[CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabrillo --...

Pete Smith N4ZR n4zr at contesting.com
Sat Apr 11 06:11:06 EDT 2015 

However ... fixing key clicks is a much subtler, and yet more difficult 
to fix problem than bad audio.  There should be no excuse for the 
latter, except bad practices.

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots, please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.

On 4/10/2015 8:59 PM, K4XS via CQ-Contest wrote:
> My hat is off to you for doing the "fix".  I owned two of the  1000s and
> did the "fix".  Unfortunately there are two groups who don't  worry about such
> things.
>   
> Some use the dirty signal as a shield,  and use it  to keep the adjacent
> frequencies clear.  Nobody like to be close to a dirty  signal.  In fact there
> is a notorious W1 who seems to be able to turn his  clicks on and off at
> will to "clear up" his frequency.
>   
> The second group has a different attitude...denial.  "I paid  $6000 for
> this rig and you tell me I have a dirty signal".  Yep, you  spent all that
> money and don't have a clue how to set up your audio so it  doesn't sound like
> manure.
>   
> Both of these ops operate with a dirty signal, but for different  reasons.
>   
> K4XS/KH7XS
>   
>   
> In a message dated 4/11/2015 12:34:19 A.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,
> bparry at rgv.rr.com writes:
>
> Actually  I believe that they don't know how bad they sound. After I bought
> my  previous radio, (FT1000), I thought it was pretty good and got a lot  of
> complements. One day W8JI sent me a polite e-mail and said that I had  bad
> key clicks. I found out there was a partial fix and got it done. Now  I
> realize that most Yaesu radios have Clicks and Icom isn't much better!  I
> very much appreciated W8JI letting me know. I don't believe that most  of
> those awful SSB signals done are on purpose, they just don't know  any
> better. We need to do a better job of letting these folks know about  their
> signals without being too rude. If you are too "in their face", they  will
> just turn you off. Your purpose should be to get them to be better,  not
> make
> them mad!
>
> Bill W5VX
>
> -----Original  Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On  Behalf Of
> Kelly Taylor
> Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 2:05 PM
> To: Mike  Fatchett W0MU; George via CQ-Contest
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive  Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for
> Cabrillo -- and the phone skimmer,  new idea
>
> They either do it on purpose or they're so convinced of their  technological
> greatness they've convinced themselves their audio is  perfect.
>
> Either way, mentioning it won't have much effect: it will  either confirm to
> them they set it the way they intended (more complaints  the better), or
> they'll dismiss you as a technological pretender with no  real knowledge,
> and, by the way, 'How DARE you have the temerity to  question my
> audiological
> prowess? Don't you know who I am?'
>
> The best  fix is for everybody to vote with their feet. Don't work 'em.
>
> 73,  kelly
> ve4xt
>
>
>
> On 4/10/15 12:52 PM, "Mike Fatchett W0MU"  <w0mu at w0mu.com> wrote:
>
>> I have never understood thought  process behind not publicly "outing"
>> the
>>
> offenders.   Most of them know they have crappy or very wide audio.  They do
>>   it on purpose.
> The best medicine would to pass these lousy signals by  but
>> people won't
> because they have to have that one contact, at  least tell them
>> their
> audio is lousy and you hope that nobody  reports them, ahem.....
>
> Mike
>> W0MU
> On 4/10/2015 5:09 AM,  Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
>> Not only that, but the
>> number of awards  thereafter could be halved,
>> saving ARRL and other
>> societies  lots of money.
>>
>> But seriously, folks, can you imagine the  mess
>> that would result if
>> the same phone ops who "amuse" us  with their lousy
>> audio added either
>> subaudible tones or 100  wpm CW to their awful
>> signals.
>>
>> I'm waiting with  interest to see whether CQWW follows through on
>> rule
>> XII (A)  (5) and disciplines at least a few stations for
>>
>>   excessivebandwidth.  I'm not interested in outing a list of those
>>
>> disciplined, necessarily, but I hope at least the number of  actions
>> taken
>> is made public, so that people know the  committee is serious.
>> With the
>> tools now available, in  particular whole contest recordings
>> and SDR
>> panadaptors, it  should be possible to objectively define
>> excessive
>> bandwidth  (e.g., level in dB relative to peak amplitude,
>> versus  frequency
>> difference).
>>
>> 73, Pete N4ZR
>> Check out  the Reverse Beacon Network at
>>
>>   http://reversebeacon.net,
>> blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
>>   For spots,
>> please go to your favorite
>> ARC V6 or VE7CC DX  cluster node.
>>
>> On 4/10/2015
>> 12:55 AM, Bokverket  wrote:
>>> ----- Ursprungligt meddelande -----
>>>   Från:
>> "Bokverket" <info at bokverket.com>
>>> Till:  <cq-contest at contesting.com>
>>>
>> Skickat: den 9 april  2015 13:15
>>> Ämne: Suggestion for Cabrillo -- and the
>> phone  skimmer, new idea
>>>
>>> Rarely do one's wishes  be fulfilled so soon,
>> even retroactively!
>>>   Goran/SM0DRD, who thinks that hte subaudible tones
>> that someone
>>> mentioned
>>> would be a great step towards a  quick
>> realization of the phone
>>> skimmer. But
>>>   even better would be ***
>> combining cw and SSB into one signal  ***
>>> The cw
>>> could be sent at 100
>> or  something wpm like a rattle, just as with those
>>> obsolete  spy
>> transmissions. It won't disturb the audio since there is  so
>>> much overdrive
>> noise already, and can then be detected  easily by a new
>>> version of the cw
>>   skimmer.
>>> But what's more, we could halve the number of  contests!!! Save
>> countless
>>> $$'s and marriages.  And  for die-hard cw only people, the number
>> of
>>>   contacts
>>> will increase and the extra transmitted phone messages  can
>> be
>>> automatically
>>>   generated.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>   Goran/SM0DRD
>>>
>>>
>>   _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing  list
>>>
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>   http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>   _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing  list
>>
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>
>>   http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _____________________
>>   __________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing
>>   list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq
>>   -contest
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest  mailing  list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest  mailing  list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list