Yes, I'm listening to the 14.100 Mhz.

The digtal traffic explains alot.

I guess It will be better in a few months, and I will have something
to measure it by.

I am getting better reception using 14.099.3 on USB than 14.100 on
CW1. any reason for this?

thanks.



Leigh Marrin/KM6JE wrote in message ...
Walter wrote:
I am getting some sort of osculating interference at about 1 second
intervals. It sounds like a cricket chirping. Also something that
sounds like a cell phone ringing, but is this comes and goes. I don't
know if this is normal, or something in my house is generating this..

Lemme guess, Walter: you're listening to the 14.100 mHz beacon, right?
This frequency is in the 20 meter "digital" sub-band, and the racket
you're hearing is probably 300 baud "Packet", or another digital mode like
AMTOR or PACTOR.

If you've got the time, there are several shareware decoding programs that
will decode at least some of this digital racket, using the sound card in
your PC.

--Leigh Marrin/KM6JE in Santa Barbara, Calif.

Considering you are using a DX 394, I am amazed that it is that close. The
readout on the 394 is well known to be rather out of calibration. Doesn't
really matter. Just tune it by ear.
"Walter" wrote in message
om...
Yes, I'm listening to the 14.100 Mhz.

The digtal traffic explains alot.

I guess It will be better in a few months, and I will have something
to measure it by.

I am getting better reception using 14.099.3 on USB than 14.100 on
CW1. any reason for this?

thanks.



Leigh Marrin/KM6JE wrote in message
...
Walter wrote:
I am getting some sort of osculating interference at about 1 second
intervals. It sounds like a cricket chirping. Also something that
sounds like a cell phone ringing, but is this comes and goes. I don't
know if this is normal, or something in my house is generating this..

Lemme guess, Walter: you're listening to the 14.100 mHz beacon, right?
This frequency is in the 20 meter "digital" sub-band, and the racket
you're hearing is probably 300 baud "Packet", or another digital mode
like
AMTOR or PACTOR.

If you've got the time, there are several shareware decoding programs
that
will decode at least some of this digital racket, using the sound card
in
your PC.

--Leigh Marrin/KM6JE in Santa Barbara, Calif.

"Walter" wrote in message
om...
Yes, I'm listening to the 14.100 Mhz.

The digtal traffic explains alot.

I guess It will be better in a few months, and I will have something
to measure it by.

I am getting better reception using 14.099.3 on USB than 14.100 on
CW1. any reason for this?

thanks.

Probably a wider filter in the USB mode. When there is little or no
interference, the signal will sound better with the wide filter.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

The DX-394 can be very accurate but factory or post-sale alignment can
be out and component aging can be a factor. LSB and CW1 use one BFO
and switching between these modes produces no change in the beat
frequency. USB and CW2 use another BFO with the same consistent pitch
between modes. But the the two BFO's may not both be correctly
aligned. If they were, then switching between LSB/CW1 and USB/CW2
should produce no change in pitch, only a significant change in
amplitude of the desired signal and the nearby interference. When
tuned, say, 1kHz lower than the desired frequency, the resulting 1kHz
beat note should be stronger using USB/CW2; tune high by 1 kHz,
LSB/CW1 should provide a stronger beat note. If badly misaligned, it's
anybody's guess.

The only difference between the SSB and CW modes is the insertion of a
fairly sharp audio filter centred around 0.8kHz (800 Hz) in the CW
mode. This helps suppress some of the adjacent interference.

For more info on the DX-394, join the 450 strong user group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RADIOSHACKDX394 .

73, Tom

"CW" wrote in message news:5S74b.233755$Oz4.63743@rwcrnsc54...
Considering you are using a DX 394, I am amazed that it is that close. The
readout on the 394 is well known to be rather out of calibration. Doesn't
really matter. Just tune it by ear.
"Walter" wrote in message
om...
Yes, I'm listening to the 14.100 Mhz.

The digtal traffic explains alot.

I guess It will be better in a few months, and I will have something
to measure it by.

I am getting better reception using 14.099.3 on USB than 14.100 on
CW1. any reason for this?

thanks.

tom Holden wrote:

The DX-394 can be very accurate but factory or post-sale alignment can
be out and component aging can be a factor. LSB and CW1 use one BFO
and switching between these modes produces no change in the beat
frequency. USB and CW2 use another BFO with the same consistent pitch
between modes. But the the two BFO's may not both be correctly
aligned. If they were, then switching between LSB/CW1 and USB/CW2
should produce no change in pitch, only a significant change in
amplitude of the desired signal and the nearby interference. When
tuned, say, 1kHz lower than the desired frequency, the resulting 1kHz
beat note should be stronger using USB/CW2; tune high by 1 kHz,
LSB/CW1 should provide a stronger beat note. If badly misaligned, it's
anybody's guess.

The only difference between the SSB and CW modes is the insertion of a
fairly sharp audio filter centred around 0.8kHz (800 Hz) in the CW
mode. This helps suppress some of the adjacent interference.

One of the strangest methods for generating USB and LSB reception that
many of us have ever seen.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

tom Holden wrote:

starman wrote in message ...
tom Holden wrote:

The DX-394 can be very accurate but factory or post-sale alignment can
be out and component aging can be a factor. LSB and CW1 use one BFO
and switching between these modes produces no change in the beat
frequency. USB and CW2 use another BFO with the same consistent pitch
between modes. [snip]

One of the strangest methods for generating USB and LSB reception that
many of us have ever seen.

What's strange about it? Seems economical by using the same filter for
both USB and LSB. Are there no other radios that take the same
approach?

I've never seen any but there probably is at least one more.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

For thos of you that have WinXP and an always on internet connection e.g.
cable/dsl modem.

WindowsXP is probably already syncing your computer's RTC to one of two
time standards. By default I believe it uses time.windows.com and has
available time.nist.gov

Double click on the time in the lower right hand corener of your screen.
Select the Internet Time tab. For this to be working,the "Automatically
synchronize with an Internet time server" box must be checked and you must
be connected to the internet. Synchronization will only occur when you are
connected. This will also show you which of the two listed above is the
current time standard and allow you to change to the other, or you can
manually enter the address of a different server if you wish. Be sure to
clck Apply if you do so :) It will also show you the last time the syncing
was done and when the next one is due and you can also click the Update
Now button to force a manual update if you like.

BTW you can get a list of public time servers at:

http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/servers.html

--
Panzer