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

WSJT-X Version 1.1

Expand Messages
  • Joe Taylor
    WSJT-X Version 1.1 (based on code revision 3496 in the open-source repository) has been posted on the WSJT web site:
    Message 1 of 10 , Jul 19 9:01 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      WSJT-X Version 1.1 (based on code revision 3496 in the open-source
      repository) has been posted on the WSJT web site:

      http://www.physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/

      Click on WSJT-X at the left margin. Then for installation on Windows,
      click on the appropriate download link.

      If you have been using earlier versions of WSJT-X during its
      development, be sure to read the ChangeLog:
      http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/wsjtx_changelog.txt

      Everyone should refer also to the updated WSJT-X User's Guide,
      http://www.physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/WSJT-X_Users_Guide_v1.1.pdf

      Version 1.1 is considered a stable release.

      WSJT-X can be compiled and run under Linux, OS X, and other unix-like
      operating systems as well as Windows. We expect installation packages
      for Linux and OS X to be available soon.

      Please join me in offering a hearty "Well done!" to all those who have
      contributed to development of WSJT-X by writing code and sending
      suggestions and bug reports. Special thanks to PY2SDR and KK1D for
      their recent code additions.

      -- 73, Joe, K1JT
    • Rudy Benner
      I have 2 Signalink USB units, both work fine, but I am open to a suggestion for a better unit. I am not up to the task of modifying it, my eyes are not what
      Message 2 of 10 , Jul 19 9:46 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        I have 2 Signalink USB units, both work fine, but I am open to a suggestion for a better unit.
         
        I am not up to the task of modifying it, my eyes are not what they were.
         
        ve3bdr rudy
      • Rudy Benner
        Excellent. Thanks. ve3bdr rudy From: Joe Taylor Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 12:01 PM To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X Version 1.1
        Message 3 of 10 , Jul 19 9:50 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Excellent. Thanks.
           
          ve3bdr rudy
           
          Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 12:01 PM
          Subject: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X Version 1.1
           
           

          WSJT-X Version 1.1 (based on code revision 3496 in the open-source
          repository) has been posted on the WSJT web site:

          http://www.physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/

          Click on WSJT-X at the left margin. Then for installation on Windows,
          click on the appropriate download link.

          If you have been using earlier versions of WSJT-X during its
          development, be sure to read the ChangeLog:
          http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/wsjtx_changelog.txt

          Everyone should refer also to the updated WSJT-X User's Guide,
          http://www.physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/WSJT-X_Users_Guide_v1.1.pdf

          Version 1.1 is considered a stable release.

          WSJT-X can be compiled and run under Linux, OS X, and other unix-like
          operating systems as well as Windows. We expect installation packages
          for Linux and OS X to be available soon.

          Please join me in offering a hearty "Well done!" to all those who have
          contributed to development of WSJT-X by writing code and sending
          suggestions and bug reports. Special thanks to PY2SDR and KK1D for
          their recent code additions.

          -- 73, Joe, K1JT

        • Ed
          I am curious... what do you hope to gain by going to a better unit? Ed K7AAT From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
          Message 4 of 10 , Jul 19 9:59 AM
          • 0 Attachment

             

            I am curious….. what do you hope to gain by going to a ‘better’  unit?

             

            Ed   K7AAT

             

             

            From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rudy Benner
            Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:46 AM
            To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [wsjtgroup] Replacement for Signalink USB suggestions?

             

             

            I have 2 Signalink USB units, both work fine, but I am open to a suggestion for a better unit.

             

            I am not up to the task of modifying it, my eyes are not what they were.

             

            ve3bdr rudy

          • Rudy Benner
            Better performance. From: Ed Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 12:59 PM To: Rudy Benner ; wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [wsjtgroup] Replacement for
            Message 5 of 10 , Jul 19 10:00 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Better performance.
               
              From: Ed
              Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 12:59 PM
              Subject: RE: [wsjtgroup] Replacement for Signalink USB suggestions?
               

               

              I am curious….. what do you hope to gain by going to a ‘better’  unit?

               

              Ed   K7AAT

               

               

              From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rudy Benner
              Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:46 AM
              To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [wsjtgroup] Replacement for Signalink USB suggestions?

               

               

              I have 2 Signalink USB units, both work fine, but I am open to a suggestion for a better unit.

               

              I am not up to the task of modifying it, my eyes are not what they were.

               

              ve3bdr rudy

            • Ed
              Rudy, I am not trying to be snide or negative so please don’t take my continued response in that manner, but I have been quite pleased with my SignaLink USB
              Message 6 of 10 , Jul 19 10:22 AM
              • 0 Attachment

                Rudy,

                 

                I am not trying to be snide or negative so please don’t take my continued response in that manner,  but I have been quite pleased with my SignaLink USB devices and simply can’t understand what improvement in ‘performance’  is possible.  The WSJT-X  software does all the ‘performance’ work and the SignaLink simply handles the interface with the radio.  Can you possibly elaborate on what performance issues you are looking to improve?

                 

                Ed

                 

                From: Rudy Benner [mailto:rudy@...]
                Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 10:00 AM
                To: Ed; wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Replacement for Signalink USB suggestions?

                 

                Better performance.

                 

                From: Ed

                Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 12:59 PM

                Subject: RE: [wsjtgroup] Replacement for Signalink USB suggestions?

                 

                 

                I am curious….. what do you hope to gain by going to a ‘better’  unit?

                 

                Ed   K7AAT

                 

                 

                From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rudy Benner
                Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:46 AM
                To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [wsjtgroup] Replacement for Signalink USB suggestions?

                 

                 

                I have 2 Signalink USB units, both work fine, but I am open to a suggestion for a better unit.

                 

                I am not up to the task of modifying it, my eyes are not what they were.

                 

                ve3bdr rudy

              • Marinus van Opzeeland
                Wow, that was a quick turnaround. Thank you Joe and well done to the team ! Kind regards,Marinus... PE1LIF
                Message 7 of 10 , Jul 19 10:29 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Wow, that was a quick turnaround. Thank you Joe and well done to the team !

                  Kind regards,
                  Marinus... PE1LIF
                • Ed
                  DITTO ! Ed K7AAT From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marinus van Opzeeland Subject: RE: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X
                  Message 8 of 10 , Jul 19 10:38 AM
                  • 0 Attachment

                    DITTO !

                     

                    Ed   K7AAT

                     

                     

                    From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marinus van Opzeeland
                    Subject: RE: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X Version 1.1

                     

                      Wow, that was a quick turnaround. Thank you Joe and well done to the team !

                     

                    Marinus... PE1LIF

                  • Joe Taylor
                    ... There should be no need to do this. You must be starting WSJT-X before you turn on the radio, or interface box, or HRD, or Commander, or ...??? In such a
                    Message 9 of 10 , Jul 19 10:40 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      NC5O wrote:
                      > ... each time I start the program I need to start the CAT option, ...

                      There should be no need to do this.

                      You must be starting WSJT-X before you turn on the radio, or interface
                      box, or HRD, or Commander, or ...??? In such a case, WSJT-X concludes
                      that CAT communication is broken, and stops trying.

                      In due course, we'll probably make it more foolproof. For now, we
                      haven't given that task a high priority.

                      -- 73, Joe, K1JT
                    • Ed
                      Question regarding the triple decode / display of some JT9 stations. I know this subject has been raised before. This evening I am seeing a number of stations
                      Message 10 of 10 , Jul 24 5:03 PM
                      • 0 Attachment

                         

                        Question regarding the triple decode / display of some JT9 stations.

                         

                        I know this subject has been raised before.  This evening I am seeing a number of stations whose signals are being decoded three times as previously discussed….. the primary signal,  and two other signals about 20+dB down and 60Hz away on each side of the primary.   Just around 23XX UTC there was a W5 ,  a WD4, and also a VE7 who showed up on 20M all with this issue….possibly more.

                         

                        As I recall the prior discussion here to this issue,  these multiple decodes are probably caused by the introduction of 60Hz hum on the DC power of the transmitting station….  Do I have that correct?

                         

                        If so,  my question is what can we do to advise the offending station of this issue?

                         

                        My thought is to send a Free message during a QSO saying something like,  “ U HAV 60Z HUM”   or   “ CK UR STA 4 HUM”.

                         

                        Does this sound reasonable or am I out of line for suggesting such?

                         

                        Ed   K7AAT

                         

                         

                         

                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.