[RTTY] Information please

Sun May 28 10:19:33 EDT 2017

On 5/28/2017 9:04 AM, Ed Muns wrote:
 > +1 for JTDX.  The advantages are all on JT65 for HF, not JT9, though.

The issues with JTDX are: 1) the use of "hinted decoding" which uses a
list of known calls and will find them even if they are not present!
2) overly aggressive decoding which produces a very high level of
"false" decodes, 3) lack of "two pass" decoding which "nulls out" a
stronger signal and decodes weaker signals on (nearly) the same
frequency.

WSJT-X (particularly in the development branch) is clearly superior to
JTDX and has the advantage of Joe Taylor's direct involvement.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV

On 5/28/2017 9:04 AM, Ed Muns wrote:
> +1 for JTDX.  The advantages are all on JT65 for HF, not JT9, though.
> 
> 73,
> Ed W0YK
> On May 28, 2017 3:05 AM, Barry Murrell ZS2EZ <zs2ez at zs2ez.co.za> wrote:
>>
>> John, you may want to try JTDX, a derivative of WSJT-X optimised exclusively
>> for HF by UA3DJY.
>> Unlike WSJT-X (which unless you are prepared to compile your own version is
>> updated VERY infrequently - last release version is 1.7.0, while the
>> "Developer" team talk about 1.7.1 with major improvements which are not
>> generally available) JTDX is constantly updated and includes it's own mode
>> (JT10) which is becoming quite popular.
>>
>> I find that JTDX is considerably more sensitive on receive (hearing a number
>> of weak stations much better than WSJT-X) and have regularly managed QSOs at
>> around -28 and -30!!!
>>
>> The latest JTDX can be downloaded at :
>> https://cloud.mail.ru/public/N4qQ/7RrTSrusu  and more info can be found at
>> http://www.qrz.lt/ly3bg/JTDX/jtdx1.html
>> It works with JTAlert too!!
>>
>> Well worth trying!!
>>
>> 73 de BARRY MURRELL ZS2EZ
>> KF26ta - Port Elizabeth, South Africa
>> EPC#0558 DMC#1690 WCC#030 30MDG#4081
>> DXCC(mixed)#41,146  DXCC(RTTY)#1,916
>> DXCC(phone)#34,990  DXCC(CW)#11,714
>> DXCC 40m,30m,20m,17m,15m,12m,10m
>> WAS Triple Play #492  WAS(RTTY)#538  WAZ(RTTY)#185  WAE-I(mixed)#72
>> WAZS(mixed)#214  AAA#1569
>> AS ZR6DXB: VUCC(50MHZ)#1,334  UKSMG WAE(Silver)#75  UKSMG AFRICA#22  WAC
>> (Satellite)
>> website : www.zs2ez.co.za
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of John Barber
>> Sent: Saturday, 27 May 2017 6:16 PM
>> To: 'W4GKM' <w4gkm at citlink.net>; rtty at contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Information please
>>
>> If you are already set up for another data mode, using AFSK, it's simple. I
>> started by downloading JT65-HF, set it up and watched the results. On most
>> HF bands the radio is set to .076 dial frequency.
>> JT65-HF was disappointing in the user interface and facilities, so I tried
>> the JT65-HF HB9HQX-Edition improved version, which has been excellent.
>> John GW4SKA
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of W4GKM
>> Sent: 27 May 2017 14:58
>> To: rtty at contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Information please
>>
>> I have never tried these modes, but I would like to, where do I start.
>>
>> Nick
>> W4GKM
>>
>>
>> On 5/26/2017 9:37 AM, Don AA5AU wrote:
>>> JT65 and JT9 and excellent modes. I have over 144 entities worked on
>>> JT65
>> alone and have worked all states on 10-80 meters (need only DE & RI on 160
>> and AK, HI & ME on 6 meters.
>>> Last night I worked two Japanese stations on 6 meter JT65 running 80
>>> watts
>> to a 4-element yagi (3 element SteppIR with passive element added) and this
>> morning JH0INP confirmed our QSO via LotW. There's lots of activity on 6
>> meter JT65 in the summer.
>>> I really like JT modes on 160 meters because I seem to be able to work
>>> new
>> ones I can't hear on CW. I highly recommend JT65 & JT9.
>>> Don AA5AU
>>>
>>>          From: Bill Turner <dezrat at outlook.com>
>>>     To: RTTY Reflector <rtty at contesting.com>
>>>     Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 9:11 AM
>>>     Subject: Re: [RTTY] Information please
>>>       
>>> ------------ ORIGINAL MESSAGE ------------(may be snipped)
>>>
>>> On Fri, 26 May 2017 09:20:25 +0100, you wrote:
>>>
>>>> You could think about using the other data modes. With low power and
>>>> poor propagation, PSK can work a lot better than RTTY.
>>>> The ultimate move across to the dark side is JT65. I started using
>>>> JT65 about 10 days ago and have 60+ countries in the log, operating
>>>> just a couple of hours a day.
>>>> Very low power is all you need, but it's a horrible slow process with
>>>> no skill required. My only motivation is to get to 100 DXCC then back
>>>> to
>> RTTY!
>>>> John GW4SKA
>>> REPLY:
>>>
>>> Even better than JT65 is JT9.  A fraction of the bandwidth and
>>> according to the author, about 2 dB better with weak signals. The
>>> protocol is the same. Give it a try, you'll like it.
>>>
>>> 73, Bill W6WRT
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.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
> 