[CQ-Contest] Advice Sought for Wireless Headsets & Mics

[Jukka Klemola]

For any PTT operation, 5ms is acceptable.
For audio monitoring, 5ms caan be a lot; it corresponds to 200Hz.

Regarding operating and any QSO rate, 5ms is nothing - providing there is
one 5ms.

If there are many 5ms delays in series, it may become meaningful.


73,
Jukka OH6LI

2015-12-04 22:04 GMT+02:00 David Pruett <k8cc at comcast.net>:

> "even a small sidetone delay can drive one nuts"
>
> How small?  5 mS?  You will not notice 5 mS, but 5 mS is indeed small.
>
> I would not argue the statement "even a *noticeable* sidetone delay can
> drive one nuts", but what is noticeable?
>
> During 30+ years in the automotive industry, we had a rule of thumb that
> anything under 100 mS couldn't be "noticed" by the human operator.
> Generally, this was as applied to momentary presses on control switches,
> which begs the observation that whether a delay is noticeable depends on
> what the reaction is referenced against.  Delays on asignal received over
> the air are not noticeable because the mind has nothing to reference it
> against.  A noticeable delay on the CW sidetone will indeed be noticeable
> to the operator.  I know - I've experienced trying to send CW with the
> sidetone passed thru a Timewave DSP filter, which is why they provide an
> input from the amp relay keying line to bypass the filter during transmit.
>
> I'm not here to argue Jim's original point.  A/D & D/A conversions do
> indeed add delay, but these are pretty darn small with modern technology.
> I might suspect that more delay is introduced through the transmission time
> of the Bluetooth signal, which is finite and limited by bandwidth
> constraints.
>
> Without data or real life practical experience, this entire discussion is
> nothing more than speculation.
>
> Dave,/K8CC
> Retired Electronics Engineer
>
> On 12/4/2015 2:28 PM, Michael Clarson wrote:
>
>> Dave: The inline microphones usually sound fine (mine is on a BOSE earbud
>> set) but they tend to pick up a lot of background noise. As for Bluetooth,
>> typical Bluetooth has a latency delay of about 150 ms. There is special
>> low
>> latency Bluetooth of about 40 ms, which was developed so if one uses a
>> Bluetooth headset to watch video, the audio and video are closer to being
>> in sync. While delays of this magnitude are often tolerable on voice, if
>> one runs CW, even a small sidetone delay can drive one nuts 73, Mike,
>> WV2ZOW
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 3:02 PM, David Siddall <hhamwv at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Bose offers an in-line mic to go with the QC15 and QC25 headphones.  It's
>>> intended use is for wireless phone calls.  Has anyone tried using it for
>>> SSB and attained decent voice quality?
>>>
>>> Related Question:  does anyone have a recommendation for a BlueTooth
>>> headset and microphone combo for SSB, if not the Bose?   I'm trying to go
>>> more "wireless" in the shack, especially after shelling out $50+ to Heil
>>> for cord replacement.
>>>
>>> And yes, I realize that given the recent discussion about the "assisted"
>>> category, when intending to enter as a single op I will have to use the
>>> BlueTooth headset and/or microphone at WiFi 2.4 GHz channel 6 or below to
>>> stay within the ham allocation.  Otherwise using it may constitute
>>> utilizing a non-ham frequency to solicit QSOs?  Or maybe just using
>>> BlueTooth would make my entry assisted?  Or using my wireless mouse to
>>> log
>>> with N1MM (which I have not forced to channel 6 or below.)  OTOH, as N3QE
>>> pointed out, there can be some benefits to the assisted category ....
>>> (Funny face.)
>>>
>>> 73,  Dave K3ZJ
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>