from:"Adrian"




On 9/5/23 02:49, Jim Brown via wsjt-devel wrote:
#1 is hardly a benefit, 



Why not, utilizing a gap at 100Hz or 2900Hz is very useful and effective 
with split.




#3 is bogus.


How would you know ? You lack the technical ability..


#2 is a side benefit, but VERY secondary, and not the fundamental 
purpose of the practice.


Absolute BS for the same reason for #1 I used to think you knew what you 
were talking about,..



Who cares about you or your 70 yr old history, old dogs can't learn new 
tricks ?


Mike makes excellent points, which you fail to comprehend.

The harmonic prevention title is ridiculous, keep it simple like "Signal 
Quality"



vk4tux





___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] [wsjtgroup] Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Mike I personally do not have issue with it as is, and as you know most 
do not read the manual, or could not be bothered.


"Split Operation for Signal Quality"  could be another option ? Just 
lets the newbies get a clue on why a split option is there.



73


vk4tux

On 9/5/23 02:32, Black Michael wrote:

And ya'll are confusing the purpose of split with the rig split function.

We have 3 choices

#1 Fake It
#2 Rig
#3 None

The all refer to split -- not to any reason for using it.  You are 
trying to put the reason as the title.


Mike W9MDB




On Monday, May 8, 2023 at 10:51:17 AM CDT, Adrian via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:



No, leave the split rig/fake checkpoints, as is, but place within a 
field/box titled 'Signal Optimization' ,


which should be an easy ui update ?

No need to remove rig split or fake split, because that is what is 
activated via CAT.



73


vk4tux

On 9/5/23 01:42, Alan wrote:

I think I suggested something similar much earlier in the thread.

However with that new name rig and fake it don't mean anything so I'd 
suggest change to hardware and software respectively.


Alan G0TLK, sent from my mobile device

On 8 May 2023 16:37:35 Adrian via wsjt-devel 
 
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:


Sam, That is what I mentioned earlier, however 'Signal Optimization' 
makes more sense,


as that is the end result.


73


vk4tux

On 9/5/23 01:28, Sam Birnbaum via groups.io wrote:

Hi All,

As a retired software developer with extensive UI development 
experience, may I make a suggestion to
whomever is in charge of the UI, to change this part of the display 
in Radio Settings tab from what is the
current version (left side) to this new version (right side) and 
explain its function in the WSJT-X manual/



ChangeRadioSetting.jpg

This removes the ambiguity and confusion regarding the use of the 
word SPLIT.



73,


Sam W2JDB



-Original Message-----
From: Adrian via wsjt-devel  
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
To: WSJT software development  
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

Cc: Adrian  <mailto:vk4...@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, May 8, 2023 10:17 am
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second 
cycles


Consistent TX level control, making alc minimum set easier for 
whole pan TX usage.


73
vk4tux
On 9/5/23 00:08, Björn Ekelund via wsjt-devel wrote:
So what more does it do?

Björn SM7IUN

On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 3:43 PM Black Michael  
wrote:


That's not the only thing it does so that's not a good choice.
Nobody has every come up with anything better than Split.
Let's just learn that Split from 50 years ago has changed and
is much more flexible now than before.

Mike W9MDB




On Monday, May 8, 2023 at 08:37:26 AM CDT, Björn Ekelund via
wsjt-devel  wrote:


I propose that the option "Split operation" in the radio
settings of WSJT-X is renamed "Transmit harmonics prevention"
to remove some of the confusion to those who struggle with
digital radio technology.

The three options below should be "I don't care if I QRM the
band", "Use VFO B", and "Use CAT".

Björn SM7IUN


On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 10:24 AM Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
 wrote:

On 5/6/2023 10:41 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
> This start to be really funny!

There's a saying in the States that "you can't argue with a
drunk." A
corollary is that it's a waste of time to one who only
wants the world
to tell him he's right.

The story related in your post is perfect!

73, Jim K9YC


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net  <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel  
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>

--
73,

Sam W2JDB
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#206) 
<https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/message/206> | Reply To Group 
<mailto:wsjtgr...@groups.io?subject=Re:%20%5Bwsjtgroup%5D%20Enhancement%20suggestion%20-%2030%20secon

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

The RX frequency = Set band frequency & pan marker sent > received. If I 
send you a 1900Hz audio modulated signal at split Sub TX vfo set 
14.072.500 = 14.074.400 usb freq,


Your RX on 14.074.00 band standard RX will see it at 400Hz marker.


73


vk4tux

On 9/5/23 01:46, Alan via wsjt-devel wrote:
Since WSJT-X shifts any transmit audio below 1500Hz higher up the 
spectrum how come we see RX signals on the waterfall below 1500Hz?


I presume on RX it shifts all signals back down by the same amount as 
they were shifted up on TX?


Alan G0TLK, sent from my mobile device

On 8 May 2023 15:37:14 Björn Ekelund via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:


Fair enough, they come with keeping the transmit audio frequency 
centered in the passband.


"Use optimal transmit audio frequency" then?

Given the huge and often uninformed debates (not only here), avoiding 
the s-word would have a lot of value.


Björn SM7IUN

On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 4:29 PM Black Michael via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:


#1 It allows you to transmit outside your passband.
#2 It avoids roll off of power at band edges.
#3 It avoids non-linearities in the audio digitization.

Mike W9MDB



On Monday, May 8, 2023 at 09:13:02 AM CDT, Björn Ekelund via
wsjt-devel  wrote:


So what more does it do?

Björn SM7IUN

On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 3:43 PM Black Michael
 wrote:

That's not the only thing it does so that's not a good
choice. Nobody has every come up with anything better than Split.
Let's just learn that Split from 50 years ago has changed and
is much more flexible now than before.

Mike W9MDB




On Monday, May 8, 2023 at 08:37:26 AM CDT, Björn Ekelund via
wsjt-devel mailto:wsjt-de...@listssourceforge.net>> wrote:


I propose that the option "Split operation" in the radio
settings of WSJT-X is renamed "Transmit harmonics prevention"
to remove some of the confusion to those who struggle with
digital radio technology.

The three options below should be "I don't care if I QRM the
band", "Use VFO B", and "Use CAT".

Björn SM7IUN


On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 10:24 AM Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
 wrote:

On 5/6/2023 10:41 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
> This start to be really funny!

There's a saying in the States that "you can't argue with
a drunk." A
corollary is that it's a waste of time to one who only
wants the world
to tell him he's right.

The story related in your post is perfect!

73, Jim K9YC


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel 







___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Reino,  "Signal Optimization" is a better field name , we control the 
audio passband frequency window for the best modulation results = Signal.



73


vk4tux


Sam just sent his proposal how to remove the split word in the relation of the 
local split usage. There may be no need for a 'two level' selection and just 
the title could be 'Audio optimization'. For sure related text in the User 
Guide needs same update, but in addition the 'Hold Tx Freq' related description 
should introduce 'split working' and perhaps a note to state that the Audio 
Optimization is independent of that and can be used at the same time.


73, Reino OH3mA



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] [wsjtgroup] Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

No, leave the split rig/fake checkpoints, as is, but place within a 
field/box titled 'Signal Optimization' ,


which should be an easy ui update ?

No need to remove rig split or fake split, because that is what is 
activated via CAT.



73


vk4tux

On 9/5/23 01:42, Alan wrote:

I think I suggested something similar much earlier in the thread.

However with that new name rig and fake it don't mean anything so I'd 
suggest change to hardware and software respectively.


Alan G0TLK, sent from my mobile device

On 8 May 2023 16:37:35 Adrian via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:


Sam, That is what I mentioned earlier, however 'Signal Optimization' 
makes more sense,


as that is the end result.


73


vk4tux

On 9/5/23 01:28, Sam Birnbaum via groups.io wrote:

Hi All,

As a retired software developer with extensive UI development 
experience, may I make a suggestion to
whomever is in charge of the UI, to change this part of the display 
in Radio Settings tab from what is the
current version (left side) to this new version (right side) and 
explain its function in the WSJT-X manual/



ChangeRadioSetting.jpg

This removes the ambiguity and confusion regarding the use of the 
word SPLIT.



73,


Sam W2JDB



-Original Message-
From: Adrian via wsjt-devel 
To: WSJT software development 
Cc: Adrian 
Sent: Mon, May 8, 2023 10:17 am
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Consistent TX level control, making alc minimum set easier for whole 
pan TX usage.


73
vk4tux
On 9/5/23 00:08, Björn Ekelund via wsjt-devel wrote:
So what more does it do?

Björn SM7IUN

On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 3:43 PM Black Michael <mailto:mdblac...@yahoo.com>> wrote:


That's not the only thing it does so that's not a good choice.
Nobody has every come up with anything better than Split.
Let's just learn that Split from 50 years ago has changed and is
much more flexible now than before.

Mike W9MDB




On Monday, May 8, 2023 at 08:37:26 AM CDT, Björn Ekelund via
wsjt-devel mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>> wrote:


I propose that the option "Split operation" in the radio
settings of WSJT-X is renamed "Transmit harmonics prevention"
to remove some of the confusion to those who struggle with
digital radio technology.

The three options below should be "I don't care if I QRM the
band", "Use VFO B", and "Use CAT".

Björn SM7IUN


On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 10:24 AM Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>> wrote:

On 5/6/2023 10:41 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
> This start to be really funny!

There's a saying in the States that "you can't argue with a
drunk." A
corollary is that it's a waste of time to one who only wants
the world
to tell him he's right.

The story related in your post is perfect!

73, Jim K9YC


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net  <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel  
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>

--
73,

Sam W2JDB
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#206) <https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/message/206> 
| Reply To Group 
<mailto:wsjtgr...@groups.io?subject=Re:%20%5Bwsjtgroup%5D%20Enhancement%20suggestion%20-%2030%20second%20cycles> 
| Reply To Sender 
<mailto:w2...@aol.com?subject=Private:%20Re:%20%5Bwsjtgroup%5D%20Enhancement%20suggestion%20-%2030%20second%20cycles> 
| Mute This Topic <https://groups.io/mt/98763644/1015776> | New 
Topic <https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/post>
Your Subscription <https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/editsub/1015776> | 
Contact Group Owner <mailto:wsjtgroup+ow...@groups.io> | Unsubscribe 
<https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/leave/12251959/1015776/1415

Re: [wsjt-devel] [wsjtgroup] Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Sam, That is what I mentioned earlier, however 'Signal Optimization' 
makes more sense,


as that is the end result.


73


vk4tux

On 9/5/23 01:28, Sam Birnbaum via groups.io wrote:

Hi All,

As a retired software developer with extensive UI development 
experience, may I make a suggestion to
whomever is in charge of the UI, to change this part of the display in 
Radio Settings tab from what is the
current version (left side) to this new version (right side) and 
explain its function in the WSJT-X manual/



ChangeRadioSetting.jpg

This removes the ambiguity and confusion regarding the use of the word 
SPLIT.



73,


Sam W2JDB



-Original Message-
From: Adrian via wsjt-devel 
To: WSJT software development 
Cc: Adrian 
Sent: Mon, May 8, 2023 10:17 am
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Consistent TX level control, making alc minimum set easier for whole 
pan TX usage.


73
vk4tux
On 9/5/23 00:08, Björn Ekelund via wsjt-devel wrote:
So what more does it do?

Björn SM7IUN

On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 3:43 PM Black Michael <mailto:mdblac...@yahoo.com>> wrote:


That's not the only thing it does so that's not a good choice. 
Nobody has every come up with anything better than Split.
Let's just learn that Split from 50 years ago has changed and is
much more flexible now than before.

Mike W9MDB




On Monday, May 8, 2023 at 08:37:26 AM CDT, Björn Ekelund via
wsjt-devel mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>> wrote:


I propose that the option "Split operation" in the radio settings
of WSJT-X is renamed "Transmit harmonics prevention"
to remove some of the confusion to those who struggle with digital
radio technology.

The three options below should be "I don't care if I QRM the
band", "Use VFO B", and "Use CAT".

Björn SM7IUN


On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 10:24 AM Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>> wrote:

On 5/6/2023 10:41 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
> This start to be really funny!

There's a saying in the States that "you can't argue with a
drunk." A
corollary is that it's a waste of time to one who only wants
the world
to tell him he's right.

The story related in your post is perfect!

73, Jim K9YC


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net  <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel  
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>

--
73,

Sam W2JDB
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#206) <https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/message/206> | 
Reply To Group 
<mailto:wsjtgr...@groups.io?subject=Re:%20%5Bwsjtgroup%5D%20Enhancement%20suggestion%20-%2030%20second%20cycles> 
| Reply To Sender 
<mailto:w2...@aol.com?subject=Private:%20Re:%20%5Bwsjtgroup%5D%20Enhancement%20suggestion%20-%2030%20second%20cycles> 
| Mute This Topic <https://groups.io/mt/98763644/1015776> | New Topic 
<https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/post>
Your Subscription <https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/editsub/1015776> | 
Contact Group Owner <mailto:wsjtgroup+ow...@groups.io> | Unsubscribe 
<https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup/leave/12251959/1015776/1415934963/xyzzy> 
[vk4...@gmail.com]


_._,_._,
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Consistent TX level control, making alc minimum set easier for whole pan 
TX usage.



73

vk4tux

On 9/5/23 00:08, Björn Ekelund via wsjt-devel wrote:

So what more does it do?

Björn SM7IUN

On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 3:43 PM Black Michael  wrote:

That's not the only thing it does so that's not a good choice. 
Nobody has every come up with anything better than Split.
Let's just learn that Split from 50 years ago has changed and is
much more flexible now than before.

Mike W9MDB




On Monday, May 8, 2023 at 08:37:26 AM CDT, Björn Ekelund via
wsjt-devel  wrote:


I propose that the option "Split operation" in the radio settings
of WSJT-X is renamed "Transmit harmonics prevention"
to remove some of the confusion to those who struggle with digital
radio technology.

The three options below should be "I don't care if I QRM the
band", "Use VFO B", and "Use CAT".

Björn SM7IUN


On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 10:24 AM Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
 wrote:

On 5/6/2023 10:41 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
> This start to be really funny!

There's a saying in the States that "you can't argue with a
drunk." A
corollary is that it's a waste of time to one who only wants
the world
to tell him he's right.

The story related in your post is perfect!

73, Jim K9YC


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles



On 8/5/23 17:00, Reino Talarmo wrote:

Sent: sunnuntai 7. toukokuuta 2023 23.29
Why would i talk about non wsjtx usage on a wsjtx group ?

It is important to use commonly used words in the same meaning in the ham 
community. There are many radio amateurs that have used other modes, some even 
tens of years, before trying to operate WSJT-X modes. This discussion is a good 
example of confusion, when suddenly a word is used to mean something else on 
the working point of view. Split has meant since start of the amateur radio 
using one frequency for transmission and another for reception for getting a 
QSO especially on a pile-up situation. In a pile-up the DX operator has 
difficulties to receive especially weaker stations. Of course the same applies 
to any mode. FT8 is just a bit better that many classical mode due to special 
decoding actions that are possible as very strong error correction and error 
detection are used. In addition FT8 provides pan (skimmer) reception making 
split working really comfortable!

The relevant issue in the split operation was different Rx and Tx frequencies 
and that was made possible by use of two VFOs. Computers were used for QSO 
logging and control of radios were made possible by CAT control to support 
split working. Now WSJT-X started to use 'Split operation' to describe the 
split control action, BUT used to compensate the split by changing audio. That 
for sure caused confusion, including me in first. There should be a 'warning' 
in the user guide, hi!


Well we all agree the Transceiver CP > VFO frequency & the modulating 
audio frequency = the usb frequency transmitted  and received by others.


Split, or Fake alters the radio TX CP frequency to force modulating 
audio frequency within the best passband window 1500 - 2000 Hz. *


The audio is not best described compensating the split, but rather the 
split/fake frequency shift compensating the good audio frequency


 maintained to maintain the set TX marker point. I do not see why it is 
confusing when you understand why it is done re *.


Anyone working 'split' DXpeditions surely should not have lost any of 
that knowledge by using wsjtx splt-rig/fake operation to maintain a good 
level/quality signal.


The manual should emphasize the reason & benefit to audio quality rather 
getting hung up on the word 'split'.


The thing is with CAT control, it is done automatic by wsjtx, and the 
operator  can just concentrate on making contacts.





My earlier comments refute the claim that the green marker is a rx frequency,
when the program is receiving the whole pan bandwidth,
and the rx marker is just a decode filter separating that traffic from the rest,
such that there is no audio split when you are receiving at the same point that
your tx mark sits, regardless of where you place it on the pan.

Well, the pan is a good tool to describe the split working. Let's take a DX 
station operating at 1600 Hz on the pan (green goalpost position) and there are 
100 station trying to call it. If those stations use single frequency working 
(non-split), then they don't need to use 'split operation' as there Tx (red 
goalpost) is at 1600 Hz. Would the DX station decode all those 100 stations! If 
wsjt-x manages to decode, say four of those, what is the probability that in 
the next reception time-slot the same or at least the one he answered to will 
be decoded?


I never claimed 100 stations on top of each other on same timeslot could 
be decoded. The law of the jungle applies there, is why many use power.


The smart thing to do is use TX hold (where split/fake is a huge 
advantage), and hangout on the less populated low section or high 
section of the pan,


looking for a gap. I have TX shift enabled during TX and often hit gaps 
on the fly with good success.


It is surprising how short that can be and still pass the info required 
to contact


For the DX operator, he can obtain a cue of many operators that have 
spread out on the pan all calling. I personally have worked pileups of 
up to 30 calls in list,


one after another, and sometime altering between 2 -3 for better time 
efficiency when one is lost for a couple of overs.




Now, if the 100 stations are using 'split working', then there is much higher 
probability that the DX station will decode even most of those. He will select 
one and his Rx frequency (the green goalpost) now moves to the point on the pan 
and in the next reception timeslot the selected station at the Rx frequency is 
decoded in a high probability. Of course you knew that already. BUT this is 
what most hams mean by split working.



Your choice if you work the right pane, I have worked callers direct the 
left during busy sessions and most wanted.  I don't consider working 
anyone within the pan, split working, for reasons mentioned before, as I 
receive all of the pan. I am not contained by the green marker.




Of course most of the stations calling outside 1500 to 2000 Hz Tx points will

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles


Certainly, but did you test the quality of the signal ?

On 7/5/23 18:19, alan2--- via wsjt-devel wrote:
The indicated frequency on a counter will not change as you are 
transmitting a 50Hz wide signal within a frequency range defined by 
the upper sideband width.  The position of your 50Hz wide transmission 
will vary within that sideband width but you will need a good spectrum 
analyser to see it.

Alan G0TLK
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles


The wsjtx program does that for you. No confusion


vk4tuxc

On 7/5/23 18:19, alan2--- via wsjt-devel wrote:
The indicated frequency on a counter will not change as you are 
transmitting a 50Hz wide signal within a frequency range defined by 
the upper sideband width.  The position of your 50Hz wide transmission 
will vary within that sideband width but you will need a good spectrum 
analyser to see it.

Alan G0TLK
On 07/05/2023 04:35, Adrian via wsjt-devel wrote:

But the one you tune in by moving green marker is your receiving frequency.
Same way you tune your transmitter by moving red marker.

*No, The green marker is just a decode filter for that mark to place 
that traffic in the right pane for view.The receive frequency covers the whole 3 -4 KHz bandwidth of your 
pan as set. See the left pane for all of these signals.Regardless of your TX 
slot, you will be still receiving there*



If you have
"hold TX freq" checked you and set your TX where ever you want over the
(audio) IF.
In that case you will have a split qso where you transmit on different
frequency as you receive.

*No because you receive also wherever that TX marker is. The green 
marker is not a RX tune, but a decode filter.Your receive all of the pan, not just the green marker slot*



"Split operation" in settings has nothing to do with this. It is
wsjt-x's "artificial intelligence" to optimize TX audio filter usage, if
user allows it by selecting "rig" or "fake it".
Whether or not this "artificial intelligence" is used it does not change
your RX and TX tuning (red and green markers) on RF spectrum, I.E. does
not cause any "split".
Test with frequency counter. Your TX RFcarrier does not change when
selecting "none", "rig" or "fake it".

Saku
OH1KH


*There is no TX RFcarrier as you said earlier, so there is nothing to 
see for change, only the usb sideband sum of RF and audio frequency.However in the radio there is a real ( not artificial ) generation 
of CP and audio signals mixed for the result TX ssb signal.**On 20m at 400 TX marker, my FTDX101MP in 'rig split' has TX Sub vfo 
set (by wsjtx) at 14.072.500, and uses an audio frequency of 1900Hz 
(1500 -2000 Hz being the target passband window) Sum = 14.074.400, the xxx.400 equating to the the pan indicator.*


*My monitor scope pickup indicates the audio at 1900Hz mean with the 
CP frequency at 14.072.500, that are mixed.**The vfo indicates the real CP reference **That is real as the passband filter hardware requires for best 
signal quality and level consistency.**Many not using split/fake wonder why their signal strength/quality 
varies across the pan in use, and the reason is not 'artificial'*

***73**vk4tux*




--





___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles


The fact that you try to compare a voice split qso to a FT 8 qso is stupid..

You look for the vacant slot in the pan and then select that, of not 
easy then look for a gap irrelevant of width.


73


vk4tux


On 7/5/23 15:41, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:

Hi Adrian,

This start to be really funny!

Let me take a real scenario that I participated. If I remember correctly it was 
a FT8 contest and there were a rare station, at least to me, K1JT. So everybody 
called him, including me, quite a pile-up on his transmit frequency. Joe tried 
to manage that pile-up by sending message 'USE SPLIT PSE'.

What he meant by that? Did he recommended that everybody should use Split 
operation 'Rig' or 'Fake It' while working him or something else?

If he meant Split operation, how he knew that the operators were selected Split 
operation 'None'? He had no access to other stations rigs nor monitor function 
of those rigs. By magic, perhaps.

No, no, he meant use Split working i.e. send on another frequency that where he 
is sending.

I did and managed to work him, but he never sent 73 to my RR73, but that's 
another story as I was novice at that time.



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles




Also on the subject of "split" The radio CP frequency point change on 
the vfo display is required,


to obtain the best pass-band frequency required to suit and sum to the 
tx marker set.


The radio is shifting its CP frequency between TX and RX to achieve this.

In "rig splt" the 'split' radio function is required and activated. What 
other button can we push to prove it is not 'split' ?



73


vk4tux



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-05-06 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


Reino, Your comments are not addressing mine, but rather what you assume.

The decoder decodes the entire pan RX bandwith, the green marker filter 
just separates that traffic within that mark, for separate "visual" 
display,,


there is no difference in sensitivity other than the radio RX performance.


73


vk4tux


On 7/5/23 15:41, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:

The green goalpost indicates the frequency, where your decoder starts decoding 
i.e. it is your most important received frequency at that time. All other 
station you see in the Band Activity are just extra, but those are not any part 
of your current QSO. So the green goalpost is your receiver frequency. All 
others are from your FT8 skimmer as an extra for you.



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-05-06 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel

But the one you tune in by moving green marker is your receiving frequency.
Same way you tune your transmitter by moving red marker.

*No, The green marker is just a decode filter for that mark to place
that traffic in the right pane for view.The receive frequency covers the whole 3 -4 KHz bandwidth of your pan
as set. See the left pane for all of these signals.Regardless of your TX slot,
you will be still receiving there*

If you have
"hold TX freq" checked you and set your TX where ever you want over the
(audio) IF.
In that case you will have a split qso where you transmit on different
frequency as you receive.

*No because you receive also wherever that TX marker is. The green
marker is not a RX tune, but a decode filter.Your receive all of the pan, not just the green marker slot*

"Split operation" in settings has nothing to do with this. It is
wsjt-x's "artificial intelligence" to optimize TX audio filter usage, if
user allows it by selecting "rig" or "fake it".
Whether or not this "artificial intelligence" is used it does not change
your RX and TX tuning (red and green markers) on RF spectrum, I.E. does
not cause any "split".
Test with frequency counter. Your TX RFcarrier does not change when
selecting "none", "rig" or "fake it".

Saku
OH1KH

*There is no TX RFcarrier as you said earlier, so there is nothing to
see for change, only the usb sideband sum of RF and audio frequency.However in the radio there is a real ( not artificial ) generation of
CP and audio signals mixed for the result TX ssb signal.**On 20m at 400 TX marker, my FTDX101MP in 'rig split' has TX Sub vfo set
(by wsjtx) at 14.072.500, and uses an audio frequency of 1900Hz (1500
-2000 Hz being the target passband window) Sum = 14.074.400, the xxx.400 equating to the the pan indicator.*

*My monitor scope pickup indicates the audio at 1900Hz mean with the CP
frequency at 14.072.500, that are mixed.**The vfo indicates the real CP reference **That is real as the passband filter hardware requires for best signal
quality and level consistency.**Many not using split/fake wonder why their signal strength/quality
varies across the pan in use, and the reason is not 'artificial'*

***73**vk4tux*

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-05-02 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel



On 2/5/23 23:33, Sam W2JDB via wsjt-devel wrote:

Hi,

Having followed this thread from the beginning and being a small part 
of it (in the beginning) I do have some questions regarding the use of 
the
word SPLIT as it pertains to WSJT-X versus its classical meaning on 
the HF Bands in CW and SSB, i.e. UP 5 or UP 10 etc.


First, I would you all agree that while you are in the receive state 
in WSJT-X, you are listening for the entire band pass beginning at the 
base,
i.e.  14.074 plus a small offset such as 200 and extending to the 
upper limit of the bandpass that you specified. That does not change 
no matter

where you place your receive goal posts (green).

The question now becomes if you are operating split when you move the 
TX marker away from the RX marker. Suppose you don't have the SPLIT
function on, that is it is set to NONE. Are you still operating split 
if your TX marker is at the edges of the bandpass?


No




Now lets look at it the other way, suppose you set the TX marker at 
1500 smack dab in the center, or close to it, and you do have the 
SPLIT function on,

Fake It or Rig it does not matter. Are you now operating SPLIT?



No



How about you have SPLIT on and are on offset 2000, calling someone 
who is on 500 and he then answered you on offset 2000.  Did you 
operate SPLIT?



Yes



Here is another question, suppose I am in a QSO, phone, my equalizer 
is set to emphasize the lower frequencies and attenuate the middle and 
the
highs while my counterparty emphasizes the higher frequencies and 
attenuates the lower to the middle.  Are we operating SPLIT?



No

How about the situation when you need to use either RIT or XIT 
function in the rig, Are you operating SPLIT?



No



As someone said it, no one owns the meaning of the word SPLIT, but the 
choice of using the word SPLIT within WSJT-X seems to be the wrong word
as it runs counter to its classical meaning in the HAM community and 
introduces confusion. We all know, or should know, that WSJT-X uses a 
function,
should we to choose to use it, optimize the output power and minimize 
and distortion no matter where the TX marker is. That function simple 
shifts things
around so that the audio component is somewhere around the center of 
the bandpass.



Rig Split option places the rig in split mode to achieve the TX offset 
required for best passband filter audio frequency range.


I have used 'Rig Split' for may years with great results/

73

vk4tux

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-05-02 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


Experts ?

On 2/5/23 15:13, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:

Jim, Mike and all experts,




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-05-02 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


Alan, Yes all good, you said it well.

My explanation was within the radio before modulation, regarding RF 
frequency shift on TX to accommodate a quality center passband audio 
modulation frequency.


Everyone else is talking about the resultant transmitted signal 
frequency agreed being the sum of those parts.


Instead of adjusting the tx marker + 100Hz in rig split, I can just 
adjust the vfo +100Hz in rig split to do the same thing with the audio 
frequency kept in the passband window


required.. All stations sen have moved 100Hz across.  If I do it with 
wsjtx TX marker +100 Hz , wsjtx will step the vfo in 500Hz step if 
needed  to suit the @ 500Hz border pan


 TX marker change across that border.

So the 10m program pan display could be labelled as the RF frequency 
28.075.500 at the center 1500 mark and be correct RF freq marker etc 
with surrounding -/+100Hz increments



73


vk4tux

On 2/5/23 17:09, Alan via wsjt-devel wrote:
Interesting discussion but I find it a bit confusing so I've gone back 
to basics:


The transmission is in the form of amplitude modulation using single 
(upper) sideband suppressed carrier. That means the RF may not be a 
single frequency but a band of frequencies with the bandwidth defined 
by the normal USB filter width - the sideband.  The carrier and lower 
sideband aren't there in usable form.


The USB filter width is about 300Hz to 2800Hz, depending on rig 
settings, so a single tone of exactly 1500Hz will produce RF at 1500Hz 
into the sideband width and for all practical purposes nowhere else in 
that sideband.


A lower tone of 500Hz will produce RF 500Hz into the sideband but also 
probably some harmonics every 500Hz up to 2500Hz.


If there is no audio signal at a particular frequency within that 
filter width there will be no RF in that part of the sideband either.


A WSJT-X signal is generated as a narrow band of frequencies about 
50Hz wide.  On transmit RF will be present within the sideband only 
for that 50Hz width.


WSJT-X by default begins that 50Hz wide signal at 1500Hz.  If we move 
the TX marker to say 1200Hz the 50Hz wide RF signal will begin at at 
1200Hz into the sideband width, not 1500Hz.


WSJT-X in receive sees and displays all of the signals within the USB 
filter width


We pick one signal that will have a particular position within the 
received sideband, let's say 400Hz up from the lower bound and reply 
to it.


Without split our transmission would occupy RF between 400Hz and 450Hz 
into the sideband.  This is non-optimum for WSJT-X.


If we have split set then on our reply WSJT-X will change the rig VFO 
to put our transmission  back into the optimum location in the 
sideband for reception.


If we have fake it set then WSJT-X shifts the transmit audio so that 
the resultant RF is again in the optimum location within the sideband.


The location of RX and TX signals within the sideband are different, 
so the RF frequencies involved are different.


That's the definition of split frequency operation, but it all occurs 
within a single USB sideband width, so may not be immediately obvious.


The important thing to remember is that in USB mode the frequency 
shown on the rig is not a single transmit frequency.  Its the start of 
a band of frequencies, the upper sideband produced by amplitude 
modulation.


Does that all make sense?

In the context of WSJT-X it might be better to use something like 
"Hardware AHS" and "Software AHS" with AHS meaning audio harmonic 
suppression rather than split?


Alan G0TLK, sent from my mobile device



On 1 May 2023 12:18:59 Adrian via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:



Too funny, as the rx of both stations covers the entire pan bandwidth,
the fact they are transmitting on a different pan slice within,

does not qualify as 'audio split' in my book. If both were running 300Hz
rx filters then it might qualify on matching tx/tx placement between two
stations

  not running rig/fake split.

Both stations can be running very similar audio frequencies and have the
TX offset between then controlled mainly by the RF split frequency 
offset,


which is what we are talking about. I can work 100Hz to 2900Hz in the
pan keeping audio within 1500 - 2000 HZ , again what Rig split is
designed for.

I often do that re 300Hz Rfil RX with DX peditions, which gives a 20dB
gain on the FTDX101MP here @! 300Hz , while taking out the callers.

Using TX hold should be default behavior, jumping around the pan on
target , has many competing for the same tx marker/timeslot whereas

spread-out calls using the space, work much better for everyone.


73


vk4tux

On 1/5/23 20:52, Jim Shorney wrote:
Apparently this is really hard to understand. When the audio offset 
of your QSO partner and your TX audio offset are different your are 
running audio split.


On Mon, 1 May 2023 15:58:55 +1000
Adrian  wrote:


There is no 'audio split' in WSJTX'  TX audio is determined by mode, RF
frequency and the TX marker.

RX audio d

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-05-01 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


Thankyou Mike


73


vk4tux

On 2/5/23 13:31, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
Nobody owns the definition of splitas for confusing hams they are 
only confused because they refuse to learn.


#1 Rigs have a split button -- it lights up.  That's split mode -- no 
requirement that VFOB be on any different frequency than VFOA.  You 
can run CW Skimmer on an IC-7300 with VFOA on FM mode to give you 
12KHz width for receive and VFOB on CW to transmit -- that's split 
mode too and you may be in a CW contest working operators on their 
frequency or working a DXpedition in frequency split.
#2 Nobody has ever come up with a simple word to describe the audio 
split done in WSJT-X modes.  It does follow the tx on 1 and rx on 
another in the audio space and does in audio what different 
frequencies do so it is just split using another method. You could 
shift audio by changing frequency if you wanted to.
#3 This discussion comes up every couple of years and never goes 
anywhere other than to educate some people about the audio split.
#4 When you pick "Rig Split" in WSJT-X your rig goes into split mode 
-- it doesn't know why you want to do it and that's what some are 
arguing is the "why"it's still split mode as the little light is 
lit up.  Fake It was done for rigs that didn't handle Rig Split well 
and None for rigs that can't do either or don't need either (there are 
a few).'


So we have:
#1 Rig split -- hardware -- could be RF or just mode or cross-band
#2 Freq (RF) split -- operations (WSJT-X Fake It)
#3 Audio (AF) split -- software

CW/Phone people use #1 and #2. WSJT-X uses all 3.

A lot of the motivation for Rig Split and Fake It came from people 
overdriving their audio and the subsequent harmonics.  WA1SXK and I 
have been on the warpath for over 3 years helping clean up all these 
harmonic generators...it's pretty rare to see them now as we have 
contacted hundreds of operators and have a paper on my QRZ page 
explaining how to set up your audio to avoid it.


Mike W9MDB


On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 08:05:31 PM CDT, Adrian via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:



All the online definitions I find for 'split' operation are ;

Split means transmitting on one frequency and listening on another.

referring to your own station, without reference to anyone else.




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-05-01 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


All the online definitions I find for 'split' operation are ;

Split means transmitting on one frequency and listening on another.

referring to your own station, without reference to anyone else.

FT8 is not a 'listening' mode. It is visual receiving 3 - 4 Khz wide 
including wherever you are TX. decoding via software all of that traffic 
decoded.
The RX marker is just a filter to display that rx mark decode slice on 
the right pane for easier reading and message store.


So wherever you TX you will always hear/see response at that same point, 
on the rx timeslot.
When the software rig/fake enabled attempts to keeps the audio in best 
audio passband zone,
it changes the radio TX unmodulated (RF CP) frequency then adds the 
audio to maintain TX mark position.


If we were using voice there would be no argument due to the wide audio 
frequency range involved.
My whole discussion here has been about the generation of the radio 
signal, and the radio frequency shift involved,

before any audio is in the picture.

I quite often use the vfo manually to change RF frequency to bring in 
offscale spots, or align F/H stations.
The wsjtx cat commands do the same thing to the vfo in split. Rig split 
does TX on Sub vfo and does require the radio to be have split activated.


So to be told the radio is not changing RF frequency during these 
changes, CAT or Manual driven, defies logic.


vk4tux

On 29/4/23 03:39, Jim Brown via wsjt-devel wrote:

On 4/28/2023 7:04 AM, Sam W2JDB via wsjt-devel wrote:

Yes I know exactly what split is in WSJT-X.


And it is confusing to long time hams because it was a very poor 
choice of words, contrary to what "split" operation has meant on the 
HF bands for at least 70 years. "Split" in the context of ham radio 
means that you transmit on a frequency different from that of the 
station you are calling. The most common application is a rare DX 
station will listen for callers above his transmit frequency.


73, Jim K9YC___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-05-01 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel

Too funny, as the rx of both stations covers the entire pan bandwidth, 
the fact they are transmitting on a different pan slice within,


does not qualify as 'audio split' in my book. If both were running 300Hz 
rx filters then it might qualify on matching tx/tx placement between two 
stations


 not running rig/fake split.

Both stations can be running very similar audio frequencies and have the 
TX offset between then controlled mainly by the RF split frequency offset,


which is what we are talking about. I can work 100Hz to 2900Hz in the 
pan keeping audio within 1500 - 2000 HZ , again what Rig split is 
designed for.


I often do that re 300Hz Rfil RX with DX peditions, which gives a 20dB 
gain on the FTDX101MP here @! 300Hz , while taking out the callers.


Using TX hold should be default behavior, jumping around the pan on 
target , has many competing for the same tx marker/timeslot whereas


spread-out calls using the space, work much better for everyone.


73


vk4tux

On 1/5/23 20:52, Jim Shorney wrote:

Apparently this is really hard to understand. When the audio offset of your QSO 
partner and your TX audio offset are different your are running audio split.

On Mon, 1 May 2023 15:58:55 +1000
Adrian  wrote:


There is no 'audio split' in WSJTX'  TX audio is determined by mode, RF
frequency and the TX marker.

RX audio decode covers the pan bandwidth, with the RX marker filtered
for the right pane display.


vk4tux

On 1/5/23 14:45, Jim Shorney via wsjt-devel wrote:

audio split in WSJTX



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

There is no 'audio split' in WSJTX'  TX audio is determined by mode, RF 
frequency and the TX marker.


RX audio decode covers the pan bandwidth, with the RX marker filtered 
for the right pane display.



vk4tux

On 1/5/23 14:45, Jim Shorney via wsjt-devel wrote:

audio split in WSJTX



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Jim, Yes the whole point of the RF frequency changing is forcing the 
audio frequency to respond to keep it in the passband best window.


My Sub vfo goes down/up in 500 Hz steps as I alter my TX marker. (TX 
hold option always), throughout the pan 3000JHz range.


I don't accept my radio is not changing RF frequency when I see it 
changing RF frequency.  That RF frequency being the vfo offset adjusted 
display CP.


I know that the audio frequency is set in association to keep my TX 
marker constant with optimum audio frequency.


If you don't alter the RF frequency then you cannot control the audio 
frequency for best performance at TX position selected.


73


vk4tux

On 1/5/23 14:45, Jim Shorney via wsjt-devel wrote:

You guys are saying the same thing if different ways. It is all split. Just 
like repeater split, DXpedition split, and 40m DX split are all different kinds 
of split so are rig split and audio split in WSJTX. If anything this just shows 
that it needs to be clarified in the documentation so it is easy for newbies to 
understand. Then you can work on getting them to actually read the manual. :)

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Mon, 1 May 2023 14:21:03 +1000
Adrian via wsjt-devel  wrote:


Again I disagree. Your are not discussing the same factor that I am of
the radio changing carrier frequency as displayed with data shift
allowance already of ;

   FUNC > RADIO SETTING > Mode PSK/DATA>  DATA SHIFT {SSB} set 1500 HZ .

So if I see a spot at 28.079.400, I tune to 28.079.00 and sure enough I
find that target at 400Hz on the Pan display.

I TX mark 1200 Hz on pan and the SUB vfo transmits 28.078.500 (500HZ sub
vfo auto down shift controlled from wsjtx), and audio frequency is 1700HZ,

keeping the 1500 - 2000 HZ sweet spot window the split shift is designed
for.

I do not accept the radio is not changing RF frequency on TX, I do
accept it is and the software generates the appropriate audio frequency
to compensate,

which the sum becomes the frequency spotted. My explanation is the radio
condition at the radio, not the received signal elsewhere.


73


vk4tux


On 1/5/23 13:55, Jim Brown via wsjt-devel wrote:

On 4/30/2023 4:30 PM, Adrian via wsjt-devel wrote:

Reino, this is where we disagree, as my point is if the vfo frequency
changes, then the 'radio frequency' which I consider the same also
changes.

Adrian,

Reino is right, and you are wrong. Nothing personal, just scientific
fact. The frequency readout of virtually all modern transceivers set
to receive CW is radio frequency corresponding to the center of the
receive bandwidth. When a second RX set to receive CW is tuned to peak
your FT8 signal, that readout IS the center of the 50 Hz signal you
are transmitting. If your USB dial frequency is 21.074 MHz (21,074
kHz) and your offset is 1.5 kHz, the center of your signal is 25 Hz
above 21.0755 MHz (21,075.5 kHz) (25 Hz because WSJT-X defines TX
frequency as the frequency of the lowest tone).

73, Jim K9YC




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Again I disagree. Your are not discussing the same factor that I am of 
the radio changing carrier frequency as displayed with data shift 
allowance already of ;


 FUNC > RADIO SETTING > Mode PSK/DATA>  DATA SHIFT {SSB} set 1500 HZ .

So if I see a spot at 28.079.400, I tune to 28.079.00 and sure enough I 
find that target at 400Hz on the Pan display.


I TX mark 1200 Hz on pan and the SUB vfo transmits 28.078.500 (500HZ sub 
vfo auto down shift controlled from wsjtx), and audio frequency is 1700HZ,


keeping the 1500 - 2000 HZ sweet spot window the split shift is designed 
for.


I do not accept the radio is not changing RF frequency on TX, I do 
accept it is and the software generates the appropriate audio frequency 
to compensate,


which the sum becomes the frequency spotted. My explanation is the radio 
condition at the radio, not the received signal elsewhere.



73


vk4tux


On 1/5/23 13:55, Jim Brown via wsjt-devel wrote:

On 4/30/2023 4:30 PM, Adrian via wsjt-devel wrote:
Reino, this is where we disagree, as my point is if the vfo frequency 
changes, then the 'radio frequency' which I consider the same also 
changes.


Adrian,

Reino is right, and you are wrong. Nothing personal, just scientific 
fact. The frequency readout of virtually all modern transceivers set 
to receive CW is radio frequency corresponding to the center of the 
receive bandwidth. When a second RX set to receive CW is tuned to peak 
your FT8 signal, that readout IS the center of the 50 Hz signal you 
are transmitting. If your USB dial frequency is 21.074 MHz (21,074 
kHz) and your offset is 1.5 kHz, the center of your signal is 25 Hz 
above 21.0755 MHz (21,075.5 kHz) (25 Hz because WSJT-X defines TX 
frequency as the frequency of the lowest tone).


73, Jim K9YC




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Reino, this is where we disagree, as my point is if the vfo frequency 
changes, then the 'radio frequency' which I consider the same also changes.


We do not see the vfo frequency display in sync variance with the 
modulation frequency. It remains static at the carrier point, which I 
consider the 'radio frequency'.


ie, the frequency the radio is tuned to. Usually signals heard 
exhibiting a mid pitch tone are usually using rig/fake split to have 
that audio thus.


I have audio completely off for FT8, not required. It is a visual mode.

I agree reported radio frequency spots are the sum of carrier point and 
audio frequency, so working a Fox I would tune to 400Hz less than spot 
report and then sit above 1000Hz


for best results as F/H is designed. Otherwise jumping the TX mark into 
vacant columns always gets get a better result as we know.


My point is if the radio frequency shifts on TX at the radio that is set 
'split', then that is the function of 'split', regardless if the RXer 
can tell or not.


 The RX'er would def know that the calling station is using TX hold, 
and these smarter stations usually also use rig/fake split.


I use Rig Split with the FTDX101MP always. I consider it the best radio 
for the job with its No 1 rxcr.



73


vk4tux


Now with those definitions the internal 'Split Operation' does not change radio 
frequency. It changes VFO frequency, but that's irrelevant on the antenna 
radiation point of view. On the other hand having the Rx green goalpost at a 
different (audio) frequency that the Tx red goalpost is classical split working 
(in short 'split') as at the antenna there are different Rx and Tx frequencies.

Perhaps we could add some note into the User Guide on that issue. Currently 
terminology seems to lead to unnecessary disagreements and move discussion to 
irrelevant arguing instead of discussing the original item (a random frequency 
selection for CQ).

My 2 cents.

73, Reino OH3mA





___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

Setting a fixed TX mark should be default behavior in wsjtx. Having 
default set users jumping on the target mark together with their TX is 
not beneficial,


rather than spaced tx calls forming a better decoded cue for the target 
to then work. TXing on a clear space and RX the target on the target mark,


does not interfere with anyone, and the target can see all calling and 
choose.  Many (mainly new) wsjtx users misunderstand this.



73


vk4tux

On 30/4/23 22:22, Sam W2JDB via wsjt-devel wrote:
As to randomizing the TX offset on TX1 and/or TX6 I don't see any 
benefit but can see potential problems. If I am calling CQ after I 
find what
appears to be a clear offset on my end, I do not want WSJT-X to move 
it for me. If I don't receive replies after a few moments, I will 
stop, and look
and analyze what I see and if need be I will move it if necessary. The 
same applies to TX1. That is part of what being a HAM is.


73,

Sam W2JDB
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles


I disagree with below.

Sam explained it well. Keeping the same Pan TX location the RF frequency 
is shifted to maintain and audio frequency suitable for the best 
passband performance and level


continuity. It is split. The TX VFO adjust to 500, 1000 below the RX RX 
VFO frequency when pan TX marker is set  ~ 500 or 1000 below  the mid 
mark. and opposit when set above so the TX vfo raises frequency 500, 100 
Hz and so on. The same effect of changing frequency changing the pitch 
of a received voice/signal is the same effect used to get the audio 
frequency in the sweetspot while maintaining pan position for stations 
listening. Any frequency shift between TX and RX is split operation.


Fake (split) is changing the same (TX/RX) vfo frequency between TX and 
RX for the same effect.



vk4tux


When using sideband modulation (USB/LSB) the RF frequency is tied to 
audio slot frequency. That is: dumped RF carrier +/- audio frequency 
depending on sideband used. If we change audio slot we change RF 
frequency that means we are using "split" in means what is in Ham radio.


No it means you are altering audio frequency in line with the pan 
marker, carrier point frequency remains the same, and unless it is 
forced to shift then audio passband become an issue.


Using the thoughtlessly named "split operation" of 
wsjt-x/settings/radio has NO effect to RF frequency that is produced. 
It is always the same as "split operation", when used, adjusts the 
ratio of RF carrier to audio frequency to keep the produced RF 
frequency always the same while centering the audio frequency in 
middle of AF filter passband.


Rubbish, The split operation shifts RF frequency on TX vfo in 500Hz 
increments to suit the audio marker more than 500Hz off center.



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fwd: Enhancement suggestion - 30 second cycles

2023-04-28 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel

I find below statement odd. as the  Pan audio mark is sent exactly as 
you set it. Only the RF frequency shifts to suit the audio > bandpass 
sweetspot.


It is indicative that you do not realize how it works.


73


vk4tux

On the other hand I don’t support of the idea that WSJT-X would 
randomly select my transmission frequency. I don’t like that the tx 
frequency jumps on a frequency where my neighbor is about to complete 
QSO with an important DX station. I



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Windows 10 24 bit audio rx + split code into twoprojects?

2023-04-24 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel

I recommend someone sane start a new wsjtx group and we all migrate.

73

vk4tux

On 24/4/23 22:36, K9RX via wsjt-devel wrote:

Not to belabor the point…. I too was rejected although I’m still able 
to see posts – just can’t respond. My failing? I posted a comment 
saying how I had 92 decodes in one sequence using WSJT and I 
congratulated the creators of the program – kudos I said. I followed 
by the benign statement “JTDX had 94 the following sequence – 
essentially the same” … the whole post was not posted. I asked why – 
he responded with this tirade of how he has stated time and again NOT 
to post about derivatives… I apologized and said I was unaware of that 
– that I was a casual poster. He called me a liar. I told him I 
believe sincerely in honesty and integrity – apologized again - he 
doubled down. After that he wouldn’t respond. So YES – there IS 
someone there and HE alone is making these decisions. My suggestion to 
him: get a life. Stop being an ass to others who sincerely are not 
trying to disrespect WSJT.

Gary

K9RX

Sent from Mail  for 
Windows

*From: *Virginia Greene via wsjt-devel 

*Sent: *Monday, April 24, 2023 8:21 AM
*To: *marting0...@gmail.com; WSJT software development 

*Cc: *Virginia Greene 
*Subject: *Re: [wsjt-devel] Windows 10 24 bit audio rx + split code 
into twoprojects?

On Apr 24, 2023, at 7:49 AM, Martin Davies G0HDB via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:

>

> Commiserations, Jim, Willie and Virginia (and anyone else whose 
membership of the

> WSJT-X group on groups.io has been terminated!).

Martin,

Perhaps the moderation is at least partially automated, with people 
being dropped for using one of several banned phrases or terms.  Who 
knows.  It does seem rather draconian to just drop forum members for a 
violation rather than just telling them that their post violates this 
or that forum rule.

I’m sure they have their reasons for moderating as they do.  At some 
point the job becomes really easy when there’s no members left to post.

73,

Clarke  K1JX

___

wsjt-devel mailing list

wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Windows 10 24 bit audio rx + split code into two projects?

2023-04-24 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


The moderator there 'Roger' is a control freak, and very self sensitive.

Last week a poster had trouble decoding, and I referred him to time.is ,

however Roger completely misunderstood the relevance and arrogantly told 
me to try the website  myself,


if i wanted to know what result it gave  I asked if he was talking 
to me in disbelief that anyone would respond in that fashion.


When he said yes , I educated him on the value of time.is for time sync 
checks, and for my trouble he told me I was rude


for letting him know and placed me on permanent moderation. I just left. 
I don't recommend the group, as the admin is inept.



73


vk4tux

On 24/4/23 22:15, Virginia Greene via wsjt-devel wrote:

On Apr 24, 2023, at 7:49 AM, Martin Davies G0HDB via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:

Commiserations, Jim, Willie and Virginia (and anyone else whose membership of 
the
WSJT-X group on groups.io has been terminated!).


Martin,

Perhaps the moderation is at least partially automated, with people being 
dropped for using one of several banned phrases or terms.  Who knows.  It does 
seem rather draconian to just drop forum members for a violation rather than 
just telling them that their post violates this or that forum rule.

I’m sure they have their reasons for moderating as they do.  At some point the 
job becomes really easy when there’s no members left to post.

73,

Clarke  K1JX

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] "Failed to access lock file" in wsjt-x 2.6.0 rc4

2022-11-05 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


adrian@debian:~$ ps ax | grep wsjt
 57603 ?    Sl 1:11 /usr/bin/wsjtx
 62851 pts/3    S+ 0:00 grep wsjt
adrian@debian:~$ sudo pkill wsjtx

adrian@debian:~$ ps ax | grep wsjt
 63624 pts/3    S+ 0:00 grep wsjt
adrian@debian:~$

It is process wsjtx rather than wsjt, but your grep should have picked 
it up as above.


In my case, any stale lock file error is resolved as above.

I never have to reboot.


73


Adrian Fewster

On 5/11/22 23:28, leo bistmans wrote:
I did try to look for lingering wsjtx related processes, but did not 
see them:


leo@linux-gu90:/tmp> ps ax | grep wsjt
 3140 pts/3    S+     0:00 grep --color=auto wsjt

leo@linux-gu90:/tmp> ps ax | grep jt
 3208 pts/3    S+     0:00 grep --color=auto jt

On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 2:06 PM Adrian  wrote:

I see this from time to time, rectified with 'sudo pkill wsjtx' and

then no problem to start a new session.. If linux > wsjtx ran a
startup
script killing first,

then there would never be an issue.


73


    Adrian Fewster

On 5/11/22 22:56, leo bistmans via wsjt-devel wrote:
> Via strace I saw the lock file that is not there is /tmp/WSJT-X
... .lock
>
>
> openat(AT_FDCWD, "/tmp/WSJT-X - ft-891.lock",
> O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL|O_CLOEXEC, 0666) = 13
> flock(13, LOCK_EX|LOCK_NB)              = 0
>
> If I create it myself with touch,  the switch code below is used
> instead of throwing the fatal error.
>
>       The code in main.cpp:
>
>   // disallow multiple instances with same instance key
>       QLockFile instance_lock {temp_dir.absoluteFilePath
> (a.applicationName () + ".lock")};
>       instance_lock.setStaleLockTime (0);
>       while (!instance_lock.tryLock ())
>         {
>           if (QLockFile::LockFailedError == instance_lock.error ())
>             {
>               auto button = MessageBox::query_message (nullptr
>                                                        , "Another
> instance may be running"
>                                                        , "try to
> remove stale lock file?"
>                                                        , QString {}
>                                                        ,
> MessageBox::Yes | MessageBox::Retry | MessageBox::No
>                                                        ,
MessageBox::Yes);
>               switch (button)
>                 {
>                 case MessageBox::Yes:
>                   instance_lock.removeStaleLockFile ();
>                   break;
>
>                 case MessageBox::Retry:
>                   break;
>
>                 default:
>                   throw std::runtime_error {"Multiple instances
must
> have unique rig names"};
>                 }
>             }
>           else
>             {
>               throw std::runtime_error {"Failed to access lock
file"};
>             }
>         }
>
> The reason that I do not have the .lock file in /tmp is an open
> question to me ( possibly a disk full condition? ).
> However I think it is fairly safe for wsjt-x to just start
instead of
> forcing me to reboot my PC.
>
> 73 de on1aad
>
>
>
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] "Failed to access lock file" in wsjt-x 2.6.0 rc4

2022-11-05 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


I see this from time to time, rectified with 'sudo pkill wsjtx' and

then no problem to start a new session.. If linux > wsjtx ran a startup 
script killing first,


then there would never be an issue.


73


Adrian Fewster

On 5/11/22 22:56, leo bistmans via wsjt-devel wrote:

Via strace I saw the lock file that is not there is /tmp/WSJT-X ... .lock


openat(AT_FDCWD, "/tmp/WSJT-X - ft-891.lock", 
O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL|O_CLOEXEC, 0666) = 13

flock(13, LOCK_EX|LOCK_NB)              = 0

If I create it myself with touch,  the switch code below is used 
instead of throwing the fatal error.


      The code in main.cpp:

  // disallow multiple instances with same instance key
      QLockFile instance_lock {temp_dir.absoluteFilePath 
(a.applicationName () + ".lock")};

      instance_lock.setStaleLockTime (0);
      while (!instance_lock.tryLock ())
        {
          if (QLockFile::LockFailedError == instance_lock.error ())
            {
              auto button = MessageBox::query_message (nullptr
                                                       , "Another 
instance may be running"
                                                       , "try to 
remove stale lock file?"

                                                       , QString {}
                                                       , 
MessageBox::Yes | MessageBox::Retry | MessageBox::No

                                                       , MessageBox::Yes);
              switch (button)
                {
                case MessageBox::Yes:
                  instance_lock.removeStaleLockFile ();
                  break;

                case MessageBox::Retry:
                  break;

                default:
                  throw std::runtime_error {"Multiple instances must 
have unique rig names"};

                }
            }
          else
            {
              throw std::runtime_error {"Failed to access lock file"};
            }
        }

The reason that I do not have the .lock file in /tmp is an open 
question to me ( possibly a disk full condition? ).
However I think it is fairly safe for wsjt-x to just start instead of 
forcing me to reboot my PC.


73 de on1aad



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] pskreporter.de

2022-09-19 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel


Thanks Mike, No this site ; https://www.pskreporter.de/

which I used to see who copied my or others callsigns on FT8 etc.

I found it very useful to judge band conditions.

Is there another site that does the same ?


73


Adrian ... vk4tux

On 20/9/22 14:09, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:

Are you thinking of pskreporter.info?

https://pskreporter.info/pskmap.html

Mike W9MDB








On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 11:06:40 PM CDT, Adrian via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:





I noticed pskreporter.de was down for a long time with a database issue.
Now it requires a login ?

Is it now a subscriber service, I see no info on that site, as any
associated url needs auth access ?


Thankyou for any info.


73


vk4tux




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

[wsjt-devel] pskreporter.de

2022-09-19 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel

I noticed pskreporter.de was down for a long time with a database issue. 
Now it requires a login ?


Is it now a subscriber service, I see no info on that site, as any 
associated url needs auth access ?



Thankyou for any info.


73


vk4tux



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X close the QSO unilaterally (?)

Most issues are with strong nearby stations , The station having issue 
to get through, should move tx to any vacant pan space on the fly, and 
the rx station should stop and wait.


Quite often stopping enables better rx, than cycling while waiting.


73


Adrian



/The /|/RR73/|/ message should be used only if you are reasonably 
confident that no repetitions will be required./



*Please note the last sentence*


73 and have fun – Franz – OE3FVU
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X close the QSO unilaterally (?)

They should do, the ones i queried via eqsl rejections said they did not 
receive my RR73, and then moved on to another station.


Bad op practice by them , I agree, instead of trying or perhaps they did 
with no luck on RX,


but sometimes a cheap txcr with poor blocking gets smothered by closed 
in strong signals and they


lose the contact.

In the meantime i have them in my log, but I am not in theirs. If theirs 
logged when they send the 73 and mine logs when i receive it,


then we both have each other in the log or have enough to confirm the 
qso in ALL.txt via confirm sig reports on both sides.



73


vk4tux

On 15/7/22 23:14, Larry Banks via wsjt-devel wrote:
If they don't get your RR73, then they will send back their R-#.  IF 
you get nothing back they got your R73 and are playing by the rules.


Larry / W1DYJ



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X close the QSO unilaterally (?)

That may have been a flyover comment for you, but in anycase it get the 
ones that you don't hear and really want using 0.12uV sensitivity.


Have worked an amazing amount of DXpeditions in the last 2 months, it 
has been great.


Yaesu got it right.

73


vk4tux


Wow, I would hope a $5K radio isn't required to work more stations, I do just 
fine with an IC-7100 and a QRPlabs QDX.  8*)

73, Willie N1JBJ




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X close the QSO unilaterally (?)

The problem with that approach combining RR(received report) and 73 is 
'did the other station know that you received their report' ?


The return 73 says they did.

Hams have to do what the software dictates in it's design to get a qso 
logged.


Maybe take out the RR73 option so at one side has to send a 73 after 
both reports are sent and hence confirmed.


As I said, i see a lot of this issue on eqsl, but will not lose any 
sleep over it.


It is a suggestion for above reasons.

When you move up from a toyset; 7300/811 to a FTDX101MP/SPE you work 
many more stations.


I am on nearly 24/7.


vk4tux

On 15/7/22 20:29, Fred Price via wsjt-devel wrote:

Maybe I replied to the wrong person, sorry.
However that last 73 is not needed RR73 the QSO is over. Case in 
point, on SSB how many DX stations send a 73 back to you? None that 
I've ever worked. I say 73 and the DX calls QRZed not 73. Do I log it? 
absolutely. Too many using FT8 think you need that 73 for the QSO to 
be valid.

I know ops who say:
No grid no work
No 73 no log
Which is just being silly.
However with all that said, it's up to the individual ops to what they 
work and when they log, but to me the software does exactly what it 
should do.

Have a good evening.

Fred
N2XK

On Jul 15, 2022 6:04 AM, Adrian via wsjt-devel 
 wrote:



On 15/7/22 18:03, Fred Price wrote:
>  This also might be a good idea as you stated you have a little
station.

Can you point out where I stated what you claim above ?

My method of using FT8 is fine & effective, and I have method for
repeat
RR calls.

My point is that the final 73 comes after both stations
acknowledge the
other parties signal report,

and a final 73 lets the other party know that is the case.

..

vk4tux

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X close the QSO unilaterally (?)



On 15/7/22 18:03, Fred Price wrote:

 This also might be a good idea as you stated you have a little station.



Can you point out where I stated what you claim above ?

My method of using FT8 is fine & effective, and I have method for repeat 
RR calls.


My point is that the final 73 comes after both stations acknowledge the 
other parties signal report,


and a final 73 lets the other party know that is the case.

..

vk4tux



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X close the QSO unilaterally (?)

2022-07-14 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel

When you send a RR73 and get nothing back, then wsjtx has logged the 
call, but you don't know if your RR73 was received,


or if the other party logged you.

Making the log work only on 73 sent or received instead of RR73, 
confirms the sig report both ways and the qso both ways.


if the program worked this way the everyone would send the 73 to get in 
and be logged.


Why is using 73 to trigger a log entry sent/received a problem ?

Send RR73 and program logs on received 73.

Receive RR73 and program logs on sent 73.


vk4tux

On 15/7/22 15:12, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:


>Hopefully, in an ideal world, it should be that WSJT-X  waits for a 
second RR73 (hypothetical answer confirmation sequence I mean) from 
the remote station, before to definitely close and log the QSO.


Hi Marco,
I am not sure what you mean by the “second RR73”. There seems to be a 
generic misunderstanding how the protocol is assumed to work. User 
Guide sections 7.1. and 7.4. provide a nice advice. For a minimum QSO, 
where locator information is exchanged:


CQ K1ABC FN42  #K1ABC calls CQ

  K1ABC G0XYZ IO91 #G0XYZ answers

G0XYZ K1ABC –19    #K1ABC sends report

  K1ABC G0XYZ R-22 #G0XYZ sends R+report

G0XYZ K1ABC RR73   #K1ABC sends RR73

  K1ABC G0XYZ 73   #G0XYZ sends 73

The last message (73) is optional.

Relevant issue is that in none of the examples a station that receives 
RR73 is sending back RR73, but 73 or nothing more for that call.


73, Reino OH3mA



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X close the QSO unilaterally (?)

2022-07-14 Thread Adrian via wsjt-devel

It is a good point, wsjtx should not auto log until the 73 is received, 
not RR73 sent.


Case in point is the rejected eqsl's from stations in my log, but I am 
not in theirs.


This would save that problem.

In the meantime, in those situation's, my TX is set free to change, and 
I click a


vacant column on pan to better my chances of finishing the qso.

Many stations don't bother with the 73 because of this shortfall.


73


vk4tux

On 15/7/22 13:10, Marco Calistri via wsjt-devel wrote:

Il 14/07/22 23:18, jarmo ha scritto:

Thu, 14 Jul 2022 23:02:32 -0300
Marco Calistri via wsjt-devel
kirjoitti:


Hello,
This occurrence causes that WSJT-X logging the QSO then I go to hit
"OK" and QSO is getting saved on my CQRLOG app.

  (I'm using Linux).

I'm using also, now question, why you hit OK, if qso is not complete?
I hit again opposite stations report to give again RR73, some cases
move couple Hz TX and hit again RR73. Normally I do this max 5 times and
then hit CANCEL. Can't log unfinished qso.


Good point!

Yes probably I just have to discard the logged QSO offered by WSJT-X 
in cases like this one and click OK only when QSO get really completed.


The fact is that as soon as WSJT-X sends the RR73 to the partner then 
from a WSJT-X point of view the QSO is complete!



Normally this means, that someone qrm'ing so much, that opposite
station can't hear anymore me.
  

But I would like to know if I could adjust something into WSJT-X
settings, to avoid closing QSO's "unilaterally".

This could ba, as sending that RR73 so long yuo get /# or if not
you cancel qso..


Jarmo, oh1mrr
Thanks Jarmo for your comments. I believed that this process (logging 
QSO) would be totally managed by WSJT-X,  without any human intervention.


Hopefully, in an ideal world, it should be that WSJT-X  waits for a 
second RR73 (hypothetical answer confirmation sequence I mean) from 
the remote station, before to definitely close and log the QSO.


Regards,

---
*73 de Marco, PY1ZRJ (former IK5BCU)*
**


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] FT-857 rig control bug in WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1


Mike Yes Ptt does, but in USB the audio does not flow.

I use a MP3090 PSU underneath and see the current draw only 1.4 instead 
of 11 amps on TX ,


and no usual slight alc indication. I never use USB, but rather the 
designed Data/pkt wsjtx option,


with radio in DIG mode.

So perhaps that explains the other gentleman's results?


73


Adrian

On 11/7/22 14:04, Black Michael wrote:
Does your PTT work in both USB and Data/Packet mode?

Mike W9MDB


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] FT-857 rig control bug in WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1


In any-case my 857/897 works with CAT ptt and rear port data audio.

Signal link (waste of money), has an inbuilt ptt setup for its own 
design, however a Usb Cmedia or PC/laptop sndcd connected


to the rear data port works fine without any need for vox. Happy to 
provide a video to verify.



73


vk4tux

On 11/7/22 13:24, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
Yaesu rigs don't use the Front/Back option -- they don't have the 
capability to choose which to do PTT on.

Only some Kenwoods and the VX1700.

Mike W9MDB




On Sunday, July 10, 2022 at 11:58:19 AM CDT, Nigel Haynes via 
wsjt-devel  wrote:



I use the rig in USB mode and not digital mode. So that would probably 
explain why it doesn’t listen on the data port for audio. BUT, it 
works fine this way in all previous versions. Something changed in the 
RC1 that makes this no longer possible. Im not sure, but guessing I’m 
not the only person who uses it this way. One main advantage of the 
Signalink is VOX control. I would agree that CAT PTT would be better, 
but in this issue, the only thing that has changed is the program 
version. In order to upgrade versions, I would have to make other 
changes.


So my existing setup, using VOX PTT and CAT works fine in all previous 
versions, but when testing the RC1 out, it no longer works.


Also, on mine, the transmit audio source is greyed out and will not 
let me change. How do I get that option available?


Still greyed out in RC1 even when selecting CAT as PTT and mode as 
Data\Pkt.


Here is the error in RC1 when using VOX:

*From:* Adrian 
*Sent:* Sunday, July 10, 2022 11:30 AM
*To:* WSJT software development 
*Cc:* Nigel Haynes 
*Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] FT-857 rig control bug in WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1

This guy is also using CAT ptt and using rear data port audio as I do ;

https://km1ndy.com/how-to-program-yaesu-ft857d-for-ft8-and-wsjtx/

On 11/7/22 00:22, Nigel Haynes via wsjt-devel wrote:

I have been using the WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1 without issue on several
rigs, but when I tried to setup an FT-857 for rig control, I was
having errors. I am using a signalink for sound, so need to select
VOX in the settings. When selecting VOX, it gives an error when
connecting via Test CAT. If I select CAT PTT, everything works
(except it doesn’t because the rig wants audio via the mic and not
the cat port on the rear where the signalink is sending the
audio.) I installed the latest production release, 2.5.4, and
everything is good.

As a test, I have it working on 2.5.4, then installed WSJT-X
2.6.0-rc1 and launched the same shortcut, and get the error. I
then reinstalled 2.5.4 and it works as expected. The rig also
switches from VFOA to VFOB and back a few times before the error.

Recap:

WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1 has an issue on the FT-857 rig control and will
not connect when VOX PTT is selected. It connects (rig control)
with CAT PTT, but need to use VOX.

Thanks,

Nigel Haynes

supernigel.hay...@gmail.com




___

wsjt-devel mailing list

wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] FT-857 rig control bug in WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1


This guy is also using CAT ptt and using rear data port audio as I do ;

https://km1ndy.com/how-to-program-yaesu-ft857d-for-ft8-and-wsjtx/


On 11/7/22 00:22, Nigel Haynes via wsjt-devel wrote:


I have been using the WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1 without issue on several rigs, 
but when I tried to setup an FT-857 for rig control, I was having 
errors. I am using a signalink for sound, so need to select VOX in the 
settings. When selecting VOX, it gives an error when connecting via 
Test CAT. If I select CAT PTT, everything works (except it doesn’t 
because the rig wants audio via the mic and not the cat port on the 
rear where the signalink is sending the audio.) I installed the latest 
production release, 2.5.4, and everything is good.


As a test, I have it working on 2.5.4, then installed WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1 
and launched the same shortcut, and get the error. I then reinstalled 
2.5.4 and it works as expected. The rig also switches from VFOA to 
VFOB and back a few times before the error.


Recap:

WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1 has an issue on the FT-857 rig control and will not 
connect when VOX PTT is selected. It connects (rig control) with CAT 
PTT, but need to use VOX.


Thanks,

Nigel Haynes

supernigel.hay...@gmail.com



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] FT-857 rig control bug in WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1



"When using the signalink, the audio goes through the data port. You 
must select VOX for the rig to use audio on this port. Using CAT will 
not send audio from the data port. It will key the rig, but wont 
modulate because its looking for audio on the mic connector only "



Not here;

Mine uses the data jack audio as setup above with both my 857 and 897 
(same electronically),


and have never needed to use vox. Do you have rear audio source selected 
like above ?



vk4tux



*From:* Adrian 
*Sent:* Sunday, July 10, 2022 10:31 AM
*To:* WSJT software development 
*Cc:* Nigel Haynes 
*Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] FT-857 rig control bug in WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1


  The cat port doesn't have any audio connections. The
  signal-link should be using the data port. Do you have a cat
  cable fitted as well ?


I have 897/857 setup for wsjtx with no need for vox using cat
ptt, but I do have both CAT and data(sndcd) lines fitted.


  73


  vk4tux

On 11/7/22 00:22, Nigel Haynes via wsjt-devel wrote:

cat port on the rear where the signalink is sending the audio
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] FT-857 rig control bug in WSJT-X 2.6.0-rc1