Based on the documentation of NMRpipe it appears that the SOL function uses time domain deconvolution.

When I was graduate student, I had written my own program for NMR data processing and I used time domain deconvolution for solvent suppression. I observed that the length of the window used for deconvolution deconvolution has a dramatic effect on the quality of the solvent suppression. Based on this, and a quick look at the NMRpipe documentation, I would expect that a substantial improvement of solvent suppression can be obtained in your spectrum if you lower the value of flenpts parameter associated with the SOL function. In addition, I would expect that changing the fshape parameter to select for sinusoidal weighting (instead of the default boxcar) would be helpful.

My interpretation of your artefact is as follows (though I have not seen the code for NMRpipe): the deconvolution algorithm calculates the average over the chosen window and subtracts it out from the current fid. The problem is that, this is not possible for the first few data-points; the window terminates at zero time, and the data for calculating the average is not available for the first few points. Therefore, the subtracted fid contains a solvent artifact contributed from the first few data points. There are several ways to overcome this problem:

1. Decrease the window size for the first few data points, keeping the chosen value of flenpts for the remaining data points.

2. Predict values of the fid for negative times by using extrapolation. Then use these values for calculating the required averages for the deconvolution. The second method, I believe, would be better.

If the problem lies with incorrect adjustment of offset, then the observation of the data after the FT in the first dimension will reveal that the positive lobe of the non-suppressed water is consistently either on the right or on the left. However, I suspect, that you will find that in some of the increments the positive lobe is on the left and in others it is on the right.

This solvent suppression method may also fail if there are problems with magnetic field homogeneity, temperature homogeneity (due to RF induced heating) or radiation damping.

Based on the documentation of NMRpipe it appears that the SOL function uses time domain deconvolution.

When I was graduate student, I had written my own program for NMR data processing and I used time domain deconvolution for solvent suppression. I observed that the length of the window used for deconvolution has a dramatic effect on the quality of the solvent suppression. Based on this, and a quick look at the NMRpipe documentation, I would expect that a substantial improvement of solvent suppression can be obtained in your spectrum if you lower the value of flenpts parameter associated with the SOL function. In addition, I would expect that changing the fshape parameter to select for sinusoidal weighting (instead of the default boxcar) would be helpful.

My interpretation of your artefact is as follows (though I have not seen the code for NMRpipe): the deconvolution algorithm calculates the average over the chosen window and subtracts it out from the current fid. The problem is that, this is not possible for the first few data-points; the window terminates at zero time, and the data for calculating the average is not available for the first few points. Therefore, the subtracted fid contains a solvent artifact contributed from the first few data points. There are several ways to overcome this problem:

1. Decrease the window size for the first few data points, keeping the chosen value of flenpts for the remaining data points.

2. Predict values of the fid for negative times by using extrapolation. Then use these values for calculating the required averages for the deconvolution. The second method, I believe, would be better.

If the problem lies with incorrect adjustment of offset, then the observation of the data after the FT in the first dimension will reveal that the positive lobe of the non-suppressed water is consistently either on the right or on the left. However, I suspect, that you will find that in some of the increments the positive lobe is on the left and in others it is on the right.

This solvent suppression method may also fail if there are problems with data acquisition that produce non-symmetric line-shapes, e.g., magnetic field homogeneity, inhomogeneity, temperature homogeneity inhomogeneity (due to RF induced heating) or radiation damping.

Based on the documentation of NMRpipe it appears that the SOL function uses time domain deconvolution.

When I was graduate student, I had written my own program for NMR data processing and I used time domain deconvolution for solvent suppression. I observed that the length of the window used for deconvolution has a dramatic effect on the quality of the solvent suppression. Based on this, and a quick look at the NMRpipe documentation, I would expect that a substantial improvement of solvent suppression can be obtained in your spectrum if you lower the value of flenpts parameter associated with the SOL function. In addition, I would expect that changing the fshape parameter to select for sinusoidal weighting (instead of the default boxcar) would be helpful.helpful. The mirror option of the SOL function may also be useful.

My interpretation of your artefact is as follows (though I have not seen the code for NMRpipe): the deconvolution algorithm calculates the average over the chosen window and subtracts it out from the current fid. The problem is that, this is not possible for the first few data-points; the window terminates at zero time, and the data for calculating the average is not available for the first few points. Therefore, the subtracted fid contains a solvent artifact contributed from the first few data points. There are several ways to overcome this problem:

1. Decrease the window size for the first few data points, keeping the chosen value of flenpts for the remaining data points.

2. Predict values of the fid for negative times by using extrapolation. extrapolation or by using a mirror image of the fid. Then use these values for calculating the required averages for the deconvolution. Apparently, extrapolation is the default for NMRpipe. The second method, I believe, would be better. solvent peak, in general, has a large magnitude; hence, small inaccuracies in the extrapolation give rise to substantial artifacts. Therefore, a more efficient method for estimation of the negative time domain data points might give better results.

This solvent suppression method may also fail if there are problems with data acquisition that produce non-symmetric line-shapes, e.g., magnetic field inhomogeneity, temperature inhomogeneity (due to RF induced heating) or radiation damping.

Based on the documentation of NMRpipe it appears that the SOL function uses time domain deconvolution.

When I was graduate student, I had written my own program for NMR data processing and I used time domain deconvolution for solvent suppression. I observed that the length of the window used for deconvolution has a dramatic effect on the quality of the solvent suppression. Based on this, and a quick look at the NMRpipe documentation, I would expect that a substantial improvement of solvent suppression can be obtained in your spectrum if you lower the value of flenpts parameter associated with the SOL function. In addition, I would expect that changing the fshape parameter to select for sinusoidal weighting (instead of the default boxcar) would be helpful. The mirror option of the SOL function may also be useful.

My interpretation of your artefact is as follows (though I have not seen the code for NMRpipe): the deconvolution algorithm calculates the average over the chosen window and subtracts it out from the current fid. The problem is that, this is not possible for the first few data-points; the window terminates at zero time, and the data for calculating the average is not available for the first few points. Therefore, the subtracted fid contains a solvent artifact contributed from the first few data points. There are several ways to overcome this problem:

1. Decrease the window size for the first few data points, keeping the chosen value of flenpts for the remaining data points.

2. Predict values of the fid for negative times by using extrapolation or by using a mirror image of the fid. Then use these values for calculating the required averages for the deconvolution. Apparently, extrapolation is the default for NMRpipe. The solvent peak, in general, has a large magnitude; hence, small inaccuracies in the extrapolation give rise to substantial artifacts. Therefore, a more efficient method for estimation of the negative time domain data points might give better results.

Based on the documentation of NMRpipe it appears that the SOL function uses time domain deconvolution.

When I was graduate student, I had written my own wrote a program for NMR data processing and I that used time domain deconvolution for solvent suppression. I observed that the length of the window used for deconvolution has a dramatic effect on the quality of the solvent suppression. Based on this, and a quick look at the NMRpipe documentation, I would expect that a substantial improvement of solvent suppression can be obtained in your spectrum if you lower the value of flenpts parameter associated with the SOL function. In addition, I would expect that changing the fshape parameter to select for sinusoidal weighting (instead of the default boxcar) would be helpful. The mirror option of the SOL function may also be useful.

My interpretation of your artefact is as follows (though I have not seen the code for NMRpipe): the deconvolution algorithm calculates the average over the chosen window and subtracts it out from the current fid. The problem is that, this is not possible for the first few data-points; the window terminates at zero time, and the data for calculating the average is not available for the first few points. Therefore, the subtracted fid contains a solvent artifact contributed from the first few data points. There are several ways to overcome this problem:

1. Decrease the window size for the first few data points, keeping the chosen value of flenpts for the remaining data points.

2. Predict values of the fid for negative times by using extrapolation or by using a mirror image of the fid. Then use these values for calculating the required averages for the deconvolution. Apparently, extrapolation is the default for NMRpipe. The solvent peak, in general, has a large magnitude; hence, small inaccuracies in the extrapolation give rise to substantial artifacts. Therefore, a more efficient method for estimation of the negative time domain data points might give better results.

Based on the documentation of NMRpipe it appears that the SOL function uses time domain deconvolution.

When I was graduate student, I wrote a program for NMR data processing that used time domain deconvolution for solvent suppression. I observed that the length of the window used for deconvolution has had a dramatic effect on the quality of the solvent suppression. Based on this, and a quick look at the NMRpipe documentation, I would expect that a substantial improvement of solvent suppression can be obtained in your spectrum if you lower the value of flenpts parameter associated with the SOL function. In addition, I would expect that changing the fshape parameter to select for sinusoidal weighting (instead of the default boxcar) would be helpful. The mirror option of the SOL function may also be useful.

My interpretation of your artefact is as follows (though I have not seen the code for NMRpipe): the deconvolution algorithm calculates the average over the chosen window and subtracts it out from the current fid. The problem is that, this is not possible for the first few data-points; the window terminates at zero time, and the data for calculating the average is not available for the first few points. Therefore, the subtracted fid contains a solvent artifact contributed from the first few data points. There are several ways to overcome this problem:

1. Decrease the window size for the first few data points, keeping the chosen value of flenpts for the remaining data points.

2. Predict values of the fid for negative times by using extrapolation or by using a mirror image of the fid. Then use these values for calculating the required averages for the deconvolution. Apparently, extrapolation is the default for NMRpipe. The solvent peak, in general, has a large magnitude; hence, small inaccuracies in the extrapolation give rise to substantial artifacts. Therefore, a more efficient method for estimation of the negative time domain data points might give better results.

Based on the documentation of NMRpipe it appears that the SOL function uses time domain deconvolution.

When I was graduate student, I wrote a program for NMR data processing that used time domain deconvolution for solvent suppression. I observed that the calculates the average over the chosen window and subtracts it out from the current datapoint. The length of the window used for deconvolutionwindow had can have a dramatic effect on the quality of the solvent suppression. Based on this, and a quick look at the NMRpipe documentation, I would expect that a substantial improvement of solvent suppression can be obtained in your spectrum if you by using a lower the value of flenpts parameter associated with the SOL function. In addition, I would expect that changing the fshape parameter to select for sinusoidal weighting (instead of the default boxcar) would be helpful. The mirror option of the SOL function may also be useful.

My interpretation of your artefact is as follows (though I have not seen the code for NMRpipe): the deconvolution algorithm calculates the (weighted) average over the chosen window and subtracts it out from the current fid. The problem is that, this is not possible for the first few data-points; the window terminates at zero time, and the data for calculating the average is not available for the first few points. Therefore, the subtracted fid contains a solvent artifact contributed from the first few data points. There are several ways to overcome this problem:

1. Decrease the window size for the first few data points, keeping the chosen value of flenpts for the remaining data points.

2. Predict values of the fid for negative times time points by using extrapolation or by using a mirror image of the fid. Then fid; then use these values for calculating the required averages for the deconvolution. over a window of fixed length. Apparently, extrapolation is the default for NMRpipe. The solvent peak, in general, has a large magnitude; hence, small inaccuracies in the extrapolation can give rise to substantial artifacts. the observed baseline distortion. Therefore, better results may be obtained by using a more efficient method for estimation of the data values for negative time domain data points might give better results.points.