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/PUEOGYAWAMFHRXRZRDDBVQN2X7WT6WUM/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "PUEOGYAWAMFHRXRZRDDBVQN2X7WT6WUM",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/QTJJ3METCMSEEET5WELOFRUPK5OBSELC/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "w5ggw (a) cox.net",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Gregg Wonderly",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: Icom D-Star",
    "date": "2011-04-27T14:00:35Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/J6OFOSBKYWCXMWAPK5B2LFQ4GTRZYXA7/?format=api",
    "children": [
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/5Z32GCUYKNLXYOQL52VNPWIZWBPTH5F2/?format=api"
    ],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "So as every followup seems to have detailed, there is an increase in desired \nbandwidth with a direct need in required spectrum.  If we can reduce spectrum, \nwe increase distance the signal can transit.  If we increase bandwidth for a \nparticular size spectrum, we improve the amount of information we send.\n\nThe problems with current voice compression being understood have to do with \nremedial compression techniques based on available compute power.  I suggested \nFPGA because of exactly this issue.  Sure, people pick the easy route because \nthey can buy those solutions and get into the marketplace faster.  What needs to \nhappen is the \"Apple\" thing.  We need a company that actually cares enough about \nthe quality of what it can ship, worries about power requirements and optimizes \nperformance to create a truly awesome voice CODEC standard.\n\nThe cell phone market keeps trying to optimize the bandwidth needs to increase \ntheir spectrum's available capacity.\n\nWe are frustrated by the attributes of AM-VSB television characteristics vs ATSC \ncoded VSB television.  Because, the minimal available information transitions to \nno available information in a very short distance and signal level change.  Thus \nwe can't hear the TV at least.  Either we get everything, or we get nothing.\n\nThis is where we are at with digital emission standards at this point.  It's not \nthe perfect solution because we are not sending enough information to recreate a \nperfect version of the original audio sample, for audio stuff.  But, we are able \nto use the complete 12.5khz that D-Star is using (down from 20khz wide band FM \nis at now, and less than half of the old 30khz stuff that the old mobile phone \nradios were using).  That 12.5khz has 2 channels in it.  One for voice an done \nfor data.  So more information is bandwidth is available.\n\nThis is one of those experimentation moments.  Not everyone is happy with where \nit is at, but without some more participation, those experimenting now will be \nthe ones setting the standards, and if you are not happy with those results, it \nwill be your fault not theirs, because you chose not to participate.\n\nGregg Wonderly\nW5GGW\n\nOn 4/25/2011 6:10 AM, Ben Jackson wrote:\n> On 4/23/2011 2:42 PM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:\n>> On Sat, 2011-04-23 at 10:42 -0500, Gregg Wonderly wrote:\n>>> In the end, digital compression of spectrum space is going to happen more and\n>>> more.  AM style broadcast is hugely inefficient even though it is painfully\n>>\n>> Okay, but *why*?  Why are we so obsessed with squeezing bandwidth down\n>> and down, at the expense of intelligibility?\n>\n> You unfortunately provided data on why we should get ahead of crunching\n> down bandwidth: Because sooner or later, we're going to get squeezed for\n> bandwidth due to our spectrum being fairly empty and everyone and their\n> brother wanting to push IP to their new wireless toaster service.\n>\n> I'm not a fan of proprietary codecs but our lack of an alternative back\n> in the 2000s caused D-STAR to be used with AMBE. Too bad, so sad. Don't\n> support it, probably not going to use it. My worry is that even though\n> we provided a alternative with Codec2, what cutting edge technology that\n> will be here five years from now are we not developing because we were\n> playing catch up?\n>\n",
    "attachments": []
}