It is not so much that the package is different between voice and text modes, but rather, the amount of data flowing through the link in a given amount of time. In order to have voice transmissions with good intelligibility and no breaks in the signal, you need a VERY robust data link. The WinDRM specifications call for a minimum of 1,000 bits passed per each block of 400 msec. Anything slower than that and voice transmissions are not possible.
Even if you do reduce the number of bits per unit of time needed for voice, the quality of the voice will typically suffer. And the main selling point of DV seems to be the quality of the audio. Take that away and I don't see any real advantages of DV over analog. While you can tolerate varying throughputs for text messaging, imaging, and similar data, it becomes intolerable for voice due to its real time requirements. 73, Rick, KV9U kd4e wrote: >I am puzzled as to why one digital signal works >well under poor signal conditions and another does >not. > >DSSTV and DV contain more data than the simple text common >to most digital modes, but that seems to be quantity vs kind. > >Why would image or voice content be packaged differently, >and thus be less robust than text, please? > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
