Why is it often the case that when transferring magentization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?

Why is it often the case that when transferring magentization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?

Why is it often the case that when transferring magentization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?

Why is it often the case that when transferring magentization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?

Why is it often the case that when transferring magentization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?

Why is it often the case that when transferring magentization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?

Why is it often the case that when transferring magentization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?

Why is it often the case that when transferring magentization magnetization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?

Why is it often the case that when transferring magnetization from 1H to 15N, the 1/4J time is often a little less than expected - for example, it is often set to 2.25 ms. On the other hand, when transferring back form 15N to 1H for detection, 1/4J is typically set accurately to 2.7 ms?

I'm assuming the answer is something to do with relaxation of 1H during INEPT transfer. How necessary is this? Is there a way to optimize the values based on t2 time rather than sit at the magnet and manually optimize them?