I received a comment last week that the CW (regular CW) decode in Multipsk was poor when compared to the CW decode ability of MixW. I had not really noticed this but today I thought I would do a comparison. Below are the results of the test. I copied a strong signal (S5 on my meter) at 11 WPM, good fist. No QRM or QSB. I tried to match the squelch settings as best I could, Multipsk's slider was set to '8'. I think the MixW squelch was open a tiny bit more since I got a few random 'E' characters after this guy stopped transmitting, whereas Multipsk printed no characters when he signed. The MixW receive algorithm was Mixw 1.45 ,
MixW : TR O U B L E WI TH M Y T E N T E C A G A I N = Multipsk: TROUBLE WIDS MY ET N TEC AGAIN = Mixw: TH E R C V R W O U L D N O T S T AR T = Multipsk: TH E R C V R W OUL D N O T S TART = MixW: S O T H E TH I NG N EEEI D EC I D ED TO W OR K Multipsk: S O E TH E THING N EEEEEE DECIDED TO WORK MixW: AF TER I T GOT WAR ME D UP = Multipsk: AFTER IT GOT WAR MED UP = MixW: WE ARE P A C K I N G F OR T H E Multipsk: WE ARE P A C K I N G F OR T H E Mixw: R I D T O M O R R OW K E N = S O H W K 3 F K W D E A M3 F A F Multipsk: RI D E TO M OR R OW K EN = S O H W K3FKW DE A W3F AF K Results: Seemed about the same to me, but if I take each line and do a subjective assessment I would say. Line 1: MixW better. Line 2 : A tie. Line 3: Multipsk better (words spaced better) Line 4: Multipsk better Line 5 : A tie. Line 6: Multipsk better (Got callsign of the other station correct . W3FAF). Any comments ? Andy K3UK Fredonia, New York. Skype Me : callto://andyobrien73 Also available via Echolink For general discussion on digital modes, try our sister relector at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
