On Sun, 20 Oct 2013 06:36:00 -0700 (PDT), Sverre Holm (LA3ZA) wrote: > Based on this result, it would be interesting to zoom in on the frequencies > between 250 and 500 Hz for further testing, also higher speeds would be > interesting to test as 40 and 80 is the same as 8 and 16 wpm. Peter > Montnemery is by the way SM7CMY.
After this thread got going good, I did some testing on my own. First, I moved from my normal 650 down to see how low the rig would go. My KW goes from 300 to 1000 in 50 Hz steps. I found I liked 400 for awhile, but noticed when I went very low at higher speeds, I started losing the resolution between signal and noise. I've settled at 550 for the time being, and liking it so far. Like others, I started decades ago at 750 or even 800, but several years ago went to 700 and stayed there until a year or so ago when I got back active on HF. I'm going to stay at 550 for awhile and see what happens in the long run. All this said, remember if you are detecting tones ELECTRONICALLY (not by ear/brain cooperation), higher frequencies work better. The reason is the same as what makes VHF PL tones work better when they are in the higher end of the chart. There are more AC cycles per millisecond so the decoders can detect them quicker. Gary ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
