From: Ted Wrobel <[email protected]>
We don't hear anyone trying to build 'low cost', 'open design' RF amplifier chips even though many are priced way above $20. Perhaps more comparable, we don't see hams trying to invent an 'open' microprocessor instruction set to escape the evil monopoly of folks like Intel, AMD, and Sun. ----- There are quite a few cheap, fully open source chips out there but in low quantities. These are not X86 instruction set really, more RISC, ARM or similar microprocessors. In truth, the DVSI chip is a bargain considering the relatively small market over which to amortise engineering and chip fab costs. True. It seems to me that the uproar over the proprietary codec in DStar is really greatly overblown. Someone found a way to piggyback on a successful codec manufacturers existing technology to get a really low cost chip that hams can use. Let's say thanks and then go to work on more and better ways to use the chip we have - like the DVDongle and other boards. There is plenty of space for experimentation and improvement in digital voice without needing another codec. I highly disagree. Yes, I am grateful for INet labs and their DVDongle - it's allowed a $200 starting point for DSTAR vs buying a fully-dedicated ICOMs radio. However, I think hams have become senile with the proprietary codec, and asssume "its here, that's the way it should be and will always be". Sure, ICOM's radios and the DSTAR protocol itself dictate AMBE codec use. However, a open source codec allows infinite latitude to experimenters in software installations and inexpensive (FREE) soundcared etc etc *without* the need for a hardware chip layer. Finally, if we had another codec, it would take about a month for a Codec3 crowd to organize to combat both DVSI and Codec2. Of course it takes time, and hundreds if not thousands of combined man hours. The dual-codec Codec2/AMBE repeater is the best idea I've heard so far - it allows existing ICOM radios to stay the way they are, and still allows hobbiests a *free* and inexpensive way to enter the DSTAR field... 73 Ted W1GRI -73, KE7HQY ________________________________ From: dstar_digital@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:dstar_ digi...@yahoogro ups.com] On Behalf Of a cutler22 Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 09:28 To: dstar_digital@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Codec2 development - open source vocoder >From the sounds of it - this "Open Source DSTAR codec" is probably runner up to "DSTAR 2.0", which would indeed be a fork situation of the protocol. However, it would probably be called something different to avoid confusion. ICOM's "flavor" of DSTAR is the *only* flavor of DSTAR out there- no other major manufacturer has touched DSTAR. Even the Kenwood D-STAR radio is a rebranded ICOM radio.... Of course, market share for DSTAR is ever growing, not declining and it won't go away anytime soon. However, Codec2 sounds like the better market-driven bottom-up protocol for next-generation Digital Voice that could have a bigger market share than ICOM's DSTAR. -73 de Anthony, KE7HQY ________________________________ From: Tony Langdon <vk3...@gmail. com> To: dstar_digital@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, June 7, 2010 2:20:04 AM Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Codec2 development - open source vocoder At 05:34 PM 6/7/2010, you wrote: >And that D-STAR protocol definition is defined by the JARL... > >How much of a prospect is it the JARL would be willing to update the >DSTAR protocol with an open source vocoder if it were competitive to AMBE? Assuming the JARL were open (pun not intended!) to the idea. The rest of this message deals with the case where the JARL to decide to amend the D-STAR protocol (if they don't, then we would be dealing with a fork instead). The biggest challenge will be not breaking gear that's in the field. The DV Dongle is the easiest case, because the new (open) codec can simply be added to DVTool, and run entirely in software when needed, with the dongle only being used to encode/decode an AMBE stream. The Icom radios would require a series of replacement boards for their existing DV boards, to use the new codec, otherwise you're going to have a bunch of users who will find D-STAR suddenly becomes hit and miss. Also, the spec would need to be updated to include notifying the remote end which codec is in use, somewhere in the protocol, since this can no longer be assumed. There could be an opportunity in the new add-on board to have field programmable components on board, so any further enhancements to the codec/DSP can be downloaded and installed. The above is the minimum that would have to be done. There might be other unintended consequences that need to be dealt with (I can see the possibility for all sorts of "corner cases"). >------------ --- >Codec2 is in at least partial code form so far: ><http://www.rowetel. com/ucasterisk/ codec2.html>http://www.rowetel. >com/ucasterisk/ codec2.html Looks promising. Where I see this gaining traction first is in HF digital voice experimentation, which hit a major speed bump when patent issues became apparent. However, codec2 will need to get into the 1200bps and below range to be really effective in this application. >It seems to be competitive in the current market, a third-party >daughter board similar to UT-118 would have to be developed that had >dual AMBE/Codec2 capability, and sold at-cost to undercut the >current UT-118 cost. Assuming (warning - monster assumption!) the >SMT design was donated by hams and it was sold at cost, and it had >automatic codec detection and switching capability, it would be a >competitive way to bring an open source codec to "DSTAR". And be able to be fitted without too much hassle/expense to existing equipment in the field (like my 91AD). 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio. com
