Date   

Re: OT: New Computer Specs

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

I am looking to get a new computer for my shack. Currently I use a Thinkpad Laptop with an Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-5200U CPU @ 2.20GHz
with 2 cores, 16Gb of Memory, and an Intel HD Graphics on board. My usual software suite is Win4K3Suite with bandscope, DXLab Suite
with everything but Warbler running and VE7CC. I may also run WSJT-X and CW Skimmer connected to the I/Q output of my KX3. The
issue I run into is CW Skimmer seems to run out of cycles quickly. Without CW Skimmer CPU usage averages about 50%.

+ 50% CPU consumption is quite high. Ignoring CPU Skimmer, which applications are the top 5 consumers of CPU cycles?

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


OT: New Computer Specs

 

I am looking to get a new computer for my shack.  Currently I use a Thinkpad Laptop with an Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-5200U CPU @ 2.20GHz with 2 cores, 16Gb of Memory, and an Intel HD Graphics on board.  My usual software suite is Win4K3Suite with bandscope, DXLab Suite with everything but Warbler running and VE7CC.  I may also run WSJT-X and CW Skimmer connected to the I/Q output of my KX3.  The issue I run into is CW Skimmer seems to run out of cycles quickly. Without CW Skimmer CPU usage averages about 50%.  Once CW Skimmer starts it goes to 100% and Skimmer can’t keep up with screen refresh.  My question is would people suggest more i5 cores or should I go with i7?  I am asking here because people on this forum run DXLab Suite and have similar workloads to mine. 

 

Bob AF9W

 


Re: Filtering SC for special callsigns by mode

iain macdonnell - N6ML
 



On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 11:16 AM Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@...> wrote:
I have been using the “Identifying Special Callsigns” feature (http://dxlabsuite.com/spotcollector/Help/ConfigurationSpecialCallsigns.htm) of SpotCollector with good success, but I wonder if there is some beneficial additional functionality available that I am missing.

I would like SC to display the callsigns of CWops members that I have yet to work on a given band, but only for the CW mode, in pursuit of CWops awards, along with any spots relevant to my DXCC or Challenge objectives without regard to band or mode.

Using the CWops roster as the Leaderboard special callsign list, I can display spots for all CWops members on unworked bands along with spots needed for DXCC or Challenge objectives, but the spot database display shows this for all modes and not just CW.  So, in the case of CWops members, I end up seeing many spots for modes that are not of interest.

If I invoke the Mode filter and set it for CW, then SC displays only the needed entries for CW, which works fine for the CWops awards, but I will miss other desirable entries such as an ATNO on FT8.

The ideal solution would be to allow me to further filter the Leaderboard spot displays by mode so that it contributes only the CWops counters that I need to the display, in conjunction with the display of other spots I need for DXCC and Challenge goals regardless of mode.

Is there a way to do this in the existing program?

+ Yes. Assuming that the tag you've specified for CWops members in the "Special Callsign List" is

cwops

+ use this SQL expression

<NEEDFILTER> or ((TAGS like '*<cwops>*') and (MODE='CW'))

That doesn't solve the problem, which was to show only CWOps members *on CW, who have not been worked before on CW* (but also show other stations who are Needed on other modes).

I can't think of any way to do it with SpotCollector's current capabilities....

73,

    ~iain / N6ML


 


aa6yq@ambersoft.com

Dave Tucker Nu4N <dwtucker19@...>
 

Hi Dave

I got it going. so case is solved. Tnx Dave NU4N

On 4/23/2021 1:29 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:
+ AA6YQ comments below

I am also having DXK problems with the new version. Yesterday my computer locked up and had to reboot. Reboot was successful. But when I started DXK the program could not find my log file. I had backed up my log file a day ago. But it would not log. Said that too many lines (16) and would not reload. So I went back and uploaded the day before and it loaded. But I accidently closed DXK keeper. Well it could not my log file again. So I had to resort 2 days a goes restore. I cant shut down DXK without this problem happening ago.
DXK keeper stated to reload a earlier version which I dont have one.
Any help wud be appreciated.

+ Please place your log file (probably NU4N.mdb) in a zip archive, attach the zip archive to an email message, and send the message to me via

aa6yq (at) ambersoft.com

73,

Dave, AA6YQ





--
73's de NU4N Dave


Re: USA-CA award

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

For the USA-CA award that I am pursuing, is there a way/place where to indicate the already submitted, accepted, verified counties as iI do, for example for IOTA, WAS, WAZ. etc.?

+ No, support for the USA-CA award is limited to generating a progress report.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: Upgrade 16.1.0 failed

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ Please place your log file (pathname specified in the "Log file" panel on the Configuration window's log tab) in a zip archive, attach the zip archive to an email message, and send the message to me via

aa6yq (at) ambersoft.com

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: problems w Vs 16.1.0

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Seems I have joined the problems with Version 16.1.0 club. I updated my DXK file to Vs 16.1.0. After a few minutes, it finally
opened but to a blank log page. The heading was "Vs 16.10 (no log opened) (K2SX). I tried opening it using an older smaller log
file (KM4FOC with only 16K QSOs) and it seemed to open OK. My K2SX file has 290K QSOs. Went back to try and open DXK with
K2SX.mdb and got the "log contains more fields than expected. Tis version is incapable of opening it. Probably can likely be
overcome by opening current version of DXK". I am also getting a note that "A new version of TQSL is available" which I
acknowledged but did nothing with. It seems like some others are having similar problem but I don't see a fix for this yet.
Suggestions?

+ Please place your K2SX log file in a zip archive, attach the zip archive to an email message, and send the message to me via

aa6yq (at) ambersoft.com

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: WW 9.3.7 PSK output tones seem to be low freq

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Started WW and selected PSK31.
noticed the tones coming out seemed low freq, less than 400Hz, as though LF hum present.
much different from previous operation as I recall.

Disconnected everything from the PC and the tones from the PC speaker were still Low freq thought I might have an open ground etc. checked all connections OK Tone test with the PC only sounded normal.

Started Multipsk for comparison and the PSK31 tones sounded clean and in the 2k+ freq range as expected.
Is the PSK LF sounding tones normal for WW or am I missing something ?

+ The last update to WinWarbler (9.3.7) was released back in February, so any change in behavior is most likely the result of a change in your hardware or software. As a first step, terminate WinWarbler, and direct the Launcher to restore WinWarbler's settings from the Workspace you maintain with "known working settings".

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: DX LAB 16.1.0 error

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

I am also having DXK problems with the new version. Yesterday my computer locked up and had to reboot. Reboot was successful. But when I started DXK the program could not find my log file. I had backed up my log file a day ago. But it would not log. Said that too many lines (16) and would not reload. So I went back and uploaded the day before and it loaded. But I accidently closed DXK keeper. Well it could not my log file again. So I had to resort 2 days a goes restore. I cant shut down DXK without this problem happening ago.
DXK keeper stated to reload a earlier version which I dont have one.
Any help wud be appreciated.

+ Please place your log file (probably NU4N.mdb) in a zip archive, attach the zip archive to an email message, and send the message to me via

aa6yq (at) ambersoft.com

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: Q65

Jim Miller, AB3CV
 

Thanks all!

jim ab3cv


Re: DXKeeper 16.1.0 is available

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Dave I have several contacts logged as Q65 mode in DXkeeper prior to your update. eQSL still does not accept them as is. eQSL say they will accept the QSO's as MFSK with submode Q65. Do these prior contacts need to be modified so they can be uploaded to eQSL? Or should I just wait for eQSL to update their approved mode list?

+ As far as I know, eQSL requires submodes to be submitted as modes; DXKeeper has been successfully submitting FT8 QSOs to eQSL with

<MODE:3>FT8

since the summer of 2017, despite the fact that ADIF represents FT8 as

<MODE:4>MFSK <SUBMODE:3>FT8

If eQSL has changed its policy, please point me at a statement of the new policy.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: Filtering SC for special callsigns by mode

Dave AA6YQ
 

I have been using the “Identifying Special Callsigns” feature (http://dxlabsuite.com/spotcollector/Help/ConfigurationSpecialCallsigns.htm) of SpotCollector with good success, but I wonder if there is some beneficial additional functionality available that I am missing.

I would like SC to display the callsigns of CWops members that I have yet to work on a given band, but only for the CW mode, in pursuit of CWops awards, along with any spots relevant to my DXCC or Challenge objectives without regard to band or mode.

Using the CWops roster as the Leaderboard special callsign list, I can display spots for all CWops members on unworked bands along with spots needed for DXCC or Challenge objectives, but the spot database display shows this for all modes and not just CW. So, in the case of CWops members, I end up seeing many spots for modes that are not of interest.

If I invoke the Mode filter and set it for CW, then SC displays only the needed entries for CW, which works fine for the CWops awards, but I will miss other desirable entries such as an ATNO on FT8.

The ideal solution would be to allow me to further filter the Leaderboard spot displays by mode so that it contributes only the CWops counters that I need to the display, in conjunction with the display of other spots I need for DXCC and Challenge goals regardless of mode.

Is there a way to do this in the existing program?

+ Yes. Assuming that the tag you've specified for CWops members in the "Special Callsign List" is

cwops

+ use this SQL expression

<NEEDFILTER> or ((TAGS like '*<cwops>*') and (MODE='CW'))

+ The necessary capabilities are described in

https://www.dxlabsuite.com/spotcollector/Help/SpotDatabase.htm#Filtering%20with%20SQL%20expressions

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: WW 9.3.7 PSK output tones seem to be low freq

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

Jon,

sorry if I didn't make it clear that I was referring to the
transmit tones
Transmit and receive tones are the same in PSK##. You transmit
on the same "tone" you are receiving.

Again, where are the "decode lines" in WW (there up to three -
one for each decode window)? Which decode window is "active"
for transmit?

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2021-04-23 1:15 PM, Jon Baker wrote:
Thanks for responding Joe.
sorry if I didn't make it clear that I was referring to the
transmit tones


USA-CA award

Carlo - IK2RPE
 

For the USA-CA award that I am pursuing, is there a way/place where to indicate the already submitted, accepted, verified counties as iI do, for example for IOTA, WAS, WAZ. etc.?
Many thanks

Carlo  IK2RPE


Upgrade 16.1.0 failed

kdsipi@...
 



problems w Vs 16.1.0

Dennis, K2SX
 

Seems I have joined the problems with Version 16.1.0 club.  I updated my DXK file to Vs 16.1.0.  After a few minutes, it finally opened but to a blank log page.  The heading was “Vs 16.10 (no log opened) (K2SX).  I tried opening it using an older smaller log file (KM4FOC with only 16K QSOs) and it seemed to open OK.   My K2SX file has 290K QSOs.  Went back to try and open DXK with K2SX.mdb and got the “log contains more fields than expected.  Tis version is incapable of opening it.  Probably can likely be overcome by opening current version of DXK”.  I am also getting a note that “A new version of TQSL is available” which I acknowledged but did nothing with.  It seems like some others are having similar problem but I don’t see a fix for this yet.  Suggestions?

Dennis, K2SX


Re: WW 9.3.7 PSK output tones seem to be low freq

Jon Baker
 

Thanks for responding Joe.
sorry if I didn't make it clear that I was referring to the 
transmit tones


Re: WW 9.3.7 PSK output tones seem to be low freq

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

Is the PSK LF sounding tones normal for WW or am I missing
something ?
What tone have you selected in the WW waterfall? Look for the
"decode lines".

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2021-04-23 10:17 AM, Jon Baker wrote:
Started WW and selected PSK31.
noticed the tones coming out seemed low freq,  less than 400Hz,  as though LF hum present.
much different from previous operation as I recall.
Disconnected everything from the PC and the tones from the PC speaker were still Low freq
thought I might have an open ground etc.  checked all connections OK
Tone test  with the PC only sounded normal.
Started Multipsk for comparison and the PSK31  tones sounded clean and
in the  2k+ freq range  as expected.
Is the PSK LF sounding tones  normal for WW  or am I missing something ?
73
Stan  N1ZX


WW 9.3.7 PSK output tones seem to be low freq

Jon Baker
 

Started WW and selected PSK31.
noticed the tones coming out seemed low freq,  less than 400Hz,  as though LF hum present.
much different from previous operation as I recall.

Disconnected everything from the PC and the tones from the PC speaker were still Low freq
thought I might have an open ground etc.  checked all connections OK
Tone test  with the PC only sounded normal.

Started Multipsk for comparison and the PSK31  tones sounded clean and
in the  2k+ freq range  as expected.
Is the PSK LF sounding tones  normal for WW  or am I missing something ?

73
Stan  N1ZX


Re: Q65

Phil Cooper
 

Jim,

 

Have you opened TQSL recently? If you  do, it says there is a new configuration file.

Agree to the download, and all should be OK.

 

73 de Phil GU0SUP

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jim Miller, AB3CV" <jtmiller47@...>
Sent: Friday, 23 April, 2021 13:12
To: "DXLab@groups.io" <DXLab@groups.io>
Subject: [DXLab] Q65

Anyone know if TQSL and LOTW are now accepting Q65 now that the ADIF committee has acted?

73
Jim ab3cv 

2981 - 3000 of 203935