7463RE: [wsjtgroup] WSJT vs JT65-HF decoding discrepancies
- Jul 4, 2010
I have to side with Jeremy on this one Bill. I’ve run them side by side also and like Jeremy find that JT65-HF will decode more than WSJT. That is not to say that with a bit of “tweaking” I can’t usually make WSJT decode the same signal BUT on a sit back and let them both do their work JT65-HF will win 99% of the time. I have the odd occasion where WSJT will get a decode and JT65-HF will not but those occasions are very few and far between.
That's interesting, because WSJT is (by design, due to the "deep search" capabilities in WSJT that JT65-HF has not implemented) more "sensitive" than JT65-HF. And with WSJT, you can try repeatedly to "tease" a decode out of any visible pattern. I would guess it's either a setup or a use problem. I've run JT65-HF and WSJT7 side by side, and I've never seen anything JT65-HF decodes that isn't also decoded (when properly clicked on) by WSJT -- and the opposite is oftentimes true (WSJT can decode stuff JT65-HF can't), as there is no way to tease a decode out of JT65-HF; it either decodes the first time it scans the segment, or it doesn't. No do-overs.
OTOH, the JT65-HF user interface and multiple-decode capabilities are WAY COOL. If only we could put the two together somehow...
I have been looking at other JT65 software and have noticed that there is actually a pretty significant discrepancy between decodes using JT65-HF and WSJT7. Unfortunately JT65-HF has been providing more decodes which are deeper in the noise whereas WSJT misses a number of them. I know it has definitely got to be something I have setup wrong but I for the life of me can't figure out what it is.
Everything is a standard install and I haven't changed anything so far other than putting my callsign and grid in. Any assistance would be great.. Thanks!
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>