behavior of the 580 delta.
>
> You may call these "bells and whistles" but it is
> merely an engineering design trade-off between
> mutually exclusive criteria. You can't receive
> processed audio until processing is completed, and if
> the rate of data transmission is faster this
> processing can occur in a given system, you won't be
> hearing any breaks. Like I said I used to judge a
> radio by its QSK behavior. But then I found QSK to
> not be as totally useful as I once thought. Really
> fast well executed semi-breakin does just as well in
> my opinion.
>
> 73 W9OY
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|