[Fwd: LF: Re: S-meter readings...]

[Andre' Kesteloot]

Steve Olney wrote:

> G'day Bob, Geri and others,
>
> OK thanks.  I have a clearer picture now.   Doing a napkin analysis and
> taking into account the logarithmic nature of the S-meter readings, it seems
> that, for example, if you have, say, S5 noise alone and then an S5 signal,
> then the S-meter reads somewhere btween S5 and S6 - closer to S5.
> Therefore an S5 report would be warranted as being pretty close.    The
> problem seems to be when you have, say, S5 noise and, say, an S2 signal.
> The S-meter still reads S5.   Giving an S5 report would seem to be suspect
> under those circumstances.
>
> It always was on my mind when attempting to give RSTs that the readability
> part is the only one where I feel that I am giving a true assessment (except
> of course when the signal is way above the noise).   Now I can see that as
> long as there is a difference of 1 S-point between noise only and
> noise+signal then the S reading is reasonable (although in guess-units as
> Bob has pointed out).
>
> Thanks
>
> 73 Steve VK2ZTO