So which is better, park the dial and move the audio
center frequency (ACF) “marker”, or park the marker and move
the frequency dial? The former seems to be the standard method used for
PSK31 (when using programs like Digipan and PSK31), but the latter seems
to make more sense in the context of finding your peak output point in the
bandpass and leave your marker there for best decoding. Is it partially
dependant on the available filters and/or the age of the rig and its
ability to handle digital modes?
 

 

This latter concept seems to fly in the face of guidance
(at least for modes like Olivia) provided on hflink.com and other tutorial
sites where the ACF marker is supposed to be set in accordance with the
tone pair/mode in use and the frequencies are voluntarily set based on the
“sub-band” (.65 or .50, etc). This suggests that both the
frequency and ACF should be fixed or channelized, regardless of rig or
bandpass “sweet spots”.
 

 

>From the context of making it easier to find signals and
establish QSO’s, this guidance makes sense, assuring (to some
degree) that if your dial is set to a specific frequency and your ACF
marker is in the proper spot for the tone pair in use, any one who comes
along can find you quickly. If everyone running Olivia between 14104 and
14109 used “channels” on .50, a tone pair of 1000/32 and a
marker on 1000hz (at least to call CQ) QSOs would be much easier to locate
and lock onto. Between 14072 and 14078, “channels” should be
on .65, running 500/16 with an ACF of 750Hz. Easier, but is it at the
expense of best decoding, power output, and QRM avoidance?
 

 

Again, this is all by gentlemen’s agreement, but
there seems to be little other established guidance in print or on the
web. Was this originally suggested to assist in happily co-existing with
other “channelized” modes frequently found in these sub-bands,
like Pactor? Wouldn’t the “park the marker, move the
dial” method make it difficult to post and follow digital spots on
sites like Andy’s (K3UK) if everyone’s dial showed a different
frequency? (A minor concern, maybe, but certainly a huge help on these
sparse bands!)
 

 

Finally, could this same question be applied
equally to RTTY, where it depends on the software used, despite long
established rules for mark/space frequencies? If I use MixW, I can keep my
rig dial fixed and click on any of several signals in the passband,
decoding them all equally (easy, certainly but not optimal). Is this just
the wrong way to use this software? Should the ACF be locked centered
between the standard RTTY M/S audio frequencies and the dial moved?
Using MMTTY, the marker stays fixed and the dial is adjusted so
it’s not a concern. Is one better than the other, personal
preference, or rig dependent?

R/
Glenn KD4ULB

> Bill Aycock wrote:

>> Frank- I think that there is MUCH confusion in our ranks on
this 
>> subject. For instance, I set my rig to one frequency
(usually 
>> 14,070.00) and leave it there. I tune to different
signals by moving 
>> the "marker" that shows the
offset from the base frequency on the 
>> waterfall. The radio
bandwidth is many times as wide as the signal 
>> width (for
PSK31), and many signals can be accommodated in the 
>>
passband. I have a tuneable Digital filter, and one of the most 
>> educational tricks is to shift the upper and lower audio limits
of 
>> the filter, and watch the result on the waterfall One of
the sources 
>> of the confusion is the ambiguity in the
meaning of "best". I think 
>> that it is highly
improbable that we can get a clear definition. Good 
>> luck-
Bill-W4BSG 
>> 
> 
> In my opinion there are
two "classes" of radios for digital use, and 
> which
type you have dictates how you handle the center frequency 
>
question. Older "legacy" radios do not allow use of narrow
crystal 
> filters (originally intended for CW) in the digital
modes. The 
> designers of these radios either ignored the digital
modes altogether 
> (requiring, for example, interfacing the radio
through the mic 
> connector) or simply didn't care much (my
FT-900, an otherwise good 
> radio, falls into this category).
These radios can be used for digital, 
> but lack the most
important QRM-fighting tools--the crystal and 
> mechanical
filters. For these radios you can get away with tuning by 
>
leaving the VFO alone and simply "moving the marker" on the
waterfall to 
> the signal you wish to receive. But you will miss
receiving many, many 
> signals if the band is at all crowded if
you tune using this technique. 
> 
> Newer radios
generally all allow use of the narrow crystal and 
> mechanical
filters in the digital modes and typically have a special 
>
"DIGI" mode setting for this purpose. For radios of this type,
it is 
> *very important* to tune the station that you are working
to the center 
> frequency rather than simply moving the
"marker" on the waterfall and 
> not touching the VFO.
The reason is that otherwise you cannot use the 
> crystal and
mechanical filters of your rig effectively. The optimal way 
> to
tune a station with a modern rig is to place the received signal in 
> the center frequency passband, typically either 1000hz (most Yaesu

> radios, for example) or 1500 hz, and then utilize the rig's
narrow 
> filter. For PSK31, literally the narrower the better --
for example, my 
> Mark V's 250hz filters are super for PSK modes,
and the 500hz filters 
> are great for MFSK, 500hz Olivia, Domino,
and MT63. Doing this also 
> makes the IF width and shift controls
much more effective, and often you 
> can use these controls to
eliminate even a QRMing signal that is inside 
> the narrow
passband "corridor." 
> 
> Placing the received
signal in the center frequency passband often makes 
> a huge
difference in your ability to receive a signal. Often if there 
>
is a strong PSK signal elsewhere on the band, it will desensitze your 
> receiver through AGC action to the point where you are not
receiving the 
> weaker signals at all. Kick in the narrow
filters, and this problem 
> will disappear. This is true even
with higher-end rigs such as the 
> FT1000MP/Mark V. Sure, you can
work stations by simply moving the 
> "marker" to the
station you want to work rather than tuning the same 
> station to
your rig's center frequency, but this technique is 
> sub-optimal
and makes the signal you wish to receive subject to QRM and 
> AGC
desensitization even from signals 1Khz or more away. 
> 
>
You can usually readily see how important 1) tuning the received signal

> to the center frequency and 2) kicking in the narrow filters
actually 
> is, by watching the waterfall. Often the waterfall on
the rig will be 
> dark when the passband is wide open, and much
lighter on the received 
> signal once the filters are kicked in.
This is because some stronger 
> signal outside of the filter
passband is desensitizing the receiver. I 
> can often copy
signals with the filters in the circuit that are 
> completely
invisible on the waterfall without the filters. 
> 
> The
best digital programs recognize the importance of tuning the 
>
received signal to the center passband frequency, and make this easy to

> do. DM780 has a center frequency marker, and with one click of
an icon 
> it automatically tunes the received signal to the
center passband (moves 
> the received signal "marker"
to the "C" center frequency marker). One 
> more click
and you can kick in whichever narrow filters your rig has 
> that
are appropriate for the mode, e.g. 500hz for MFSK, much narrower 
> for PSK. MixW also enables the user to do this with a few clicks by
use 
> of an easy-to-program macro function. 
> 
>
As the band conditions start to improve, with more signals on the band 
> (remember, we are presently right at the solar minimum) using the
narrow 
> filters on digital modes will become more and more
important. 
> 
> de Roger, W6VZV 
> 
> 
> 
> Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked
Page at 
> http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php 
>

> Yahoo! Groups Links 
> 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ 
> 
>
> 
ID required) 
> 
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 

Reply via email to