[RTTY] Slow RTTY - some more

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> Now on the subject of slow, or odd sounding RTTY, I can confirm that
> if you use a microHam router with MMTTY, and you have Strict BPS
> enabled, the resulting sent stream of text is much slower than
> usual.

That was true in the past but so much with the new version of microHAM
Router and more recent Eltima VSPAX code.  I just timed a 130 character
string ("<CR><LF>DE W4TV W4TV W4TV W4TV " x 5) from MMTTY - the message
was about three seconds longer with Strict BPS enabled vs. Strict BPS
disabled.  The timing was done with only a digital clock but "by ear"
there was very little change in the "sound".

> The awful RTTY produced by (some) K3 owners using paddles to send is
> quite often very poor, and I have found that MMTTY doesn't always
> decode it.

MMTTY has a problem because of the lack of regularity - the "variable
length stop bit" - when a character isn't ready to be sent.  I have
already talked with the K3 developer adding diddle to fix the stutter.

> During his first calls, the RTTY tones sounded distorted, and I had
> no  clear print at all.

There is no more reason for the "tones" from a K3 to be distorted when
using paddles for input than for distortion with any other FSK rig.
The difference in the K3 will be the "Long mark" between characters
if the user can't send CW at >60 WPM.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2/11/2013 1:20 PM, Phil Cooper wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Well, after the discussions on here before the contest, I was hoping for
> great things. However, there were a large number of folk who did not
> "behave" as they ought!
>
> I had quite a few callers that sent an exchange in answer to my CQ, and more
> than a few that wouldn't wait till a contact was over before calling.
> It always amazes me how many folk see a spot for me, and call, whether they
> can hear me or not.
>
> Now on the subject of slow, or odd sounding RTTY, I can confirm that if you
> use a microHam router with MMTTY, and you have Strict BPS enabled, the
> resulting sent stream of text is much slower than usual.
> I can replicate this easily, and found out quickly that Strict BPS is not
> needed with MMTTY, although it IS needed with some other programs.
>
> The awful RTTY produced by (some) K3 owners using paddles to send is quite
> often very poor, and I have found that MMTTY doesn't always decode it.
>
> During WPX, I had one caller that I suspect may have been using a K3, and
> that was N4RJ. I don't know if he is on this list or not, but if someone
> knows him, perhaps they can confirm/deny this.
>
> During his first calls, the RTTY tones sounded distorted, and I had no clear
> print at all.
> I was trying to work AC4M, and kept hearing tones which blocked the reply
> from AC4M.
> After a QRZ, he tried again, and out of a line of gibberish, I managed to
> see N4RJ, and called him.
> No response, so I worked the next station, and once again, saw the line of
> letters.
> Eventually, I did work N4RJ, but he took time to start his Tx. After my
> tones dropping, I was expecting a quick response, but it was so slow, I was
> about to send my report again.
> Apart from being slow, the tones were not flowing as normal, but seemed
> choppy, and I didn't always get clean print.
> Here is part of the text I got from him -
> NRRJPRRJI N T TNXTN NIVTMM 0QT MEXJVWN N4RJISZCPPU
>
> Whilst I think it is pretty neat that you can actually use the CW paddles to
> send RTTY out from a K3, it really ought to have some sort of buffer that
> smoothes out the sent text.
> I know a few folk who use this successfully, so it is possible, but maybe
> you need to be more than a little proficient at CW to start with.
>
> 73 all
>
> Phil GU0SUP
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>