On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Alan Beard <bear...@unixservice.com.au> wrote: > "Codec2 doesn't have a Network (in place)" > You can see the difference in goals here. In their case they need networking to extend the range of their radios. It's all kind of neat as far as networking the different proprietary protocols together. The networking, not the voice or radio technology is what excites them.
The alternative is to design a radio that doesn't need a cellular network every 5 miles. That doesn't need the Internet. I think David has published some good ideas on how to improve FM, and certainly SSB. I don't think FM was ever designed to work well with low deviation. Anyone using FM with low deviation is going to need a lot of repeaters. There's no reason to compress the RF like they do in Land Mobile Radio. In that arena, the government is just trying to limit range and pack the spectrum. A lot of Hams don't really care about that limitation if they can network their $400 radios with a $200 computer network gadget. > Are we not EXPERIMENTERS? Looking to improve on the existing. > No. The hobby is made-up of experimenters and operators. For the most part many Hams are happy just to connect the antenna and power supply. I'm amazed at the signals on APRS. The signals are grossly over-modulated. Plug and play. I think David is working along the lines of: 1. 4FSK with frequencies spaced by the Baud. (SDR required) 2. Time-Division Multiple Access (fast switching radio) 3. Wideband Codec (better quality audio for VHF, but still low bit/s) Onward! Steve/k5okc ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list Freetel-codec2@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
