John Reiser-3 wrote:
>
>
> But, I have a question for you, being a neophyte. Why are you not
> interested in AFSK? Does FSK work better in some way? Let me say, I have
> been very pleased with AFSK so far. I have worked almost any station that
> I
> could hear/print so far.
>
>
That's a good question. I don't know the answer either. I cannot see the
point of using FSK if a sound card is available. It will make no difference
at the other end of the contact, and at your end it means that you have to
tune in the signal you are working to the exact frequency you are
transmitting on, instead of just clicking on it in a waterfall and letting
AFC take care of it.
Some people use an external RTTY terminal unit and I have heard claims that
they can decode better than sound card programs. I can't argue with that,
since I have never done a comparison, but if true I would have thought it
was due to a deficiency in the decoding software. I would have thought that
DSP was capable of doing a better decoding job than any analog frequency
discriminator circuit.
-----
Julian, G4ILO
http://www.g4ilo.com/ G4ILO's Shack
http://www.ham-directory.com/ Ham Directory
--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/FSK-Help-tp575923p576292.html
Sent from the [K3] mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
