[RTTY] FSK Readouts vs AFSK

[Bill]

I agree simply do the math hi.

I wanted really to see if there are anything I can't think of, wrong 
with his approach. He feels the only advantage to FSK was the readout, 
if so his solution is fine for him...
Bill


On 2/6/2012 4:21 PM, Al Kozakiewicz wrote:
> I'm not 100% sure I'm following the point, but if the point is that you can decide to decode something other than 2125/2295 when running AFSK in order to make the math for the conversion to the "FSK frequency" simple to do in your head, why not?  When I was first trying RTTY and running AFSK I never ran the standard part because 2295 Hz was usually just outside my SSB filter passband.
>
> If you're using AFSK, you will probably eventually want to use a narrow SSB filter whose upper limit will end up being lower than 2kHz anyway, forcing you to change to a different tone pair.  From a technical standpoint, it doesn;t much matter at all what tone pair you choose as long as the separation is 170 Hz.
>
> Al
> AB2ZY
>
> ________________________________________
> From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com [rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill [bmarx at bellsouth.net]
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 3:44 PM
> To: RTTY reflector
> Subject: [RTTY] FSK Readouts vs AFSK
>
> Someone sent me this comment when the subject of FSK readouts came up.
> Any thoughts on his plan?
>
> "You don't have to pick the 2.1 kHz offsets for tones, I use the
> 915/1085 (that is, 1 kHz +/- 85 Hz) to make the spotting arithmetic easy
> (about 1 kHz)."
>
> Bill Marx W2CQ
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>