Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

skimmer/k3 bandwidth

Expand Messages
  • Mike
    Hi, I ve been using cw skimmer with my k3. As I understand it, no matter what the sound card s sampling rate, skimmer is only capable of analyzing a 24
    Message 1 of 5 , Sep 16, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,

      I've been using cw skimmer with my k3. As I understand it, no matter what the sound card's sampling rate, skimmer is only capable of analyzing a 24 KHz-wide band centered on the k3's currently tuned cw transmit frequency, i.e. 12 Khz below and 12 Khz above the current xmit frequency. Is this correct? Or is there some other way of setting things up that would allow cw skimmer to analyze the entire received bandwidth (e.g. 96 Khz at a 96 K sampling rate)?

      Thanks and 73,

      Mike - ke5akl
    • Steve Ellington
      Mike It s true and such a shame but from what I ve been told, there s nothing you can do about it. So far, no one has offered a technical reason for this
      Message 2 of 5 , Sep 16, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Mike
        It's true and such a shame but from what I've been told, there's nothing you can do about it. So far, no one has offered a technical reason for this limitation other than "it's the programmers choice".

        Steve

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Mike
        To: dxatlas_group@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 12:06 PM
        Subject: [dxatlas] skimmer/k3 bandwidth



        Hi,

        I've been using cw skimmer with my k3. As I understand it, no matter what the sound card's sampling rate, skimmer is only capable of analyzing a 24 KHz-wide band centered on the k3's currently tuned cw transmit frequency, i.e. 12 Khz below and 12 Khz above the current xmit frequency. Is this correct? Or is there some other way of setting things up that would allow cw skimmer to analyze the entire received bandwidth (e.g. 96 Khz at a 96 K sampling rate)?

        Thanks and 73,

        Mike - ke5akl





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • ve7tk
        I think the best answer is in Message # 1134 on this list from the author. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxatlas_group/message/1134 Rick VE7TK
        Message 3 of 5 , Sep 17, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          I think the best answer is in Message # 1134 on this list from the author.

          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxatlas_group/message/1134

          Rick
          VE7TK

          --- In dxatlas_group@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Ellington" <n4lq@...> wrote:
          >
          > Mike
          > It's true and such a shame but from what I've been told, there's nothing you can do about it. So far, no one has offered a technical reason for this limitation other than "it's the programmers choice".
          >
          > Steve
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: Mike
          > To: dxatlas_group@yahoogroups.com
          > Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 12:06 PM
          > Subject: [dxatlas] skimmer/k3 bandwidth
          >
          >
          >
          > Hi,
          >
          > I've been using cw skimmer with my k3. As I understand it, no matter what the sound card's sampling rate, skimmer is only capable of analyzing a 24 KHz-wide band centered on the k3's currently tuned cw transmit frequency, i.e. 12 Khz below and 12 Khz above the current xmit frequency. Is this correct? Or is there some other way of setting things up that would allow cw skimmer to analyze the entire received bandwidth (e.g. 96 Khz at a 96 K sampling rate)?
          >
          > Thanks and 73,
          >
          > Mike - ke5akl
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Steve Ellington
          Well it s an interesting answer however if 30 hours work would open up skimmer for 192khz bandwidth it would certainly not be a marginal improvement in my
          Message 4 of 5 , Sep 17, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Well it's an interesting answer however if 30 hours work would open up skimmer for 192khz bandwidth it would certainly not be a "marginal improvement" in my opinion. It would be a HUGE improvement and greatly increase the demand for the product.

            "This would take 30-50 hours of work and produce only a marginal
            improvement of the functionality"
            Steve

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: ve7tk
            To: dxatlas_group@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 2:40 PM
            Subject: Re: [dxatlas] skimmer/k3 bandwidth



            I think the best answer is in Message # 1134 on this list from the author.

            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxatlas_group/message/1134

            Rick
            VE7TK

            --- In dxatlas_group@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Ellington" <n4lq@...> wrote:
            >
            > Mike
            > It's true and such a shame but from what I've been told, there's nothing you can do about it. So far, no one has offered a technical reason for this limitation other than "it's the programmers choice".
            >
            > Steve
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Mike
            > To: dxatlas_group@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 12:06 PM
            > Subject: [dxatlas] skimmer/k3 bandwidth
            >
            >
            >
            > Hi,
            >
            > I've been using cw skimmer with my k3. As I understand it, no matter what the sound card's sampling rate, skimmer is only capable of analyzing a 24 KHz-wide band centered on the k3's currently tuned cw transmit frequency, i.e. 12 Khz below and 12 Khz above the current xmit frequency. Is this correct? Or is there some other way of setting things up that would allow cw skimmer to analyze the entire received bandwidth (e.g. 96 Khz at a 96 K sampling rate)?
            >
            > Thanks and 73,
            >
            > Mike - ke5akl
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • bill_w4zv
            ... 96 kHz would cover most CW needs (perhaps excluding 10m in huge contests)...and 96 is N*24 where N=4. ;-)
            Message 5 of 5 , Sep 17, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In dxatlas_group@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Ellington" <n4lq@...> wrote:
              >
              > Well it's an interesting answer however if 30 hours work would open up skimmer for 192khz bandwidth it would certainly not be a "marginal improvement" in my opinion. It would be a HUGE improvement and greatly increase the demand for the product.

              96 kHz would cover most CW needs (perhaps excluding 10m in huge contests)...and 96 is N*24 where N=4. ;-)
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.