Barry, N1EU wrote:
"In my subjective experience, it's often the case that I'm aware that a
dx station is transmitting on frequency, and I can tell when he begins
and ends xmsn, but I still am unable to actually copy the cw he's sending
in the presence of the noise. I'm intrigued that under the same
circumstances (and bandwiths), the signal is more "copyable" on some
receivers than others.
If I understand Earl's test methodology, he is checking readability of a
steady weak carrier. Such a test would not seem to reveal the subjective
copyability that I've described."
I totally agree with what Barry says. If I said "copyability" in any of
my posts, let me change that word to "detectability".
If a steady carrier (or a CW signal) is so weak that it's barely
detactable on receiver #1 but not on receiver #2, then I'll rate receiver
#1 better than receiver #2.
It seems to follow that if a "detectable" CW signal was a tad stronger
that it would be more likely to be "copyable" on receiver #1 than on
73, de Earl, K6SE