My hat is off to you for doing the "fix". I owned two of the 1000s and
did the "fix". Unfortunately there are two groups who don't worry about such
things.
Some use the dirty signal as a shield, and use it to keep the adjacent
frequencies clear. Nobody like to be close to a dirty signal. In fact there
is a notorious W1 who seems to be able to turn his clicks on and off at
will to "clear up" his frequency.
The second group has a different attitude...denial. "I paid $6000 for
this rig and you tell me I have a dirty signal". Yep, you spent all that
money and don't have a clue how to set up your audio so it doesn't sound like
manure.
Both of these ops operate with a dirty signal, but for different reasons.
K4XS/KH7XS
In a message dated 4/11/2015 12:34:19 A.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,
bparry@rgv.rr.com writes:
Actually I believe that they don't know how bad they sound. After I bought
my previous radio, (FT1000), I thought it was pretty good and got a lot of
complements. One day W8JI sent me a polite e-mail and said that I had bad
key clicks. I found out there was a partial fix and got it done. Now I
realize that most Yaesu radios have Clicks and Icom isn't much better! I
very much appreciated W8JI letting me know. I don't believe that most of
those awful SSB signals done are on purpose, they just don't know any
better. We need to do a better job of letting these folks know about their
signals without being too rude. If you are too "in their face", they will
just turn you off. Your purpose should be to get them to be better, not
make
them mad!
Bill W5VX
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Kelly Taylor
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 2:05 PM
To: Mike Fatchett W0MU; George via CQ-Contest
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for
Cabrillo -- and the phone skimmer, new idea
They either do it on purpose or they're so convinced of their technological
greatness they've convinced themselves their audio is perfect.
Either way, mentioning it won't have much effect: it will either confirm to
them they set it the way they intended (more complaints the better), or
they'll dismiss you as a technological pretender with no real knowledge,
and, by the way, 'How DARE you have the temerity to question my
audiological
prowess? Don't you know who I am?'
The best fix is for everybody to vote with their feet. Don't work 'em.
73, kelly
ve4xt
On 4/10/15 12:52 PM, "Mike Fatchett W0MU" <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:
I have never understood thought process behind not publicly "outing"
the
offenders. Most of them know they have crappy or very wide audio. They do
it on purpose.
The best medicine would to pass these lousy signals by but
people won't
because they have to have that one contact, at least tell them
their
audio is lousy and you hope that nobody reports them, ahem.....
Mike
W0MU
On 4/10/2015 5:09 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
Not only that, but the
number of awards thereafter could be halved,
saving ARRL and other
societies lots of money.
But seriously, folks, can you imagine the mess
that would result if
the same phone ops who "amuse" us with their lousy
audio added either
subaudible tones or 100 wpm CW to their awful
signals.
I'm waiting with interest to see whether CQWW follows through on
rule
XII (A) (5) and disciplines at least a few stations for
excessivebandwidth. I'm not interested in outing a list of those
disciplined, necessarily, but I hope at least the number of actions
taken
is made public, so that people know the committee is serious.
With the
tools now available, in particular whole contest recordings
and SDR
panadaptors, it should be possible to objectively define
excessive
bandwidth (e.g., level in dB relative to peak amplitude,
versus frequency
difference).
73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots,
please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.
On 4/10/2015
12:55 AM, Bokverket wrote:
----- Ursprungligt meddelande -----
Från:
"Bokverket" <info@bokverket.com>
Till: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Skickat: den 9 april 2015 13:15
Ämne: Suggestion for Cabrillo -- and the
phone skimmer, new idea
Rarely do one's wishes be fulfilled so soon,
even retroactively!
Goran/SM0DRD, who thinks that hte subaudible tones
that someone
mentioned
would be a great step towards a quick
realization of the phone
skimmer. But
even better would be ***
combining cw and SSB into one signal ***
The cw
could be sent at 100
or something wpm like a rattle, just as with those
obsolete spy
transmissions. It won't disturb the audio since there is so
much overdrive
noise already, and can then be detected easily by a new
version of the cw
skimmer.
But what's more, we could halve the number of contests!!! Save
countless
$$'s and marriages. And for die-hard cw only people, the number
of
contacts
will increase and the extra transmitted phone messages can
be
automatically
generated.
73,
Goran/SM0DRD
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_____________________
__________________________
CQ-Contest mailing
list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq
-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest