AB2TC wrote: >Hi, > >I, too, would be very interested in seeing how "entire HF spectrum digitized >at once" receivers would fare in the real world. I am *very* skeptical. >Although the Perseus (with that architecture) receiver fares relatively well >in the recent ARRL test, the testing completely ignores what happens when >there are not *two* but thousands of strong signals in the passband. With >this new architecture, it's imperative that ARRL and other labs find other >ways of evaluating real world performance as a simple two-tone test becomes >completely irrelevant.
Toby Deinhardt wrote: > > Hi, > > has anybody done a serious test of the ADT-200A transceiver yet? > > <http://www.adat.ch/index_e.html> > <http://www.adat.ch/pub/Presentation_Hamfest_22-09-07.pdf> > <http://www.adat.ch/pub/ADT-200A_Messresultate_V10.pdf> > > It would be rather interesting to see how the concept used by the K3 (24 > bit digitalization after IF) compares in the real world to the early 14 > bit digitalization as used by the ADT-200A (and afaik by the Perseus RX > from Microtelecom), especially with the chips available currently. > <snip> > > The Perseus actually out performs the K3 receiver regardless of what the recent ARRL test reports. I agree that the ARRL needs to come up with valid tests to evaluate real world performance of digital receivers such as the Perseus, ADT-200A, and QS1R. -- Phil Covington Software Radio Laboratory LLC Columbus, Ohio http://www.srl-llc.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [email protected] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
