[TenTec] More About Clix

[Steve Ellington]

Dear JT:

Your application for ear training has been accepted.

(begin)

Train your ear by establishing a clean point of reference then find a way to
alternate between the reference and the test model. It is much like learning
the code. We should listen to perfect code and judge other fist by that
reference.
In my Pegasus testing, I used a receiver to monitor carriers from the
Pegasus, Omni C, Omni V and IC-706. All except the Peg had pure tones. The
Peg sounded rough and interestingly, you could peck on the Peg's cabinet and
hear microphonics in the monitor receiver. Using the 706, I was able to zero
in on the particular oscillator in the Peg that was generating the noisy
waveform.
So Peggy went back to TN. The engine-ears had all kinds of trouble hearing
it too. After a few days of ear strain, they gave the rig to a local, had
him transmit while the listened on another receiver. Behold, they finally
were able to perceive the flaw. After a few more days, a confession came
forth that all Pegs were guilty and I was readily granted a refund.
The 30 free trial is one great deal!

(end of training)
No test. Class dismissed.
Steve Ellington
N4LQ
----- Original Message -----
From: "J T Gwin" <jtgwin at home.com>
To: <n4lq at iglou.com>; "Jim Reid" <jimr.reid at verizon.net>; "Paul Christensen"
<paulc at mediaone.net>; <tentec at contesting.com>; "Carl Moreschi"
<n4py at earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] More About Clix


> So, where does a fellow go to sign up for this ear training?  I want a
> trained ear, too, so I can critique folk's Pegasus/Jupiter signals.
> To think that all this time, I have been telling these self-same people
> that their signals sound great on-the-air.
>
> Struggling with an untrained ear, I remain....
>
> -W4SK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <n4lq at iglou.com>
> To: "Jim Reid" <jimr.reid at verizon.net>; "Paul Christensen"
> <paulc at mediaone.net>; <tentec at contesting.com>; "Carl Moreschi"
> <n4py at earthlink.net>
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 2:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] More About Clix
>
>
> > The "digital" sound is sometimes hard to detect to the untrained ear. It
> > seems to show up best during either deep fades when phase distortion
> > enhances it or when the signal is very strong. Switching back and forth
> > between a normal cw carrier and the Peg, one can detect the difference.
> > I'm convinced that most people just write it off to band conditions.
> > As for getting on-the-air reports, generally, they are worthless.
There's
> > only a few operators who will critique a signal and give a critical
> > report.
> >
> > Considering your QTH Jim, I doubt if anyone would ever notice the fuzzy
> > sound much less report it! After all, they want that QSL OM.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: "Jim Reid" <jimr.reid at verizon.net>
> > To: "Paul Christensen" <paulc at mediaone.net>,
> > <tentec at contesting.com>, "Carl Moreschi" <n4py at earthlink.net>
> > Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 09:53:27 -1000
> > Subject: Re: [TenTec]  More About Clix
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Per the ARRL test of the Pegasus,  Feb. 2000 QST,  it appears
> > > that both the rise and fall time of the CW keying is somewhere
> > > near 2.5 or 3 mSec,  up and down.  Have looked through the
> > > Pegasus.doc of the N4PY software,  and find no way to adjust
> > > the envelope;  is this true,  what the ARRL shows is what we
> > > get?  Be fun to adjust if possible to repeat some of the experiences
> > > being reported in this thread.
> > >
> > > Note:  no one yet has said that my Pegasus CW note sounds
> > > "digital",  hi.  Say it sounds "just fine".
> > >
> > > 73,  Jim  KH7M
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TenTec mailing list
> > > TenTec at contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
>
>
>