[RTTY] 300hz or 500hz IF filter?

Fri Aug 23 16:00:04 EDT 2013

Jim,

As I have said many times, 250 Hz filters are trading off one set of
SNR compromises for another.  Using 250 Hz filters is trading increased
ISI for decreased adjacent frequency QRM and potentially AC "pumping".
Ultra narrow filters work for very strong signals that have a high
SNR relative to the ISI products generated due to differential delay
at the filter knee.

If your goal is to work a bunch of 20 over signals in a contest, the
250 Hz filters may be of some value although others have reported that
such narrow *net* bandwidths provide rapidly diminishing results - to
the point that a net bandwidth of 200 to 240 Hz provides a net decrease
in overall copyability.  Even at 270 Hz "net" bandwidth, tuning becomes
extremely critical for stations of modest strength as the slightest
mistuning causes ISI (and selective "fading") to increase significantly.

For most users a wider filter - e.g. 500 Hz - will provide better
results overall than an ultra-narrow filter - particularly if the user
takes steps to avoid receiver generated non-linearity and IMD.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV

On 8/23/2013 3:29 PM, Jim W7RY wrote:
> Joe...
> I have been RTTY contesting for many (20+) years with some of the best
> in the business. We ALWAYS used 250 Hz filters during crowed band
> conditions.
>
> And we have the wallpaper to prove it.
>
> 400 and 500 Hz crystal filters (and DSP filtering) is just not tight
> enough. Period.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Joe Subich, W4TV
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:05 AM
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] 300hz or 500hz IF filter?
>
>
> No, the half bit makes the baud rate effectively 90.9 (the shortest
> element is now 11 ms) thus the calculation is:
>      (2 * 90.9) + (1.2 * 170) = 385.5 Hz.
> although the actual occupied bandwidth will be dependent on the
> information content (how often/how regularly transitions occur will
> effect the value of "K" in the previous formula).
>
>> Alternatively, observe RTTY signals on-air.
>
> And most FSK signals are 370 Hz wide or more depending on the care
> with which the manufacturer has designed the FSK circuits.  The only
> exception are later versions of the K3 firmware which generate very
> clean FSK using DSP.
>
> 73,
>
>     ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
> On 8/23/2013 8:15 AM, Kai wrote:
>> Absolutely incorrect. Consult ITU-R SM.1138:  BW = 2M + 2DK; D=shift/2;
>> M = Baud/2   K = 1.2 (typically)
>> BWrtty=2M+2DK = Baud + shift*1.2 =249.5 Hz
>>
>> If you consider the effect of the 33 ms (1.5 bit) stop bit, that effect
>> has a narrower spectrum which is contained entirely within the 249.5 Hz
>> BW of the 22 ms start and Baudot bits. The shortest element is still
>> 22 ms.
>>
>> Alternatively, observe RTTY signals on-air.
>>
>> Kai, KE4PT
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 8/22/2013 10:34 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8/22/2013 9:42 PM, Kai wrote:
>>>> The theoretical bandwidth of 170 Hz shift 45.45 baud RTTY is just
>>>> under 250 Hz.
>>>
>>> Absolutely incorrect as 250 Hz does not account for the necessary
>>> modulation sidebands or for the discontinuity (additional bandwidth)
>>> generated by the 1.5 bit stop.  Due of the half bit, the necessary
>>> bandwidth for 170 Hz shift RTTY approaches 170 + (2 * 90.9 * 1.2) or
>>> slightly over 370 Hz as the shortest element is now 11 ms.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>>    ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/22/2013 9:42 PM, Kai wrote:
>>>> The theoretical bandwidth of 170 Hz shift 45.45 baud RTTY is just under
>>>> 250 Hz.
>>>> 73
>>>> Kai, KE4PT
>>>>
>>>> On 8/22/2013 6:54 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The -6 dB bandwidth of the INRAD "300 Hz" filter is shown as 340 Hz
>>>>> which is slightly less than the theoretical 370 Hz required for 170 Hz
>>>>> shift 45.45 baud RTTY.
>>>>>
>>>>> That said, performance will be a trade off between improved
>>>>> selectivity and interference rejection - up to a point.  If the
>>>>> receiver can withstand AGC effects of close in interference, a 400
>>>>> to 500 Hz filter will generally provide better copy than a 300 Hz
>>>>> filter.  Note: no amount of selectivity is useful when signals
>>>>> overlap or the interfering signal includes distortion (spurious)
>>>>> products that overlap the desired signal.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>>    ... Joe, W4TV
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/22/2013 5:38 PM, David VE3VID wrote:
>>>>>> Hello everyoneI would like to outfit my FT-857D portable rig with an
>>>>>> IF filter on its 455khz stage.  INRAD sells a suitable 500hz unit.
>>>>>> They also have a 300hz unit.   I am leery about the 300hz filter
>>>>>> being too narrow.
>>>>>> Any opinions?
>>>>>> 73Davidhttp://www.ve3vid.webs.com/
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>