[linrad] RE: Bamboozled by bandwidth

[W6WO <ron-skelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Lief I can see that I will have a lot of fun with a narrow 
bandwidth first and no doubt will graduate from there.

Really appreciate all your work and responsiveness.


>Hi Ron,
>
>>  Just getting going here and have read all the QEX articles with great
>>  interest. I am bewitched, bothered and bewildered over the question
>>  of bandwidth requirements.
>>  It would be useful to see a display of activity taking place in the
>>  frequency spectrum of interest for example my operation is almost
>>  exclusively in the low 25 kHz of the HF CW bands.  When in QSO I only
>>  need a 100 Hz or so and I note that Leif states that  large
>>  bandwidths are primarily required for noise reduction functions but
>>  that increases the problems of dealing with large in-band signals.
>Absolutely. If you do not have local QRN at your QTH, then you should
>use an ordinary SSB transceiver and run Linrad without the second fft.
>
>
>>  Given a high performance HF radio (mine is a Ten-tec Omni pro) with
>>  100 Hz  Xtal filtering, linrad DSP and a 16 bit sound card what's to
>>  be gained by more elaborate hardware measures that increase bandwidth
>>  ? What am I missing ?
>You will miss what happens 10kHz away. The pattern on the waterfall
>display when something interesting occurs (pileup) is very characteristic.
>If you do not care - and if you do not need the blanker, use some 486
>computer from the junk yard and run Linrad only for baseband processing.
>(If you can figure out how to get Linux running on an old computer)
>
>
>73
>
>Leif  /  SM5BSZ

-- 
73
Ron
W6WO

LINRADDARNIL