ad: elecraft

WSJT-X vs JTDX - which is better?

Discussion in 'Working Different Modes' started by KQ0J, May 11, 2018.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: K5AB-Elect-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-2
  1. KB2WVO

    KB2WVO Ham Member QRZ Page

    i dont even get ft8 on jtdx. just downloaded it. file date shows 2017.. no idea. ill stick with wsjt it works for me lol
     

    Attached Files:

    • jtdx.jpg
      jtdx.jpg
      File size:
      263.8 KB
      Views:
      122
    K4RKY likes this.
  2. K9GLS

    K9GLS Ham Member QRZ Page

    Finally solved my locking up problems. It was a cheap USB cable. Went with a Tripp lite USB cable and all the locks up instantly disappeared.
     
  3. KG7FIU

    KG7FIU Ham Member QRZ Page

    Was thinking that because code was based upon "open-source", both programs would use pretty much the same algorithms / same code for FT-8 decoding. To hear some users report that one has "superior decoding logic" suggests this is not the case. Perhaps the algorithmic code has been "tweaked", adapted... Kind of surprising.

    Perhaps eventually the FT-8 decoder algorithms will be put into a "library" allowing any program to pick-and-choose what "engine" they want to hit...
     
  4. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

    There is more to JTDX than potentially more decodes. There are many usability features not available in WSJT-X. These features alone make trying JTDX a worthwhile thing. Test JTDX for a while, uninstall it if you don't like it.

    As for more decodes, nothing is 'free'. There are false decodes as well, but that is acceptable, since the false decode rate is very low.

    JTDX focus is on HF dxing.
     
  5. N6YFM

    N6YFM XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I really do hope that you have a ground wire attached to your PC and also attached to your transciever, and both connect
    to a common ground close together? (And I am not talking about relying on the third wire of an AC power cable.)

    The fastest way to have problems, and even risk blowing up your PC motherboard, is if current
    flows over the tiny 30 gauge USB cable due to ground differentials between your PC and your radio gear.
    Additionally, looping your USB cable a few times through a type-31 torroid core will make sure RF does not
    flow back into your PC. I have seen both of the above issues cause lock-ups and worse at several stations
    of friends.

    If you do both of the above, your chances of having problems go down by two-thirds.

    Cheers,

    Neal
     
  6. MW1CFN

    MW1CFN Ham Member QRZ Page

    A little late to the party, but the term missing from this discussion is 'mode'. Which mode are we talking about? Only FT8, it seems.

    How about WSPR? How do the two main softwares compare there? WSJT-X is meant (and does) decode reliably down to -34dB, whereas JT-DX has somewhat less sensitivity that that, as far as I recall.

    J.
     
  7. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Yes, it's mostly about FT8. It all depends on the code base used. If it's the same, WSPR performance should be the same.

    I seem to recall that WSPR in the lastest version of WSJT-X has been improved. I don't think it's reflected in JTDX, since its focus is on (FT8) HF DX. Also note that Fox mode is not available in JTDX, and neither is FT4 so far.

    I never used JTDX for WSPR. I use WSJT-X for that.
     
  8. KQ0J

    KQ0J XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I use JTDX for most contacts I prefer its features. I use WSJT for MSK144 meteor scatter and for Fox / Hound work occasionally. FYI, I have used WSJT-X pretty much since it came out.

    Likes with JTDX = ' Clear DX ' button, Decode sensitivity, TX / RX frequency easier to use, TX RX split easier and more ....
     

Share This Page