That is odd. I wonder which psk31 software you are using. I use WinWarbler,
and it is able to copy almost every signal seen across a wide spectrum of 2 K
or so, at any given time. Few if any of them are uncopyable. It copies traces
that I can barely see, as well as spurs up and down the band from people
running thos 50 watt rigs. Fyi , I run wideband copy, meaning there may be 40
signals across the spectrum I can see on the waterfall, and with my normal
TS570S SSB filter.
Danny Douglas
N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB
All 2 years or more (except Novice). Short stints at: DA/PA/SU/HZ/7X/DU
CR9/7Y/KH7/5A/GW/GM/F
Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred,
I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do.
Moderator
DXandTALK
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
Digital_modes
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159
----- Original Message -----
From: Glenn L. Roeser
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: IZ8BLY's PSK63F + PSKFEC31
Hello Skip,
I hope that shift happens because with the band conditions the way they have
been, we do need something other than PSK31. Most of my PSK31 contacts are not
very good print and I lose a lot of what is being sent due to QSB. And I have
noticed that the power levels are creeping up and up. Years ago the top power
levels for most PSK31 ops was about 15 watts output, now the norm is 35 - 50
watts. And even with higher power levels they print is far from being 100%
print. Let's see if it catches on. Time will tell.
Very 73, Glenn (WB2LMV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: KH6TY <kh...@comcast.net>
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, January 5, 2010 10:50:20 AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: IZ8BLY's PSK63F + PSKFEC31
Glenn,
I think in this case, it will be possible to see a paradigm shift if we start
a major movement to PSK63F. The typing speed is as fast as PSK31, and the
tuning is just as easy (not so with MFSK16), and if the minimum S/N is truly
better than PSK31, hams will gravitate toward that like they gravitate to
Olivia (which is uncomfortably slow). The gravitation is always toward the best
performing mode, if there isn't anything else that makes it undesirable or hard
to use.
The problem is letting everyone know what mode is being used, and if RSID can
do that, I suggest that serious activity on PSK63F be started right away just
above the PSK31 activity. It is essential to know where to look for a
particular mode as it is especially confusing to see a PSK63 signal and not
have it decode because it is PSK63F. We will be adding PSK63F to fldigi very
shortly.
73
Skip KH6TY
Glenn L. Roeser wrote:
It seems to me that we have been down this road before comparing the
different digital modes. One thing is for certain, no matter what modes there
are that may do much better than PSK31, 99% of all operators will always use
PSK31.
It is almost impossible to get more than 3% of the operators to try
something new.
Very 73 to all, Glenn (WB2LMV)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Vojtech <bubn...@seznam. cz>
To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Tue, January 5, 2010 7:41:56 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: IZ8BLY's PSK63F + PSKFEC31
PSK63F is implemented in PocketDigi, source code is available.
> PSK63F is in all cases better than PSK31. The only advantage of PSK31 is
its smaller bandwidth.
The other benefit of PSK31 is quick turnaround. But I agree that PSK63F
shall be exercised and will be very useful at marginal conditions.
73, Vojtech
