tshoppa@gmail.com said: > Don't have any good ideas for 14121 kHz. > Any thoughts? I threw together a quick hack to scan for all PLL coefficients less than 50. Here are the answers closer than 50 kHz. (I didn't remove lines with a common factor.) 17 12 14166666.67 45667 24 17 14117647.06 3353 31 22 14090909.09 30091 34 24 14166666.67 45667 38 27 14074074.07 46926 41 29 14137931.03 16931 48 34 14117647.06 3353 So multiply by 24 and divide by 17 gets you a reasonable offset. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam.

Hi One practical trick is to do the divide by N shown below and simply let the normal harmonic process do the multiply by M. If both the M / N *and* the off the air signal are inside the passband of the radio, the data reduction simply becomes the relation between the two audio tones. Yes there is some messing around to keep the relative signal levels in the same ballpark…. If you use a PIC to do the divide, the whole process is pretty cheap …. Bob > On May 15, 2015, at 4:29 AM, Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> wrote: > > > tshoppa@gmail.com said: >> Don't have any good ideas for 14121 kHz. >> Any thoughts? > > I threw together a quick hack to scan for all PLL coefficients less than 50. > Here are the answers closer than 50 kHz. (I didn't remove lines with a > common factor.) > > 17 12 14166666.67 45667 > 24 17 14117647.06 3353 > 31 22 14090909.09 30091 > 34 24 14166666.67 45667 > 38 27 14074074.07 46926 > 41 29 14137931.03 16931 > 48 34 14117647.06 3353 > > So multiply by 24 and divide by 17 gets you a reasonable offset. > > > -- > These are my opinions. I hate spam. > > > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there.