[RTTY] What's cleaner: FSK or AFSK?

[RLVZ at aol.com]

Hi Guys, 
 
I really appreciate _rtty at contesting.com_ (mailto:rtty at contesting.com)  as 
I've  still got a lot to learn about RTTY.
 
Am I understanding recent comments  correctly that say "FSK stations 
typically have worse RTTY sidebands  and clicks than properly adjusted AFSK 
stations"?
 
I wondering whether to use FSK  or AFSK on my K3 and FTdx5000.  Or perhaps 
AFSK on the K3 and FSK on  the FTdx5000?  (which method would create the 
cleanest  sidebands?)
 
Hope to work you in the WPX RTTY Test this  weekend!  
 
73,
Dick- K9OM 
 
 
 
From: Kok Chen <chen at mac.com>
To: RTTY Reflector  <rtty at contesting.com>
Cc: Bill Turner  <dezrat1242 at wildblue.net>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Change in pileup  procedure?
Message-ID:  <2F228A20-E260-46CE-A5AB-595256D3FA91 at mac.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=us-ascii


On Feb 5, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Bill Turner  wrote:

> What am I missing?

Let me explain.

The keying  sidebands of a continuous phase FSK signal is down only about 
50 dB, even when 1  KHz away from the signal.  A waveshaped AFSK signal or a 
K3 FSK signal will  not be as poor, and a phase coherent FSK signal will be 
much worse, but lets  assume that a lot of people in the pile are using 
continuous phase FSK (what  most DDS superhet rigs today use).