Email Detail

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/7C4CLAQJF3O2IBV3VAF27U5GFU4O4KCK/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "7C4CLAQJF3O2IBV3VAF27U5GFU4O4KCK",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/5FSCW5IGL5YCVKPYXD3HQPICGYMV3WDQ/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "n4hy (a) idaccr.org",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Bob McGwier",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: DSP Speaker",
    "date": "2007-04-12T16:04:36Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/T5D3WK4CMLDO5HA6Y6P4ETMEPDZKWT4B/?format=api",
    "children": [
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/HWNUCKJA6HAS2JSYRWCCOVRSZXSB5JMJ/?format=api"
    ],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "\nIn the DttSP software, the sdr core for PowerSDR (Flex Radio) and \nothers,  we have a block LMS approach to automatic noise reduction.  It \ndoes a really good job of doing noise reduction and automatic notch \n(your choice) and it definitely does not introduce nasty sounding \ndistortion.  It is much more stable than standard LMS based automatic \nnotch filtering.    When I developed the algorithm,  I was surprised \nthat others had not done it.  I then learned of some subtleties which do \nneed mitigation but were pretty straightforward.  You adjust the filter \nonce per block rather than once per sample, so you must be careful not \nto introduce discontinues (distortion) at the block boundaries.  Once \nhandled,  this is the only way this should be done.\n\nThat code is available for svn download (visit the Flex Radio web site \nor the dttsp-linux yahoo group).\n\nBob\nN4HY\n\n\nTony Langdon wrote:\n> At 12:04 PM 4/12/2007, Roger Kolakowski wrote:\n>   \n>> And the winning answer was....?\n>>     \n>\n> That one's got me curious too.  I'm particularly fussy about DSP \n> noise reduction, and there are very few that I actually like.  The \n> one I use is made by Michels Engineering in Germany, which provides \n> an excellent degree of noise reduction and doesn't distort the audio \n> as severely as many others.  For me, that distortion interferes with \n> my ability to pull a signal out of the mud, and most of the DSP noise \n> reductions work best for me in the \"off\" position, as far as \n> readability goes.  The Michaels one, OTOH, has no impact on \n> readability at worst, and often a modest improvement, as well as \n> excellent noise reduction.  On very weak FM signals (ideal for SO-50 \n> :) ), the readability is dramatically improved, and the DSP can \n> almost act as an FM voice activated mute.\n>\n> 73 de VK3JED\n> http://vkradio.com\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author.\n> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>\n>   \n\n\n-- \nRobert W. McGwier, Ph.D.\nCenter for Communications Research\n805 Bunn Drive\nPrinceton, NJ 08540\n(609)-924-4600\n(sig required by employer)\n\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}