[RTTY] Intel NUC, anyone?

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> I'll have to look at my Kenwood TS-590SG to see if it's the same as
> the Icom.
It is not.  The new Kenwood (TS-590, TS-990 at least), Yaesu (since
FT-2000) and Elecraft (K2, K3, K3s, etc.) all permit using narrow
receive filters in DATA mode receive.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 10/27/2017 9:23 AM, Jim W7RY wrote:
> No...  But it is a HINT for radio and software manufactures....
> 
> 
> I'll have to look at my Kenwood TS-590SG to see if it's the same as the 
> Icom. It's not interfaced with N1MM. It's on my test bench.
> 
> 73
> Jim W7RY
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: David G3YYD
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 8:15 AM
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Intel NUC, anyone?
> 
> Is that a learning moment that says: Don't buy an ICOM?
> 
> 73 David G3YYD
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim W7RY
> Sent: 27 October 2017 13:13
> To: rtty at contesting.com; Joe Subich, W4TV
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Intel NUC, anyone?
> 
> Agreed Joe!
> 
> The Icom IC7300 is like this. I wish radio manufactures would allow AFSK
> when in RTTY mode with a simple menu change.
> 
> 
> There are ways to clean up an AFSK signal...
> 
> But then again.... You're selling interfaces!
> 
> 73
> Jim W7RY
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Subich, W4TV
> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 5:59 PM
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Intel NUC, anyone?
> 
> 
>> Another is that some rigs have transmit filters that are only usable
>> in FSK mode
> Actually, that is receive filters.  Nearly all of the older Kenwood, Icom
> and Yaesu rigs limited the narrow filter to "RTTY" (FSK) mode only.  Icom
> still limits its "twin peak" filter to RTTY only.
> 
> While many rigs are not as clean on FSK as they can be on AFSK, FSK is a
> whole lot cleaner than many AFSK signals (particularly those with "Windows
> noises", hum, clipping products from over driving the mic preamp, RFI 
> due to
> uncorrected common mode RF on the antenna leads, open ground connections,
> audio from open microphones, etc.  With FSK it is easier to generate a
> "passable" signal for those who either do not care or don't know how to
> generate a clean AFSK signal.
> 
> 73,
> 
>     ... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
> On 10/26/2017 6:21 PM, iain macdonnell - N6ML wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Peter Laws <plaws0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:14 PM, David G3YYD <g3yyd at btinternet.com>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> from FTDI. But why spend money on a box when you can just use AFSK
>>>> for a very small sum in making your own sound card to rig lead.
>>>
>>>
>>> Why do some hams use a straight key for CW?  A there are any number
>>> of keyers and interfaces that can produce perfectly timed CW using a
>>> keyboard for input.
>>
>> That's kindof a weak argument. Sending CW with a straight-key is a
>> skill (some would say an art). There's no special (operating) skill
>> involved in FSK vs. AFSK.
>>
>> The usual argument for FSK is that you don't have to worry about
>> getting the audio level right, and keeping the audio clean. Another is
>> that some rigs have transmit filters that are only usable in FSK mode
>> (IIUC).
>>
>> 73,
>>
>>      ~iain / N6ML
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>