[RTTY] Information please

Mon May 29 17:04:00 EDT 2017

Hello Joe,

can you give us "other blokes" a download address for WSJT-X 1.7.1 - or an
idea when it will be released for the general public?

 73 de Goetz DJ3IW

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] Im Auftrag von Joe Subich,
> W4TV
> Gesendet: Montag, 29. Mai 2017 18:35
> An: rtty at contesting.com
> Betreff: Re: [RTTY] Information please
> 
> On 5/29/2017 1:36 PM, Don AA5AU wrote:
> > One complaint about WSJT-X on JT65 is that it will not decode more
> > than one signal on the same frequency. If there are two (or more)
> > signals on the same frequency, WSJT-x will not decode any of them. If
> > a weak signal gets covered up, WSJT-x will not decode it.
> 
> Not in my experience but then I've been running an early version of
> WSJT-X 1.7.1 for several months (as a result of trying to debug the
> issue among WSJT-X, Commander and the K3 that ended up being resolved
> in version 5.56 of the K3 firmware).  WSJT-X 1.7.1 regularly decodes
> multiple closely spaced signals (using the two pass algorithm where
> the first [strongest] signal is subtracted from the stored wave file
> and the file decoded again).
> 
> I have WSJT-X 1.7.0, 1.7.1 (r 7557) and JTDX all installed on my
> "radio" computer but 1.7.1 is the "go to" program here.
> 
> 73,
> 
>     ... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
> On 5/29/2017 1:36 PM, Don AA5AU wrote:
> > My experience with JTDX is similar to Barry's. JTDX seems to decode just
> about every signal seen in the waterfall. I've been using JTDX exclusively
> now for over six months. I went back to WSJT-x this weekend to try MSK144.
> When 6 meters opened with E skip, I switched to JT65 and to my dismay
> WSJT-x would only decode half the signals showing in the waterfall. I then
> switched to JTDX and it decoded nearly all the signals.
> > I went back to WSJT-x, defaulted it and tried to get it set up for
> better decoding but it was never satisfactory to me. What amazes me most
> about JTDX is that is can decode weak signals that are under stronger
> signals (WSJT-x will not do this) and it can decode as many as 3 signals
> on the exact same frequency. One complaint about WSJT-X on JT65 is that it
> will not decode more than one signal on the same frequency. If there are
> two (or more) signals on the same frequency, WSJT-x will not decode any of
> them. If a weak signal gets covered up, WSJT-x will not decode it. JTDX
> will in most cases.
> > On a very crowded 20 meter band, I've seen JTDX decode more than 24
> signals in a single pass. WSJT-x can't come close to this. The notion that
> JTDX has more errors doesn't hold water. Rarely do I ever see errors with
> JTDX. I saw one yesterday and it surprised me because I hadn't seen one in
> a long time.
> > One positive WSJT-x has over JTDX might be JT9. The enhancements in JTDX
> are only for JT65. WSJT-x seems to better with JT9.
> > Don AA5AU
> >
> >        From: Barry Murrell ZS2EZ <zs2ez at zs2ez.co.za>
> >   To: rtty at contesting.com
> >   Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 2:38 AM
> >   Subject: Re: [RTTY] Information please
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > |  | Virus-free. 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