I believe that no matter wot GUI look is eventually developed, we will
never satisfy everyone. There will be many who will be over the moon,
and many who will be disappointed. It is going to a difficult task to
satisfy everyone, not to mention all the programming that its going to
take to get a
All,
I have just been reading a review on the SDR-1000 by Peter Hart, G3SJX,
in the June 2006 issue of RadCom.
He is generally upbeat, but he has a concern about image rejection. He
is talking about v1.6.0 of the software, so maybe things have improved
since then. He says:
I have now implemented 2 (VERY) prototype GUIs running on Linux with DttSP2.
http://microsat.homelinux.org/dttsp/gsdr
http://microsat.homelinux.org/dttsp/gbeppe
gsdr implements the look and feel of PowerSDR and gbeppe implements the
look and feel of Beppe's design.
In implementing both
I think there needs to be greater AC flexablity specifically the ability
to automatically switch between mic input and vac input...
In the case of and SSB contest, some transmissions originate from the
MIC and others from a DigitalVoiceKeyer ( which could be part of a
logging program).
In
Al,
While it would be possible to put a VAC engage option on the phone
mode specific operating controls, why can't you just use the band stack
feature and switch from SSB to a digital mode (VAC)? The different
parameters you would like to use, such as different filtering are easily
handled using
Dan, K6KDK, wrote:
One of the reasons this is important is that there is really
no such thing as RF Gain any way in a DSP radio.
Good point. And this actually raises an interesting question regarding the
naming of controls...
From my perspective, the SDR1K has, essentially, two gain
From: Jeff Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 Time: 06:38:49
The functional similarity between Max AGC Gain and the familiar RF Gain
control raises an interesting question - is it better give a control a name
that accurately represents what it does in the code (such as Max AGC
At 12:24 AM 8/25/2006, Ian Wade wrote:
All,
I have just been reading a review on the SDR-1000 by Peter Hart, G3SJX,
in the June 2006 issue of RadCom.
He is generally upbeat, but he has a concern about image rejection. He
is talking about v1.6.0 of the software, so maybe things have improved
At 07:03 AM 8/25/2006, Jim Lux wrote:
Then, the I/Q audio signals run through separate channels, so there's a
audio frequency dependent variation between I and Q. This is fairly
fixed, independent of
DDS frequency (not audio frequency.. it varies a lot with audio frequency)
, but is also not
This may have to do with which .exe you associate the profile. I would hope
that it would just respond to any PowerSDR.exe process that runs, but it may
be more specific than that requiring you to reassociate it when you run a
console out of a different directory.
Eric Wachsmann
FlexRadio
Jeff,
From my perspective, the SDR1K has, essentially, two gain controls.
Conceptually, from the point of view of signal flow, I picture these two
gains as pre-agc gain and post-agc gain. That is, the gain applied to
a
signal *before* it's attenuated by AGC, and the gain applied to a signal
Dan,
We have done our darndest to combine the best of both worlds: the familiar
world of recognizable control names (on one hand) with the technically and
precisely correct names (on the other). As you will notice, if you hover
over the RF control on the front panel (and nearly all other
At 11:49 AM 8/25/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeff,
Well, by this time, everyone knows where I stand on this sort of discussion.
To me, this is not a marketing issue. We are talking about how to allow
users of the rig (that have already bought and paid for it) to extract the
maximum performance
From: Jim Lux [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 Time: 07:10:29
At 07:03 AM 8/25/2006, Jim Lux wrote:
Then, the I/Q audio signals run through separate channels, so there's a
audio frequency dependent variation between I and Q. This is fairly
fixed, independent of
DDS frequency (not
Jim,
You are only going to get maximum AGC
performance in critical listening situations by having ready access to and
understanding, technically, how to adjust all the DSP engines AGC
parameters. It is that simple. I wish that you could, in fact, put a
simple
control on the front panel, call it
I managed to change enough files using ftweak on Windows XP to allow
the Quartus Web edition to compile all of projects. That was really
painful to figure out. Somehow, sometime, a bunch of my files got
dated October 6, 2006 and the web license must be renewed after 150
days. It used
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Slow down! Not so fast!
The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like my
FT 1000, I'll turn off my SDR-1000 and turn on the black box.
I'm tired of the old paradigm. The SDR is new, fresh and unconventional.
Don't make it
Joel Harrison wrote:
NO!
73 Joel W5ZN
It is possible to read the rules with a guilty conscience and see
them saying that. I agree with your interpretation since every
contester or paper hanger on the planet would be in the illegal camp at
least once.
Bob
N4HY
-Original
Mike wrote:
Please, do not misunderstand Dave. I recognize
and laud your historic QSO.
My caution was about revealing the details of
the QSO because of the recent ARRL prohibition.
I think the issue was dealt with. W5ZN gave you a single word answer
and as President of the ARRL,
You need to set the gain for CW. On the DSP setup tab, if you have
Block LMS checked, dial down the gain to single digits.
Bob
N4HY
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tnx Eric and Gerald for your prompt response.
Running SVN 652 (problem is not there when I go back to 1.6.2.).
Dialed in
Frank Brickle wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 08:37 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote:
On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 22:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote:
I've been waiting for the long
anticipated UI/backend split with a well defined interface, as announced,
gosh, several times over the past couple years...
Gerry:
Amplifier ALC's are OUTPUTS to the transceiver/transmitter. The
voltage tells your transmitter/driver to turn down the wick. You may
have meant this but your note does not read this way.
The ALC inside the SDR-1000 on TX is just outstanding. Adjust the
power and you will not be
Jim Lux wrote:
At 12:24 AM 8/25/2006, Ian Wade wrote:
All,
I have just been reading a review on the SDR-1000 by Peter Hart, G3SJX,
in the June 2006 issue of RadCom.
He is generally upbeat, but he has a concern about image rejection. He
is talking about v1.6.0 of the software, so maybe
Something to contemplate for future incarnations is the ability to
synchronize the audio streams (I/Q and/or baseband) from multiple radios,
preferably on separate computers, but even on the same computer.
If one wants to do interesting things requiring coherent processing, like
diversity
At 08:54 PM 8/25/2006, Robert McGwier wrote:
Jim Lux wrote:
At 12:24 AM 8/25/2006, Ian Wade wrote:
A
The simple single point calibration that's currently used works pretty
well. It's just not perfect.
This is all correct. I presume that almost everyone is using some kind of
tuning aid to
25 matches
Mail list logo
