CW Pitch Resolution

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
37 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

CW Pitch Resolution

John Seney
Hi Folks:

The CW pitch resolution in my K3 seems to be 10 Hz per step. A recent article in QST
spoke of 432 Hz as being a sweet spot frequency based on musical notes. A quick search
on frequencies of real musical notes shows hardly any are at integer values.

Note -- Freq -- Wavelength

D4 293.66 117.
D#4/Eb4 311.13 111.
E4 329.63 105.
F4 349.23 98.8
F#4/Gb4 369.99 93.2
G4 392.00 88.0
G#4/Ab4 415.30 83.1
A4 440.00 78.4
A#4/Bb4 466.16 74.0
B4 493.88 69.9
C5 523.25 65.9
C#5/Db5 554.37 62.2
D5 587.33 58.7
D#5/Eb5 622.25 55.4
E5 659.26 52.3
F5 698.46 49.4
F#5/Gb5 739.99 46.6
G5 783.99 44.0
G#5/Ab5 830.61 41.5
A5 880.00 39.2

Could the firmware be changed for experimentation with this or is there an easier
way to accomplish it with RIT or filter offsets?

73

John - WD1V



______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

FW: CW Pitch Resolution

Dr. William J. Schmidt, II
Not that we have established the notes... maybe we can make it play "Smoke
on the water"?


Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ / J68HZ/ 8P6HK/ ZF2HZ
 
Owner - Operator
Big Signal Ranch
Staunton, Illinois
 
email:  [hidden email]

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of John Seney
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2013 9:03 AM
To: Elecraft Elecraft
Subject: [Elecraft] CW Pitch Resolution

Hi Folks:

The CW pitch resolution in my K3 seems to be 10 Hz per step. A recent
article in QST
spoke of 432 Hz as being a sweet spot frequency based on musical notes. A
quick search
on frequencies of real musical notes shows hardly any are at integer values.


Note -- Freq -- Wavelength

D4 293.66 117.
D#4/Eb4 311.13 111.
E4 329.63 105.
F4 349.23 98.8
F#4/Gb4 369.99 93.2
G4 392.00 88.0
G#4/Ab4 415.30 83.1
A4 440.00 78.4
A#4/Bb4 466.16 74.0
B4 493.88 69.9
C5 523.25 65.9
C#5/Db5 554.37 62.2
D5 587.33 58.7
D#5/Eb5 622.25 55.4
E5 659.26 52.3
F5 698.46 49.4
F#5/Gb5 739.99 46.6
G5 783.99 44.0
G#5/Ab5 830.61 41.5
A5 880.00 39.2

Could the firmware be changed for experimentation with this or is there an
easier
way to accomplish it with RIT or filter offsets?

73

John - WD1V



______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

alsopb
In reply to this post by John Seney
Hi John,

I read that article too.  Personally I think it is a lot of bunk. It
assumes perfect hearing.

Where ones sweet spot is depends upon his hearing and hearing
degradation.  The closest pitch to 432 Hz is 429.97 Hz on my K3.
Some people's sweet spot may be 700 Hz-- since 432 Hz may be 20 db down
from there!

There was a link somebody posted a year or so ago.  It could be used
determined how much pitch difference one can detect.  For most people is
 >3 Hz.  For piano tuners and musicians with perfect pitch it is likely
to be less.  You can also try using the K3's fine tuning and tune in a
carrier.  The increase or decrease the K3's frequency by 3Hz and see if
you can detect any change.

Thus most won't perceive any difference between 429.97 and 432 Hz.
If you can, than congratulations on your perfect pitch.

73 de Brian/K3KO

On 10/13/2013 14:03, John Seney wrote:

> Hi Folks:
>
> The CW pitch resolution in my K3 seems to be 10 Hz per step. A recent article in QST
> spoke of 432 Hz as being a sweet spot frequency based on musical notes. A quick search
> on frequencies of real musical notes shows hardly any are at integer values.
>
> Note -- Freq -- Wavelength
>
> D4 293.66 117.
> D#4/Eb4 311.13 111.
> E4 329.63 105.
> F4 349.23 98.8
> F#4/Gb4 369.99 93.2
> G4 392.00 88.0
> G#4/Ab4 415.30 83.1
> A4 440.00 78.4
> A#4/Bb4 466.16 74.0
> B4 493.88 69.9
> C5 523.25 65.9
> C#5/Db5 554.37 62.2
> D5 587.33 58.7
> D#5/Eb5 622.25 55.4
> E5 659.26 52.3
> F5 698.46 49.4
> F#5/Gb5 739.99 46.6
> G5 783.99 44.0
> G#5/Ab5 830.61 41.5
> A5 880.00 39.2
>
> Could the firmware be changed for experimentation with this or is there an easier
> way to accomplish it with RIT or filter offsets?
>
> 73
>
> John - WD1V
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3222/6246 - Release Date: 10/13/13
>
>



-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3222/6246 - Release Date: 10/13/13

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Mike Sanders
Yeah, and that "sweet spot" changes daily. Sometimes as much as a couple
hundred
cycles.   73

             K0AZ
       Mike Sanders
EM37cd SW Missouri
     www.k0az.com






-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brian Alsop
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2013 9:46 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW Pitch Resolution

Hi John,

I read that article too.  Personally I think it is a lot of bunk. It assumes
perfect hearing.

Where ones sweet spot is depends upon his hearing and hearing degradation.
The closest pitch to 432 Hz is 429.97 Hz on my K3.
Some people's sweet spot may be 700 Hz-- since 432 Hz may be 20 db down from
there!

There was a link somebody posted a year or so ago.  It could be used
determined how much pitch difference one can detect.  For most people is
 >3 Hz.  For piano tuners and musicians with perfect pitch it is likely to
be less.  You can also try using the K3's fine tuning and tune in a carrier.
The increase or decrease the K3's frequency by 3Hz and see if you can detect
any change.

Thus most won't perceive any difference between 429.97 and 432 Hz.
If you can, than congratulations on your perfect pitch.

73 de Brian/K3KO

On 10/13/2013 14:03, John Seney wrote:
> Hi Folks:
>
> The CW pitch resolution in my K3 seems to be 10 Hz per step. A recent
> article in QST spoke of 432 Hz as being a sweet spot frequency based
> on musical notes. A quick search on frequencies of real musical notes
shows hardly any are at integer values.

>
> Note -- Freq -- Wavelength
>
> D4 293.66 117.
> D#4/Eb4 311.13 111.
> E4 329.63 105.
> F4 349.23 98.8
> F#4/Gb4 369.99 93.2
> G4 392.00 88.0
> G#4/Ab4 415.30 83.1
> A4 440.00 78.4
> A#4/Bb4 466.16 74.0
> B4 493.88 69.9
> C5 523.25 65.9
> C#5/Db5 554.37 62.2
> D5 587.33 58.7
> D#5/Eb5 622.25 55.4
> E5 659.26 52.3
> F5 698.46 49.4
> F#5/Gb5 739.99 46.6
> G5 783.99 44.0
> G#5/Ab5 830.61 41.5
> A5 880.00 39.2
>
> Could the firmware be changed for experimentation with this or is
> there an easier way to accomplish it with RIT or filter offsets?
>
> 73
>
> John - WD1V
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email
> list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3222/6246 - Release Date:
> 10/13/13
>
>



-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3222/6246 - Release Date: 10/13/13

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

k5oai
In reply to this post by alsopb
http://tonometric.com/adaptivepitch/

On 10/13/2013 9:46 AM, Brian Alsop wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> I read that article too.  Personally I think it is a lot of bunk. It
> assumes perfect hearing.
>
> Where ones sweet spot is depends upon his hearing and hearing
> degradation.  The closest pitch to 432 Hz is 429.97 Hz on my K3.
> Some people's sweet spot may be 700 Hz-- since 432 Hz may be 20 db down
> from there!
>
> There was a link somebody posted a year or so ago.  It could be used
> determined how much pitch difference one can detect.  For most people is
>  >3 Hz.  For piano tuners and musicians with perfect pitch it is likely
> to be less.  You can also try using the K3's fine tuning and tune in a
> carrier.  The increase or decrease the K3's frequency by 3Hz and see if
> you can detect any change.
>
> Thus most won't perceive any difference between 429.97 and 432 Hz.
> If you can, than congratulations on your perfect pitch.
>
> 73 de Brian/K3KO
>
> On 10/13/2013 14:03, John Seney wrote:
>> Hi Folks:
>>
>> The CW pitch resolution in my K3 seems to be 10 Hz per step. A recent
>> article in QST
>> spoke of 432 Hz as being a sweet spot frequency based on musical
>> notes. A quick search
>> on frequencies of real musical notes shows hardly any are at integer
>> values.
>>
>> Note -- Freq -- Wavelength
>>
>> D4    293.66    117.
>> D#4/Eb4    311.13    111.
>> E4    329.63    105.
>> F4    349.23    98.8
>> F#4/Gb4    369.99    93.2
>> G4    392.00    88.0
>> G#4/Ab4    415.30    83.1
>> A4    440.00    78.4
>> A#4/Bb4    466.16    74.0
>> B4    493.88    69.9
>> C5    523.25    65.9
>> C#5/Db5    554.37    62.2
>> D5    587.33    58.7
>> D#5/Eb5    622.25    55.4
>> E5    659.26    52.3
>> F5    698.46    49.4
>> F#5/Gb5    739.99    46.6
>> G5    783.99    44.0
>> G#5/Ab5    830.61    41.5
>> A5    880.00    39.2
>>
>> Could the firmware be changed for experimentation with this or is
>> there an easier
>> way to accomplish it with RIT or filter offsets?
>>
>> 73
>>
>> John - WD1V

--

GB & 73
K5OAI
Sam Morgan
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

N5GE
In reply to this post by alsopb
There is no reason to be scientific about your CW pitch setting.

Set the pitch to the tone you prefer and can hear the best.  Use a CW
filter.  If you don't have one get one.

Amateure Radio Operator N5GE

On Sun, 13 Oct 2013 14:46:21 +0000, you wrote:

>Hi John,
>
>I read that article too.  Personally I think it is a lot of bunk. It
>assumes perfect hearing.
>
>Where ones sweet spot is depends upon his hearing and hearing
>degradation.  The closest pitch to 432 Hz is 429.97 Hz on my K3.
>Some people's sweet spot may be 700 Hz-- since 432 Hz may be 20 db down
>from there!
>
>There was a link somebody posted a year or so ago.  It could be used
>determined how much pitch difference one can detect.  For most people is
> >3 Hz.  For piano tuners and musicians with perfect pitch it is likely
>to be less.  You can also try using the K3's fine tuning and tune in a
>carrier.  The increase or decrease the K3's frequency by 3Hz and see if
>you can detect any change.
>
>Thus most won't perceive any difference between 429.97 and 432 Hz.
>If you can, than congratulations on your perfect pitch.
>
>73 de Brian/K3KO
>
>On 10/13/2013 14:03, John Seney wrote:
>> Hi Folks:
>>
>> The CW pitch resolution in my K3 seems to be 10 Hz per step. A recent article in QST
>> spoke of 432 Hz as being a sweet spot frequency based on musical notes. A quick search
>> on frequencies of real musical notes shows hardly any are at integer values.
>>
>> Note -- Freq -- Wavelength
>>
>> D4 293.66 117.
>> D#4/Eb4 311.13 111.
>> E4 329.63 105.
>> F4 349.23 98.8
>> F#4/Gb4 369.99 93.2
>> G4 392.00 88.0
>> G#4/Ab4 415.30 83.1
>> A4 440.00 78.4
>> A#4/Bb4 466.16 74.0
>> B4 493.88 69.9
>> C5 523.25 65.9
>> C#5/Db5 554.37 62.2
>> D5 587.33 58.7
>> D#5/Eb5 622.25 55.4
>> E5 659.26 52.3
>> F5 698.46 49.4
>> F#5/Gb5 739.99 46.6
>> G5 783.99 44.0
>> G#5/Ab5 830.61 41.5
>> A5 880.00 39.2
>>
>> Could the firmware be changed for experimentation with this or is there an easier
>> way to accomplish it with RIT or filter offsets?
>>
>> 73
>>
>> John - WD1V
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3222/6246 - Release Date: 10/13/13
>>
>>
>
>
>
>-----
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3222/6246 - Release Date: 10/13/13
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Amateur Radio Operator N5GE
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

alorona
In reply to this post by John Seney
A few Hertz either way in the CW pitch not only doesn't make a lot of psychoacoustical difference, but is hardly perceptible unless you have near-perfect pitch, and even then isn't necessarily a problem.
 
Changing the pitch probably has more to do with the self-resonant frequencies of your speaker enclosures or headphones, and room. Choose a Spot pitch that you like and be done with it.
 
When I was a kid 750 Hz was the most popular sidetone frequency. I have noticed a steady decrease in the consensus spot frequency over these 40 years. I don't know why. Maybe it has to do with hearing loss. Too many 'The Who' concerts.
 
The letter published in QST about this was bordering on junk science. To single out "432 Hz" as some magical sidetone frequency is very like the New Age videos on YouTube claiming that listening to certain magical frequencies can heal your mind and give you holistic peace. It's simply nonsense.
 
Al  W6LX
 
 
Could the firmware be changed for experimentation with this or is there an easier
>way to accomplish it with RIT or filter offsets?
>
>73
>
>John - WD1V
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Jimk8mr
In reply to this post by John Seney
It's pitch differentiation. 100 Hz away from 750Hz is a lot closer in  
pitch than is 100 Hz away from 400 Hz.
 
 
73  -  Jim   K8MR
 
 
In a message dated 10/19/2013 5:36:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[hidden email] writes:

When I  was a kid 750 Hz was the most popular sidetone frequency. I have
noticed a  steady decrease in the consensus spot frequency over these 40
years. I don't  know why. Maybe it has to do with hearing loss. Too many 'The
Who'  concerts.


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Nicklas Johnson
In reply to this post by alsopb
I have to agree with the assessment that there being one "ideal" pitch for
CW is bunk.  It's a load of nonsense.

I'm a person who CAN perceive even tiny deviations in pitch, but CW is
information encoded in the on/off timing, not in the pitch, so it seems
really weird to me to try to make it conform to some kind of musical
standard.  The pitches we use in music are all pretty arbitrary anyway.
 There used to be wide disagreement even about the frequency for "A", and
there are tuning systems other than 12-tone equal temperament, too.

Every person's cochlea frequency response is going to vary a little, and
some people (like me) will even have a slightly different curve from one
ear to the other.

The "best" frequency at which to hear CW is the one that sounds good to you
at the moment and that you can copy the best right now, end of story, IMHO.

   Nick




On 13 October 2013 07:46, Brian Alsop <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> I read that article too.  Personally I think it is a lot of bunk. It
> assumes perfect hearing.
>

--
*N6OL*
Saying something doesn't make it true.  Belief in something doesn't make it
real. And if you have to lie to support a position, that position is not
worth supporting.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

k6dgw
In reply to this post by alorona
On 10/19/2013 2:36 PM, Al Lorona wrote:

> Changing the pitch probably has more to do with the self-resonant
> frequencies of your speaker enclosures or headphones, and room.

or in my head.  Getting somewhat empty up there as I accumulate
birthdays, lots of room to create echoes and other artifacts. :-)
Truthfully, most of my hearing [and a lot of my sense of balance]
disappeared in one event in my mid-20's and for some reason, I have a
narrow peak in an otherwise depressing audiogram at about 570Hz, so
that's my sidetone.  K3 makes it easy.  I'm stuck with 915Hz on AFSK
which isn't close to ideal but I make it work.
>
> When I was a kid 750 Hz was the most popular sidetone frequency. I
> have noticed a steady decrease in the consensus spot frequency over
> these 40 years. I don't know why. Maybe it has to do with hearing
> loss. Too many 'The Who' concerts.

The answer is in the JARTS RTTY now in progress.  Exchange is RST and
age.  So far, the youngest I've gotten is 41 [not counting the "00's"],
and he's all alone in the 40's and even lower 50's.  The numbers really
start climbing in the 70's, oldest so far has been 80.  Shows up in the
ARRL SS also, but more indirectly.  In the later 1950's, I think us kids
were closing in to a majority of the hams on the air.  Might have been a
majority in the early 60's.
>
> The letter published in QST about this was bordering on junk science.
> To single out "432 Hz" as some magical sidetone frequency is very
> like the New Age videos on YouTube claiming that listening to certain
> magical frequencies can heal your mind and give you holistic peace.
> It's simply nonsense.

432 is outside my WWSP passband. :-)  Important to remember however that
a 10Hz change at 400Hz is 2.5%, whereas 10Hz at 750Hz is half that which
makes quite a difference.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2014 Cal QSO Party 4-5 Oct 2014
- www.cqp.org

WWSP: "Wet Ware Signal Processing"

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Jim Brown-10
In reply to this post by alorona
On 10/19/2013 2:36 PM, Al Lorona wrote:
> When I was a kid 750 Hz was the most popular sidetone frequency. I have noticed a steady decrease in the consensus spot frequency over these 40 years. I don't know why.

I'll inject some science into the discussion based on my profession of
electroacoustics.  Human perception of sound is logarithmic, both with
respect to amplitude and frequency (pitch). Another way of saying it is
that our ability to separate two notes is a function of their percentage
difference.  For the same bandwidth in Hz, we have better discrimination
between two note a lower frequency, because the difference is a higher
percentage of the frequency.  So it's easier to discriminate a 100 Hz
difference at 450 Hz than at 750 Hz. That's one good reason to use a
lower pitch.

Another is that for most (but not all) of us, hearing loss is greatest
at higher frequencies, so we old farts tend to have somewhat better
hearing at 450 Hz than at 1 kHz.  That's not universal though -- those
of us who were exposed to noise (usually at work) that's much louder at
some frequency(ies) tend to develop notches in our hearing at those
frequencies.

73, Jim K9YC


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

alorona
You are right about all of that, but the original post (and the original QST letter to which it referred) appeared to be talking about copying a single signal, rather than the complex process of discriminating between two signals close to each other, and it implied some near-universal psychoacoustic preference for the single frequency of 432 Hz. Not 430, not 435, but 432! This supposed preference is what I rejected as junk science.
 
The next thing you know, someone somewhere is going to claim that Elecraft radios soldered with 63/37 solder sound superior to those soldered with a different blend.
 
Al  W6LX  [who listens at about a D-flat]
 
 
>> I'll inject some science into the discussion based on my profession of electroacoustics. 
>> 73, Jim K9YC


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net/
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Barry
I don't have perfect pitch, but I have "pretty good" pitch.  For example, I can tune in a RTTY signal without any tuning aids.

As a high speed CW guy, I once experimented with various base frequencies to see if it affected my upper speed limit.  My hypothesis was since square waves are odd harmonic multiples, perhaps I could push up the speed where dits started to blend together by using a lower frequency.  This would allow me to hear the 7th, 9th, 11th, etc. harmonics better and put a sharper edge on the waveform.  It didn't work.

Personally, I prefer in the 550-600 Hz range.  When I was a kid, I used to listen to 750 Hz or so.

Barry W2UP
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

drewko
In reply to this post by alorona
Unless you're using APF, in which case a few Hz might make a
difference.

Like others, I don't buy the musical CW pitch theory either. However,
the pitch of a CW note IS important, and there may be different
optimum pitches for various different reception conditions (assuming
your hearing response is not limited to a single narrow range).

It would be very useful to be able to adjust this pitch in an
interactive way. That is a feature I wish the K3 had... Say if you
have tweaked a signal to optimum in a narrow filter: it would be nice
to then simply adjust its pitch for optimum readability.

Unfortunatey. if you do this by changing the VFO/RIT, the signal is
moved off  center or out of the passband entirely. You could use the
PITCH control: however, when it is engaged you can't actually hear the
particular signal you are trying to optimize, only the loud sidetone.
It is a bit of a guessing game, switching PITCH on and off to find the
best tone for the signal. It would be a bit like having the signal
muted every time you try to adjust the af gain. Not very useful.

73,
Drew
AF2Z


On Sat, 19 Oct 2013 14:36:37 -0700 (PDT), Al  W6LX wrote:

>A few Hertz either way in the CW pitch not only doesn't make a lot of psychoacoustical difference, but is hardly perceptible unless you have near-perfect pitch, and even then isn't necessarily a problem.

>Changing the pitch probably has more to do with the self-resonant frequencies of your speaker enclosures or headphones, and room. Choose a Spot pitch that you like and be done with it.

>When I was a kid 750 Hz was the most popular sidetone frequency. I have noticed a steady decrease in the consensus spot frequency over these 40 years. I don't know why. Maybe it has to do with hearing loss. Too many 'The Who' concerts.

>The letter published in QST about this was bordering on junk science. To single out "432 Hz" as some magical sidetone frequency is very like the New Age videos on YouTube claiming that listening to certain magical frequencies can heal your mind and give you holistic peace. It's simply nonsense.

>Al  W6LX


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Sverre Holm (LA3ZA)
In reply to this post by Dr. William J. Schmidt, II
There is a study from 1992 that tested recognition rate vs pitch frequency. Unfortunately only a few tones were tested, but at least one can infer that a low tone is preferrable. This is in Montnemery, Peter, Bengt Almqvist, and Sten Harris. "Recognition of telegraphy signs at different listening levels and frequencies." Scandinavian Audiology 21.4 (1992): 255-260.

The abstract is:

"The recognition of telegraphy masked by noise at 40 and 80 signs/min telegraphy speed was studied in 10 normal-hearing subjects at different sound pressure levels (25–85 dB SPL in steps of 5 dB) as well as at different test frequencies (2000, 1000, 800, 630, 500 and 250 Hz). The ability to recognize the signs varied with varying SPL. Recognition for most of the subjects was best at an SPL close to 70 dB. All subjects improved their recognition as the frequency was lowered to 500 Hz, some even at 250 Hz. These facts should be taken into consideration when training telegraphy operators as well as in the construction of radio receivers to permit listening at low frequencies. Furthermore, the critical ratio was calculated at the different test frequencies.

Read More: http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/01050399209046009"

Based on this result, it would be interesting to zoom in on the frequencies between 250 and 500 Hz for further testing, also higher speeds would be interesting to test as 40 and 80 is the same as 8 and 16 wpm. Peter Montnemery is by the way SM7CMY.
Sverre, LA3ZA

K2 #2198, K3 #3391,
LA3ZA Blog: http://la3za.blogspot.com,
LA3ZA Unofficial Guide to K2 modifications: http://la3za.blogspot.com/p/la3za-unofficial-guide-to-elecraft-k2.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Wes (N7WS)
In reply to this post by alorona
Are you saying they don't?


On 10/19/2013 11:22 PM, Al Lorona wrote:
>  
> The next thing you know, someone somewhere is going to claim that Elecraft radios soldered with 63/37 solder sound superior to those soldered with a different blend.
>  
> Al  W6LX  [who listens at about a D-flat]
>  
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Richard-3
In reply to this post by alorona
I think I'll replace all my K3 wiring with Monster Cable and replace the
speaker with a Bose Wave system....

Shouldn't be needed, however......
*<G..r..i..n..> *

Rich
NU6T

On 10/19/2013 11:22 PM, Al Lorona wrote:

> You are right about all of that, but the original post (and the original QST letter to which it referred) appeared to be talking about copying a single signal, rather than the complex process of discriminating between two signals close to each other, and it implied some near-universal psychoacoustic preference for the single frequency of 432 Hz. Not 430, not 435, but 432! This supposed preference is what I rejected as junk science.
>  
> The next thing you know, someone somewhere is going to claim that Elecraft radios soldered with 63/37 solder sound superior to those soldered with a different blend.
>  
> Al  W6LX  [who listens at about a D-flat]
>  
>  
>>> I'll inject some science into the discussion based on my profession of electroacoustics.
>>> 73, Jim K9YC
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net/
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

W6ODJ
In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10
Hi Jim,

My only gripe is that the K3 choice range doesn't go down to 400 Hz.  I'd like to use 440, a pure standard A.

73,

Oliver
W6ODJ


On 19 Jan. 2013, at 22:30 PM, Jim Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 10/19/2013 2:36 PM, Al Lorona wrote:
>> When I was a kid 750 Hz was the most popular sidetone frequency. I have noticed a steady decrease in the consensus spot frequency over these 40 years. I don't know why.
>
> I'll inject some science into the discussion based on my profession of electroacoustics.  Human perception of sound is logarithmic, both with respect to amplitude and frequency (pitch). Another way of saying it is that our ability to separate two notes is a function of their percentage difference.  For the same bandwidth in Hz, we have better discrimination between two note a lower frequency, because the difference is a higher percentage of the frequency.  So it's easier to discriminate a 100 Hz difference at 450 Hz than at 750 Hz. That's one good reason to use a lower pitch.
>
> Another is that for most (but not all) of us, hearing loss is greatest at higher frequencies, so we old farts tend to have somewhat better hearing at 450 Hz than at 1 kHz.  That's not universal though -- those of us who were exposed to noise (usually at work) that's much louder at some frequency(ies) tend to develop notches in our hearing at those frequencies.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Stephen G4SJP
Oliver,

My K3 goes down to 300Hz!

73 Stephen G4SJP


On 20 October 2013 18:43, Oliver Johns <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Jim,
>
> My only gripe is that the K3 choice range doesn't go down to 400 Hz.  I'd
> like to use 440, a pure standard A.
>
> 73,
>
> Oliver
> W6ODJ
>
>
> On 19 Jan. 2013, at 22:30 PM, Jim Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On 10/19/2013 2:36 PM, Al Lorona wrote:
> >> When I was a kid 750 Hz was the most popular sidetone frequency. I have
> noticed a steady decrease in the consensus spot frequency over these 40
> years. I don't know why.
> >
> > I'll inject some science into the discussion based on my profession of
> electroacoustics.  Human perception of sound is logarithmic, both with
> respect to amplitude and frequency (pitch). Another way of saying it is
> that our ability to separate two notes is a function of their percentage
> difference.  For the same bandwidth in Hz, we have better discrimination
> between two note a lower frequency, because the difference is a higher
> percentage of the frequency.  So it's easier to discriminate a 100 Hz
> difference at 450 Hz than at 750 Hz. That's one good reason to use a lower
> pitch.
> >
> > Another is that for most (but not all) of us, hearing loss is greatest
> at higher frequencies, so we old farts tend to have somewhat better hearing
> at 450 Hz than at 1 kHz.  That's not universal though -- those of us who
> were exposed to noise (usually at work) that's much louder at some
> frequency(ies) tend to develop notches in our hearing at those frequencies.
> >
> > 73, Jim K9YC
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Elecraft mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:[hidden email]
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Joe Subich, W4TV-4
In reply to this post by W6ODJ

 > My only gripe is that the K3 choice range doesn't go down to 400 Hz.

It certainly does - it goes down to 300 Hz.  However, I find A4 a bit
low for my taste - I'm satisfied with a 3.88 Hz error on B4 or 3.25 Hz
error on C5.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 10/20/2013 1:43 PM, Oliver Johns wrote:

> Hi Jim,
>
> My only gripe is that the K3 choice range doesn't go down to 400 Hz.  I'd like to use 440, a pure standard A.
>
> 73,
>
> Oliver
> W6ODJ
>
>
> On 19 Jan. 2013, at 22:30 PM, Jim Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 10/19/2013 2:36 PM, Al Lorona wrote:
>>> When I was a kid 750 Hz was the most popular sidetone frequency. I have noticed a steady decrease in the consensus spot frequency over these 40 years. I don't know why.
>>
>> I'll inject some science into the discussion based on my profession of electroacoustics.  Human perception of sound is logarithmic, both with respect to amplitude and frequency (pitch). Another way of saying it is that our ability to separate two notes is a function of their percentage difference.  For the same bandwidth in Hz, we have better discrimination between two note a lower frequency, because the difference is a higher percentage of the frequency.  So it's easier to discriminate a 100 Hz difference at 450 Hz than at 750 Hz. That's one good reason to use a lower pitch.
>>
>> Another is that for most (but not all) of us, hearing loss is greatest at higher frequencies, so we old farts tend to have somewhat better hearing at 450 Hz than at 1 kHz.  That's not universal though -- those of us who were exposed to noise (usually at work) that's much louder at some frequency(ies) tend to develop notches in our hearing at those frequencies.
>>
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
12