[RTTY] Information please

Larry lknain at nc.rr.com
Mon May 29 08:36:44 EDT 2017 

As an aside, I have never had to build WSJT-X as it is available as 
Windows installable program. I am currently running 1.7.0 but had run an 
earlier version before 1.7.0 which also came as an installable. Not sure 
about the Linux or Mac versions and I never bothered with the source 
code even though I probably have all the tools to actually build it.

73, Larry W6NWS


On 5/29/2017 3:38 AM, Barry Murrell ZS2EZ wrote:
> Joe, my experiences with JTDX versus WSJT-X (particularly on 80m where I
> have been active recently) are very different.... although I can only
> compare to WSJT-X 1.7, as this is the only AVAILABLE version - I have not
> compiled software since Pascal 7 in the 80's, and do not have the time,
> knowledge or inclination to stumble around trying to "roll my own"
> version... this is why I steer clear of Linux too, WHY the developers of a
> program cannot simply provide an installer to test with (like Igor does with
> JTDX and Dave W1HKJ does with FLDigi) I will never understand. As far as I
> am concerned, WSJT-X 1.7.1 etc is NOT available to the general Amateur
> community....
>
> As far as JTDX is concerned :  The Hint function is optional (but works
> extremely well), I have found only an EXTREMELY occasional "False Decode"
> (which the software flags as Questionable) and the number of decoding passes
> are also configurable.
>
> In direct comparison to WSJT-X 1.7, I have found JTDX to be far superior in
> decoding of weak signals (regularly completing QSOs with signals of -26, -28
> and even -30!), massively better at handling overlapping signals, and it's
> Filter feature is AMAZING!
>
> Your mileage may vary, but these are my observations from operating.... as
> stated, I have no idea what the UNRELEASED WSJT-X can do, but up against the
> RELEASED version JTDX is FAR better!!!
>
> Of course, these observations are from the bottom end of Africa where there
> are generally only about 4 or 5 "local" stations on the air at any time -
> may be very different when the band is very crowded....
>
> 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 Joe Subich,
> W4TV
> Sent: Sunday, 28 May 2017 4:20 PM
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Information please
>
>
> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>

More information about the RTTY mailing list