I don't have a 1500 but the problem described of an associated tone with the
CW makes me think he has experienced the same problem I had with the 5000.
There is a bug that has been identified in the code that moves EEPROM
carrier calibration from older versions to the new format. This can be
solved by running carrier calibration. I would suggest working with tech
support to do that.

73 Ed W2RF

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:flexedge-boun...@flex-
> radio.biz] On Behalf Of Tim Ellison
> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 5:14 PM
> To: David Feldman; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [FlexEdge] First CW transmit/QSO attempt with > Flex 1500
> 
> It does help.  Junk from a previous DB could have been getting in the way,
> but that does not seem to be the issue.
> 
> Here are a few things to check or fiddle with.
> 
> 1.) Look in the Setup->General->Options tab and make sure that the Enable
> TX Out Delay check box is not checked.
> 2,) Use the smallest audio buffers that do not distort the audio (Setup-
> >Audio->Primary).  I would start with 512.
> 3.) Use smaller CW RX/TX DSP buffers (Setup->DSP->Options)
> 4.) Change the CW Blanking Delay value (Setup->Transmit)
> 
> I am not a CW op so I do not want to venture a guess at what settings to
> try, but these are the things that you can change which can improve
> latency.
> 
> -Tim
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:flexedge-boun...@flex-
> radio.biz] On Behalf Of David Feldman
> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 2:58 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [FlexEdge] First CW transmit/QSO attempt with > Flex 1500
> 
> When I first started 2.0.16, I am pretty sure it created a new database,
> because I had uninstalled 2.0.5 prior to installing 2.0.16. In any event,
> I also tried resetting the database and restarting the program, and got
> the same results (the reset/restart left an XML file on the desktop which
> I didn't look at.)
> 
> Hope this is helpful info,
> 
> Dave
> 
> > Message: 7
> > Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 21:28:08 -0500
> > From: "Tim (W4TME)" <[email protected]>
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [FlexEdge] First CW transmit/QSO attempt with Flex 1500
> >     and 2.0.16 beta on 1.6 GHz Atom XP box
> > Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
> >
> > Did you import the database from 2.0.5 into 2.0.16?
> >
> > -Tim
> > ---
> > W4TME
> > FlexRadio Systems Internet Systems Admin.
> > Product Verification Team
> > Tune In Excitement?
> >
> >
> > On 11/20/2010 6:54 PM, David Feldman wrote:
> > > This afternoon I had my first QSO with the Flex 1500
> > and PowerSDR 2.0.16 using an external keyer. I'm an absolute beginner
> > with any flexradio product - I bought the rig long ago, received it
> > when they began shipping, and put it on the shelf (as I'm exclusively
> > CW op) until 2.0.16 beta was released. So, today is my first on-air
> > experience with the rig. I was able to upgrade from 2.0.5
> > (out-of-the-box CDROM) to 2.0.16 beta without any difficulty.
> > >
> > > Where I'm struggling: I notice a pronounced
> > "hesitation" effect with the first transmit symbol, and also hear a
> > slightly off-frequency carrier (on another receiver in the shack)
> > during transmit - a kind of "backwave" but not on the exact TX
> > frequency. I don't think either of these is news to the developers or
> > reflector, but I just wanted to see if I should be making any
> > configuration/operational changes before putting rig back on shelf
> > awaiting later software version. I did try adjusting CW TX buffer size
> > between 256 and 2048 and didn't see much difference. I did find it
> > necessary to run keyer's own sidetone (with "Disable Monitor" selected
> > on powersdr) as powersdr sidetone is delayed enough vs actual sending,
> > and powersdr sidetone audio level is dependent on transmit drive level
> > (which means no powersdr sidetone when tx power turned down to 0 for
> > testing.)
> > >
> > > To work around the first-symbol hesitation, I was able
> > to complete a QSO by setting the "break in delay" parameter to ~750
> > mSec (so basically I could send a whole transmission without the rig
> > dropping back into receive.) I tried a simple test of sending a string
> > of dits at modest speed, and adjusted the Delay parameter down to 0 mS
> > (QSK hoped for) and discovered the shack receiver was not hearing any
> > useful signal (certainly not a string of dits). Until the delay was
> > set long enough to keep the rig in transmit between dits, I could not
> > obtain a workable transmit signal.
> > >
> > > The machine is an ATOM 1.6 GHz box with XP and is
> > doing nothing but running powersdr. CPU utilization seems to be
> > 50-60%.
> > >
> > > I looked at the flexedge archives and 2.0.16 release
> > notes and didn't see any advice that seems directed at the
> > first-symbol hesitation which is my main concern.
> > >
> > > Thanks for any advice,
> > >
> > > 73 Dave WB0GAZ
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Flexedge mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexedge_flex-radio.biz
> This is the FlexRadio Systems e-mail Reflector called FlexEdge.  It is
> used for posting topics related to SDR software development and
> experimentalist who are using beta versions of the software.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Flexedge mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexedge_flex-radio.biz
> This is the FlexRadio Systems e-mail Reflector called FlexEdge.  It is
> used for posting topics related to SDR software development and
> experimentalist who are using beta versions of the software.


_______________________________________________
Flexedge mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexedge_flex-radio.biz
This is the FlexRadio Systems e-mail Reflector called FlexEdge.  It is used for 
posting topics related to SDR software development and experimentalist who are 
using beta versions of the software.

Reply via email to