D-Star, to me, will NEVER EVER, replace HF/SSB/CW and the thrill and romance of being able to communicate with another human being without any corporate infrastructure in-between. To give that up would be to surrender to those that control the infrastructure. I am not about to that, nor ever. D-Star is fun, fascinating, and useful. I like it. That said, there will be that nag that always irritates about it that says I am beholden to non-RF means to communicate. That is the nature of the D-Star phenomenon. So, I will put up with the QRM and the QRN and make those QSOs that actually require operator skill. For me, that is what defines ham radio. D-Star just slightly refines it, and, degrades it at the same time.
JOzef On 9/2/2010 02 50 Hours, John Parkins wrote: > > Hello Jim. > > Quite agree with all you say. > > Plus: the D-Star system I have now allows me to sit in the garden with > a handheld running 100mW and speaking to someone AND being able to > understand them, on the other side of the world. Yes I could fire up > HF battle through the QRM, QRN and idiots and do the same thing but > it's nice to have the option. > > The other thing that gives D-Star the green light is my wife thinks > it's cool and she's not impressed with any other branch of the hobby. > > Thursday, September 2, 2010, 6:50:55 AM, you wrote: > > JM> There is a lot of room in our hobby for many niche interests and > JM> points of view. I became a Ham in the late 1950s and while I > JM> started out on AM, I switched to SSB fairly soon after. I have > JM> always liked communications quality audio for voice > JM> communications. When I discovered a whole subculture of Hams > JM> interested in Extended SSB, I had trouble understanding why. I > JM> listen to some people with carefully adjusted equalizers that > JM> sound like they are transmitting from their bathroom, what with > JM> echos etc. But then I realized that as long as they don't hog the > JM> bandwidth when a band is busy, there is nothing wrong with them > JM> wanting something more than communications quality. > JM> > JM> I just expect them to respect my preference for narrower audio > response over RF. > JM> > JM> I am thinking D-Star will probably not work out for John, and > JM> he'll decide to move on to other parts of Ham radio. Or he'll get > JM> involved in experimentation with other types of digital radio that > JM> may involve other vocoders and different design parameters (I > JM> wonder what Codec2 sounds like?). And if we all live long enough, > JM> we will probably see other DV standards evolve. I like to think > JM> that if we left the planet and came back in 50 years, the vast > JM> majority of Ham transmissions will be some form of digital. It's > JM> inevitable. For John's sake, let's hope he has some audio quality > choices. > JM> > JM> In the meantime, I like D-Star audio just fine, since I'm able to > JM> understand what everyone is saying. > JM> > JM> Jim - K6JM > > -- > Best regards, > John G8KVP mailto:[email protected] <mailto:kvp%40bigfoot.com> > >
<<attachment: jozef.vcf>>
