Re: [Flexradio] CW tone wavering
Tom Thompson wrote: Kurt, Sound cards are just begging for RF interference. They have high impedance inputs and high gain, and as a result, they are subject to fundamental overload. I have used F114-77 toroid cores from http://palomar-engineers.com extensively on my Delta 44 leads and computer leads with good results. Wrap as many turns as you can of each lead close to the card and the SDR-1000 using two toroids. Good luck and 73, Tom W0IVJ Kurt Vangsness wrote: I'm finally starting to play around a little bit with CW and in preparation I'm trying things out with my radio putting 1 watt out into a dummy load (I have an external amp which is off for these tests) and am monitoring my transmission from another receiver. I'm noticing that my transmitted CW tone is not steady - almost as though the transmitted frequency is wavering. I don't notice this with other CW signals received on the radio I'm using to monitor so I have to assume it is my transmitted signal... The resulting effect is almost like a CW transmitter with a very unstable LO. I tried an experiment monitoring the LO from the sdr-1000 (while the sdr-1000 was in receive) from the same receiver and it does not exhibit the same variations in tone. One (possibly unrelated) thing I've noticed on my sdr-1000 is that I appear to be getting fairly strong interference from a local AM station on the sound card input. In the panadaptor display I can see the carrier at the bottom of the display (when tuned to the lowest frequency before the radio retunes the DDS). With my radio connected to a dummy load (noise floor is down at the bottom of the display), the carrier shows up around -85 dBm! I've made a wave capture of the IQ and tuned to the carrier and verified that it is a local AM station. I'm wondering if it is possible for a strong signal like this on my audio cables to somehow cause the tone/frequency changes I'm observing on my transmitted CW signal. Any ideas (both on the CW instability and in getting rid of the AM signal on the sound card)? 73 and Happy Holidays, Kurt KC9FOL Configuration details: P4 2.4 Ghz, 1GB RAM, Delta 44. ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
[Flexradio] PLEASE STOP blow up in release 9
PLEASE STOP sending the JIT dumps from .NET. We understand the issue. DO NOT USE THE EQUALIZER. It will be replaced. ALL other large messages about this will be rejected. Bob N4HY -- AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged!
Re: [Flexradio] Question about Auto Power on
Martin, If you can connect to the CAT inout of the sdr-1000 you can send the radio a power on command from there. Richard W5SXD Martin Hirsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (12/22/2005 21:32) Thanks Eric for your reply. Would be very nice to control the SDR1k via touchscreen so I'll wait and for future power-sdr releases. Leon, I own sdr1k for 6 month now and I never had unwanted keydown or something strange happening. My Pc and sdr are running 24h a day and even when ac-power is lost sometimes (mostly when tinkering on other projects) pc-and sdr-software are starting without any problems. When I put the whole stuff in a box and have all cabels properly fixed I'm on the safe side I think Of course I'll have a eye on it when new beta release is installed. Strange things can happen everywhere and any time even if you have a 10.000$ rig in your shack. I'm not afraid having the radio started automatically. Imagine how boring the(ham's)world would be if we were able to reach perfection! Merry Christmas to all of you Martin DL5YEJ - Original Message - From: Larry Loen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'Martin Hirsch' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; flexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 2:52 AM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Question about Auto Power on Eric Wachsmann - FlexRadio wrote: The first thing that jumped into my mind when I read this was an onscreen keyboard along with keyboard shortcuts. We have not added it yet, but we have it on the list to add a command line string that would automatically turn the power on. Stay tuned to the release notes for more info. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of Martin Hirsch Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 5:24 PM To: flexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] Question about Auto Power on Hello to all, I plan to put the sdr1k in a solid case together with a small itx- mainboard, 8'' LCD and shuttle pro controller. Power SDR will be in the autostart-folder. Is there a way to start the radio without taking a mouse and click the ON-button ? Maybe I take a Touchscreen LCD but in this case it would be nice to control the frequency by tipping on the screen. (frequency up-down-button or something like that) btw: I'm very pleased with new beta8 (especially the new agc and max-gain) Martin Well, it's your radio and Eric writes the code, but IMHO this is not as good an idea as it sounds. I've had some very strange things happen once in a while. I don't want the rig to turn on after an AC power failure in the middle of the afternoon, assuming your PC comes back up with it. Strange things happen. Rarely, but they do happen and Murphy says it will be at just the wrong moment. I've had the rig go into keydown because the parallel cable worked loose, for instance. I'm currently fighting a Windows bug where it all locks up with the rig in who knows what state. Do you really want the thing to come on like that when you might be out of the shack? Larry WO0Z ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
[Flexradio] Change to floats in Preview 9
Eric Bob, Ignoring the EQ conundrum, the change to floats in Preview 9 has dropped my CPU utilization on RX to a range from 0.8% to 2.3% where 1.6% seems to be the average with the logger running too. Adding MixW to the mix (a pun!) drove it up to a whopping 6.0% to 8.3% where 7.0% seems to be the average. That is about a 60% decrease from Preview 7 and Preview 8. VERY NICE! Great job! -Tim --- Tim Ellison mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Integrated Technical Services http://www.itsco.com/ Apex, NC USA 919.674.0044 Ext. 25 / 919.674.0045 (FAX) 919.215.6375 - cell PGP public key available at all public KeyServers
Re: [Flexradio] #9
Bob, Not complaining/criticizing, just asking because I'm interested: do you have a formal testing methodology? A lot of software companies have difficulty with testing, because of the sheer size and complexity of the software and for a small company this is compounded by the small size of staff. I like your model (get lots of stuff out quick to the people that enjoy playing with it.) I figured you would have an innovative testing model and I just wondered how you did it. Mark The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen. ~Tommy Smothers -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert McGwier Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 10:24 PM To: David W. Gardner Cc: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re: [Flexradio] #9 Ooops. That is a problem. I suspect that is a floating/double conversion problem. Thanks. We missed that test. Bob David W. Gardner wrote: Eric and Group: Mine runs just fine until I activate the receive eq Dave-W4DWG ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz -- AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged! ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer
Well, I am not an audiophile, but have found the equalizer in Pre-Beta 9 Consoles to be a big help. I have gotten unsolicited compliments on my audio using a POS Japanese mike. I also found peaking the audio on receive around 600-700 Hz really helps on CW receive. I would miss the equalizer if it were abandoned. -- _____ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ John L. Sielke ( W )( 2 )( A )( G )( N ) http://w2agn.net \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ CRUSTY OLD CURMUDGEON, AND PROUD OF IT
[Flexradio] IIR filter hacks
While IIR filters do have their numerical problems, they ARE nice because you can often get a given filter shape with fewer computations than a FIR filter (think of a high Q bandpass filter... one section with IIR, many, many taps with FIR). There is a technique that is used in systems with pulsed signals: reset the filter between pulses. One way to overcome the problems with accumulating errors is to recognize that for speech, you periodically let go of the PTT (or stop talking). You can then reset the filter. A clever scheme detects the signal power (which you might do for other reasons anyway: AGC or compression/expansion) and makes a decision about when it's just noise. The other approach that can provide some help is to break the band into subbands, each of which can then be processed at a slower sample rate (since the bandwidth is less in the subband). This lets you have filter coefficients that are not as close to zero or 1 in your IIR. James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
[Flexradio] on filtering in general
The discussion about Tx Eq brings up an interesting system architecture issue. The audio processing should really be distinct from the radio IF processing, with some convenient interface exposed. That is, the SDR software should really just be exposing a logical baseband audio interface, and should take that audio, translate it to the appropriate offset frequency, equalize it for audio card and transmit imperfections, and send it to the hardware. All the other audio processing (speech processing, EQ, compression, the parrot, etc.) should really be done separately, conceivably by third party software. While it is seductive to try and roll all the signal processing into one (virtual) box, especially if you're doing it with transforms in and out of frequency domain, it starts to make things really complex, and makes it very difficult to cleanly integrate stuff. There are also some things that are very tedious to implement in frequency domain, but trivial in time domain (clipping would be an example). Sure, there could be some rudimentary/basic controls available within the SDR software, but elaborate filtering or processing should really be an add-on, and, for now, the conceptual model most familiar to people is the sequential string of time domain processing boxes. It might be useful to expose and interface for frequency domain processing, but for any sort of non-linear processing, this is going to be tricky to integrate and, more importantly, to explain in a way that makes it useful. While I'm no great fan of how Matlab/Simulink does things, it does provide a model for how this sort of thing can be done, in terms of transitioning between time and frequency domain, etc. From my limited look at the output of the Simulink compiler, the code implementation of it is quite, shall we say, opaque and esoteric. James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer
Let me clarify a few things about the equalizer: 1) We will not abandon the equalizer. 2) As Bob, N4HY, posted earlier, the problems with the current EQ are understood and acknowledged. 3) Bob and I agreed on an approach this morning that should give excellent performance without encroaching on any patents. He plans to do an equalizer in the frequency domain (Fast Convolution Filtering) that works in a very similar manner to the current RX/TX filter. It will probably have 10 bands +/- that cover from about 100 Hz or so to around 6KHz. If you want more than that you will need to use external EQ such as the W2IHY box or CuBase that comes with the FireBox sound card. 4) The new EQ will be BEFORE the audio leveling, compression, and TX filter so it should not have the problems associated with the original EQ of this type a few months ago. 5) You probably won't get it as a Christmas present. ;) It may be a New Year's resolution, right Bob. ;) 6) Once again, since it is software, you can simply download the latest version when it comes for free. We at FlexRadio want to thank all of you for a great year and for the many contributions you have made to our success. We wish you a joyous Christmas and a happy New Year. 73, Gerald K5SDR FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of w2agn Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 9:26 AM To: FlexRadio Reflector Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer Well, I am not an audiophile, but have found the equalizer in Pre-Beta 9 Consoles to be a big help. I have gotten unsolicited compliments on my audio using a POS Japanese mike. I also found peaking the audio on receive around 600-700 Hz really helps on CW receive. I would miss the equalizer if it were abandoned. -- _____ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ John L. Sielke ( W )( 2 )( A )( G )( N ) http://w2agn.net \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ CRUSTY OLD CURMUDGEON, AND PROUD OF IT ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
[Flexradio] TX Leveler?
Can someone point me to a written description of the operation/use of the 'Leveler'. If none exist, how about a few words. Merry Christmas, k2ox
Re: [Flexradio] TX Leveler?
There is nothing written up about it presently, though we are updating the manual as I type this. Basically, the leveler is used to try to compensate for variances in distance or angle or your mouth with respect to the microphone. When you turn your head, the volume of your raw voice coming into the microphone will drop dramatically. The leveler attempts to normalize this level. As usual, this comes at a cost. The cost is that the leveler cannot distinguish between room noise and your voice. Therefore, we set the default at a fairly low gain value (10dB, I think). This enables us to normalize voice fairly well without amplifying room noise to an annoying level. Note that using the Noise Gate with this feature will give you the best results. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 10:55 AM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] TX Leveler? Can someone point me to a written description of the operation/use of the 'Leveler'. If none exist, how about a few words. Merry Christmas, k2ox ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer
Gerald,your EQ plan isa really a smart move. As you know, I will beout of townso I won't have a chance to give it a whirl for several weeks. The Cubase system works exceptionally well; however, I use an external computer to run it. I look forward to getting the Firewire Box and the seemless implementation of Cubase on a single computer. For operators who want a simple but incredibly good audio, I recommend purchase of the W2IHY 8 band EQ and EQ plus. These boxes make the transmit audio sound spectacular. Merry Christmas and happy New Year. John W5GI
Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer
Gerald and the rest of the SDR team, thank you so much for making my adventure in ham radio so exciting over the past year with the SDR-1000. I look forward to a wonderful learning experience. 73 and Happy Holidays, Hank - K9LZJ - Greenfield, Indiana Hank Wolfla Lyman H. Wolfla II, Inc. 1308 S. Peace St. Greenfield, IN 46140 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 317-861-0186 Cell: 317-448-3457 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gerald Youngblood Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 10:58 AM To: 'w2agn'; 'FlexRadio Reflector' Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer Let me clarify a few things about the equalizer: 1) We will not abandon the equalizer. 2) As Bob, N4HY, posted earlier, the problems with the current EQ are understood and acknowledged. 3) Bob and I agreed on an approach this morning that should give excellent performance without encroaching on any patents. He plans to do an equalizer in the frequency domain (Fast Convolution Filtering) that works in a very similar manner to the current RX/TX filter. It will probably have 10 bands +/- that cover from about 100 Hz or so to around 6KHz. If you want more than that you will need to use external EQ such as the W2IHY box or CuBase that comes with the FireBox sound card. 4) The new EQ will be BEFORE the audio leveling, compression, and TX filter so it should not have the problems associated with the original EQ of this type a few months ago. 5) You probably won't get it as a Christmas present. ;) It may be a New Year's resolution, right Bob. ;) 6) Once again, since it is software, you can simply download the latest version when it comes for free. We at FlexRadio want to thank all of you for a great year and for the many contributions you have made to our success. We wish you a joyous Christmas and a happy New Year. 73, Gerald K5SDR FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of w2agn Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 9:26 AM To: FlexRadio Reflector Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer Well, I am not an audiophile, but have found the equalizer in Pre-Beta 9 Consoles to be a big help. I have gotten unsolicited compliments on my audio using a POS Japanese mike. I also found peaking the audio on receive around 600-700 Hz really helps on CW receive. I would miss the equalizer if it were abandoned. -- _____ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ John L. Sielke ( W )( 2 )( A )( G )( N ) http://w2agn.net \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ CRUSTY OLD CURMUDGEON, AND PROUD OF IT ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Change to floats in Preview 9, speed up, and EQ
Gerald, Frank, Eric, and I have come to an agreement on what the new EQ will look like. It will not be like a ISO centered RANE lookalike( but not function-alike !) but will provide the necessary shaping so that you do not get this very flat response that sounds so different on TX from that which people are accustomed to (they are accustomed to at least a bit of preemphasis and some other shaping). The new EQ will be 10 bands or less and not work above 6 KHz. We will concentrate on those areas where SSB, AM, and FM needs the shaping. It will be implemented using 512 sample buffers to limit latency to 11 ms. This was NOT that different from the delay through the low frequency filters in the IIR version. Expect this out in preview 10. Your results are consistent with mine. We are taking cache hits 1/2 as often on average and the total memory bandwidth demands are down under 50% from before. Slow off chip (not cache) memory was a big limiting factor before. The use of floats in the optimized FFTW routines more than make up for the slightly loss of speed when the floating point unit is used to do floats/doubles. Many functions automatically promote to doubles so this can be a net loss. In this case, the overwhelming increase in speed in FFTW3 more than makes up for the occasional sin/cos promotion to double and then conversion back to float. Also, we just left the oscillators running as doubles so the phase wrap glitch occurs once a week! On my wife's sempron, with almost no cache, the lowered memory bandwidth demand dropped it from 65% to 25%. Thanks and again, our apologies for not testing the EQ after the change. Bob N4HY Tim Ellison wrote: Eric Bob, Ignoring the EQ conundrum, the change to floats in Preview 9 has dropped my CPU utilization on RX to a range from 0.8% to 2.3% where 1.6% seems to be the average with the logger running too. Adding MixW to the mix (a pun!) drove it up to a whopping 6.0% to 8.3% where 7.0% seems to be the average. That is about a 60% decrease from Preview 7 and Preview 8. VERY NICE! Great job! -Tim --- Tim Ellison mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Integrated Technical Services http://www.itsco.com/ Apex, NC USA 919.674.0044 Ext. 25 / 919.674.0045 (FAX) 919.215.6375 - cell -- AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged!
Re: [Flexradio] #9
Mark: It is very formal. We write, test things, and then let you tell us what broke. Flippancy aside, we have attempted at various times to have more formal testing methodologies and Eric and Gerald are just too small as a company to do serious software testing and we have found that we get VERY quick feedback here. Many of you work at companies where software is produced as a product and you must be well aware how much it costs to do the serious testing that goes on with software that is nowhere near as complex as this. Eric and Gerald and the cache of volunteers just can't sustain that activity in the same way. Please, we complain and criticize ourselves enough when we do stupid things and open source is just different. However, it is much more cost effective! Cheers, Bob THAT is a signature I can deal with. AMEN Mark Amos wrote: Bob, Not complaining/criticizing, just asking because I'm interested: do you have a formal testing methodology? A lot of software companies have difficulty with testing, because of the sheer size and complexity of the software and for a small company this is compounded by the small size of staff. I like your model (get lots of stuff out quick to the people that enjoy playing with it.) I figured you would have an innovative testing model and I just wondered how you did it. Mark The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen. ~Tommy Smothers -- AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged!
Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer
Not abandoned, replaced with something that I hope will fit most people's needs more closely. For those who are serious audiophiles, they really should use external stuff and then leave the radio as flat as west texas and apply their own shaping. Bob w2agn wrote: Well, I am not an audiophile, but have found the equalizer in Pre-Beta 9 Consoles to be a big help. I have gotten unsolicited compliments on my audio using a POS Japanese mike. I also found peaking the audio on receive around 600-700 Hz really helps on CW receive. I would miss the equalizer if it were abandoned. -- AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged!
Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer
Absolutely Bob! I applaud the direction. Watching the reflector posts and talking with a couple of fellow Flex buddies, I think we are in 100% agreement. I would like to thank you guys for all of the absolutely excellent things that we have seen and even sometimes tried. It's a wonderful concept that has made ham radio fun for me again. I wish you and Gerald and Eric the happiest of holidays !! -- Larry W8ER PS. I am not an audiophile either ! ;-) - Original Message - From: Robert McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: w2agn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: FlexRadio Reflector FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Equalizer Not abandoned, replaced with something that I hope will fit most people's needs more closely. For those who are serious audiophiles, they really should use external stuff and then leave the radio as flat as west texas and apply their own shaping. Bob w2agn wrote: Well, I am not an audiophile, but have found the equalizer in Pre-Beta 9 Consoles to be a big help. I have gotten unsolicited compliments on my audio using a POS Japanese mike. I also found peaking the audio on receive around 600-700 Hz really helps on CW receive. I would miss the equalizer if it were abandoned. -- AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged! ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
[Flexradio] Rane, equalizer patents? was Re:Preview 9.... (CONFESSION TIME)
At 05:57 AM 12/23/2005, Robert McGwier wrote: Larry: I can't tell you how much I have wanted to avoid truly tackling this problem. I really do understand the issues and I would love to use constant Q or perfect Q designed equalizers. RANE has written some beautiful papers describing that work (in technical journals but done primarily as marketing, not as technology transfer) after they have gotten patents. The last time I gave this a glance, the patents were still in force. I abhor this kind of patent. As do I, so I went hunting for it. And couldn't find it. Nor any other patents that seem to be even remotely related. I went and searched the PTO database.. Rane Corporation doesn't appear to have any relevant patents in this area. Here's the list for Rane and audio (not all of these area assigned to Rane) PAT. NO. Title 1 6,865,270 Echo cancellation method and apparatus 2 6,853,732 Center channel enhancement of virtual sound images 3 6,566,767 Selectable make-brake ground connector, cable and/or system 4 6,144,747 Head mounted surround sound system 5 5,848,146 Audio system for conferencing/presentation room 6 5,841,879 Virtually positioned head mounted surround sound system 7 5,774,016 Amplifier system having prioritized connections between inputs and outputs 8 5,661,812 Head mounted surround sound system 9 5,459,790 Personal sound system with virtually positioned lateral speakers 10 5,291,558 Automatic level control of multiple audio signal sources 11 5,272,757 Multi-dimensional reproduction system 12 5,046,105 Audio signal equalizer having accelerated slope phase shift compensated filters 13 4,891,841 Reciprocal, subtractive, audio spectrum equalizer 14 4,882,664 Synchronous modulation circuit #s 12 and 13 are analog equalizer type designs. Searching for Miller as inventor and Rane anywhere in the patent turns up NO patents. I based this on:All techniques and algorithms discussed in this article are covered by applications filed by its inventor Ray Miller and Rane Corporation with the U.S. Patent and Trademark office and other international patent agencies. from their website. I also searched for Rane and audio as well as Rane and equalizer, and turned up nothing that seems to be applicable. And, I searched for patents issued to Dennis Bohn (CTO at Rane).. just the two above, which are analog, and issued back in 1991, so close to expiring. Rick Jeffs has a patent (assigned to Rane) for using hall effect sensors to sense slider positions. Here's all the patents assigned to Rane PAT. NO. Title 1 6,865,270 Echo cancellation method and apparatus 2 6,813,361 Non-contact audio fader control system and method 3 5,848,146 Audio system for conferencing/presentation room 4 5,291,558 Automatic level control of multiple audio signal sources 5 5,046,105 Audio signal equalizer having accelerated slope phase shift compensated filters 6 4,891,841 Reciprocal, subtractive, audio spectrum equalizer 7 4,882,664 Synchronous modulation circuit Now, it's possible that Rane and Miller have filed their patents under an obscure name so as to submarine folks later. I also looked at the photos of their gear on the website, and all they say is patents applied for, with no numbers. So, Rane might have done a fine job of creating Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. I note that they say applications filed with USPTO but don't actually say patented. There's a big difference. One can send in an application and withdraw it, for instance. Or, one can send in an application for trademark. Or, one can send in an application for a job.grin (The company I used to work for did all of these, just to delay the appearance of knockoff products a few months, while keeping their various marketing literature truthful.) Jim, W6RMK
[Flexradio] The Rane Patent(?)
Found an application (2004) by Miller. You can find it by searching the uspto.gov site for applications and search on rane in the assignee field. The application claims a method for taking extenally supplied settings for filters in an equalizer and calibrating (my word) them to generate the actual controls for the equalizer. The idea being to compensate for the interaction of the filters in the real world. The many claims all follow on that basic idea, in the usual fashion of more and more details, so that if the examiner throws out a high level claim, you still get the low level one. However, from my cursory reading of the application, all they're patenting is the way in which you translate from the user specification into the actual filter implementation. They're not patenting the filtering itself, just the way a user specifies how the filtering is to be done. The disclosure of the invention goes into all sorts of details on typical implementation, moving averages, various canonical filter implementations, etc, but the disclosure's not what the patent controls. That's all in the claims. On the subject of other things that Rane might have filed apps for.. They filed for a trademark (Aug 2002) on Perfect-Q, but abandoned it in June 2003. James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
Re: [Flexradio] The Rane Patent(?)
Wait a minute. They are so incompetent they could not get a patent on their equalizer? You can get a patent on exercising your cat with a laser pointer! Now I know we have made the right decision. 73's Bob N4HY Jim Lux wrote: Found an application (2004) by Miller. You can find it by searching the uspto.gov site for applications and search on rane in the assignee field. The application claims a method for taking extenally supplied settings for filters in an equalizer and calibrating (my word) them to generate the actual controls for the equalizer. The idea being to compensate for the interaction of the filters in the real world. The many claims all follow on that basic idea, in the usual fashion of more and more details, so that if the examiner throws out a high level claim, you still get the low level one. However, from my cursory reading of the application, all they're patenting is the way in which you translate from the user specification into the actual filter implementation. They're not patenting the filtering itself, just the way a user specifies how the filtering is to be done. The disclosure of the invention goes into all sorts of details on typical implementation, moving averages, various canonical filter implementations, etc, but the disclosure's not what the patent controls. That's all in the claims. On the subject of other things that Rane might have filed apps for.. They filed for a trademark (Aug 2002) on Perfect-Q, but abandoned it in June 2003. James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875 ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz -- AMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged!
Re: [Flexradio] The Rane Patent(?)
At 01:51 PM 12/23/2005, Robert McGwier wrote: Wait a minute. They are so incompetent they could not get a patent on their equalizer? You can get a patent on exercising your cat with a laser pointer! Now I know we have made the right decision. Not precisely... You've got to look at Rane's motivations here. Pretty much any filter topology they care to choose is probably well known, so they couldn't patent that. They could conceivably patent a particular detailed design, but why bother.. It would be easy to design around (Rane claims a 0.01 uF bypass capacitor, Jim Lux designs around by using a pair of 0.005s in parallel, etc.) Likewise, if Rane has some special DSP algorithms, they're hardly likely to patent them, when it's so easy to keep them as trade secret in the form of DSP object code or FPGA bitstreams. The mechanics of filtering, then, aren't anything special. What's special, and what Rane HAS applied for patent on, is a way to make setting the parameters easier. Their whole sales approach for 1/3octave equalizers is that you can look at the output of a 1/3octave analyzer, and set the inverse curve in your equalizer, and, et voila, the room's flat. The problem with conventional equalizers is that you can't do this, because the usual implementation has lots of interaction between channels, and what's on the front panel doesn't match what the EQ actually does (no big deal if you're setting it by ear, but a big deal if you're setting by the numbers). So Rane has figured out a way to solve the problem (clever calibration, essentially, and mapping each slider into settings for all the channels, including the ones adjacent) So, they have what they think is a better way, and have applied for patent protection (and, it will probably issue, given that it's not blatantly reading on prior art). And in the mean time, they can claim our novel whizbang patent pending technology allows us to jump tall buildings in a single bound, cure AIDS, and create world peace. In the usual 3-4 year life of some piece of gear, the patent will probably issue after the last box is manufactured. And, they can throw around that our valuable intellectual property portfolio phrase to attract investment. (although, since 2001, when apps started to be published, this is less useful, because the would be investor can actually look, without having to pay for a peek) It's also good to beat would-be competitors over the head with. You've got at least a year before the patent app is published, and you'd want to make sure that you're not designing something that might infringe, and not be able to be sold. Of course, a clever company runs out and files an app for some other aspect of the same box, and then you two can cross-license. Of such are things like the 1394 or JPEG consortia made. 73's Bob N4HY
Re: [Flexradio] #9 Formal Testing
A step above the old Morey Goldberg method of testing. Morey was an eclectic engineer in Syracuse, NY who sold boards and kits for converting your TV into a Genuine VT100 DEC computer terminal and other such nonsense back in the 60s and 70s. Morey would come up with a design, have the boards made and then sell the kit to customers without ever having made a prototype. Testing was done over the phone by Morey having the customer try different things until the board would sort of work. I used to visit him once in a while because he was a font of knowledge and ideas and had a philosophy of life that was certainly not main stream. Kind of like an old hippy today. He had a heart of gold but was a terrible businessman and was always being chased by his creditors. Advertised in Wayne Green's Kilobyte Magazine in the wayback. My point! While Morey never really told anyone they were the first testers of his latest creation the word slowly got out and then people began to question him on his latest designs before they would buy. If a person had good knowledge of TTL logic and a some test equipment then Morey's stuff made a bit of sense because the hardware was VERY low cost. With a bit of troubleshooting and minor redesign you could make a terminal emulator real cheap. The difference here: We are told UP FRONT! You are part of a giant earth shaking experiment. There is an initiation fee. $1400 to buy the black box if you don't have the time/skill to roll your own. There are even some written instructions to help you get started. BUT! For the latest trick pony in the circus you get to learn all about the good and bad along with the creator of the pony. No instructions! Be thankful there are email addresses and the several forums to answer questions and complaints. Warning! You have to deal with the hay before and after the pony. Instructions for the home office. Eric1, please reach behind your computer and pull the plug from the wall. Go away and enjoy the holiday and leave us to our own devices for a few days. We'll be here when you get back. Maybe we will even have answered some of our own questions by then. Gerald, thanks again for a fresh challange in my long, interesting career in electronics. Bob McG, I love it! 73, Larry Taft, PE K2LT Bob McGwier wrote It is very formal. We write, test things, and then let you tell us what broke.
Re: [Flexradio] on filtering in general
Jim, I think we are in violent agreement that the bulk of the specialized audio processing should be outside PowerSDR. We want to provide basic audio processing that will be useful to most of our customers. I believe that basic EQ functionality is needed to compensate for different microphones and operating conditions. However, don't need to provide recording studio type tools. You have the ability right now to integrate other audio processing tools using VAC. This allows the transfer of audio between the processing program and PowerSDR using digital steams. Also, it is easy to set up CuBase, which comes with the FireBox to give you recording studio type processing right now. So what I am saying it that what you are suggesting is off the shelf today. You just have to take the time to set it up. 73, Gerald K5SDR -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Lux Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 9:55 AM To: flexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] on filtering in general The discussion about Tx Eq brings up an interesting system architecture issue. The audio processing should really be distinct from the radio IF processing, with some convenient interface exposed. That is, the SDR software should really just be exposing a logical baseband audio interface, and should take that audio, translate it to the appropriate offset frequency, equalize it for audio card and transmit imperfections, and send it to the hardware. All the other audio processing (speech processing, EQ, compression, the parrot, etc.) should really be done separately, conceivably by third party software. While it is seductive to try and roll all the signal processing into one (virtual) box, especially if you're doing it with transforms in and out of frequency domain, it starts to make things really complex, and makes it very difficult to cleanly integrate stuff. There are also some things that are very tedious to implement in frequency domain, but trivial in time domain (clipping would be an example). Sure, there could be some rudimentary/basic controls available within the SDR software, but elaborate filtering or processing should really be an add-on, and, for now, the conceptual model most familiar to people is the sequential string of time domain processing boxes. It might be useful to expose and interface for frequency domain processing, but for any sort of non-linear processing, this is going to be tricky to integrate and, more importantly, to explain in a way that makes it useful. While I'm no great fan of how Matlab/Simulink does things, it does provide a model for how this sort of thing can be done, in terms of transitioning between time and frequency domain, etc. From my limited look at the output of the Simulink compiler, the code implementation of it is quite, shall we say, opaque and esoteric. James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875 ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] #9 Formal Testing
One additional difference, there is the stable release, and the Beta, the Beta is for the brave souls who choose to be experimented on. At 05:36 PM 12/23/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A step above the old Morey Goldberg method of testing. Morey was an eclectic engineer in Syracuse, NY who sold boards and kits for converting your TV into a Genuine VT100 DEC computer terminal and other such nonsense back in the 60s and 70s. Morey would come up with a design, have the boards made and then sell the kit to customers without ever having made a prototype. Testing was done over the phone by Morey having the customer try different things until the board would sort of work. I used to visit him once in a while because he was a font of knowledge and ideas and had a philosophy of life that was certainly not main stream. Kind of like an old hippy today. He had a heart of gold but was a terrible businessman and was always being chased by his creditors. Advertised in Wayne Green's Kilobyte Magazine in the wayback. My point! While Morey never really told anyone they were the first testers of his latest creation the word slowly got out and then people began to question him on his latest designs before they would buy. If a person had good knowledge of TTL logic and a some test equipment then Morey's stuff made a bit of sense because the hardware was VERY low cost. With a bit of troubleshooting and minor redesign you could make a terminal emulator real cheap. The difference here: We are told UP FRONT! You are part of a giant earth shaking experiment. There is an initiation fee. $1400 to buy the black box if you don't have the time/skill to roll your own. There are even some written instructions to help you get started. BUT! For the latest trick pony in the circus you get to learn all about the good and bad along with the creator of the pony. No instructions! Be thankful there are email addresses and the several forums to answer questions and complaints. Warning! You have to deal with the hay before and after the pony. Instructions for the home office. Eric1, please reach behind your computer and pull the plug from the wall. Go away and enjoy the holiday and leave us to our own devices for a few days. We'll be here when you get back. Maybe we will even have answered some of our own questions by then. Gerald, thanks again for a fresh challange in my long, interesting career in electronics. Bob McG, I love it! 73, Larry Taft, PE K2LT Bob McGwier wrote It is very formal. We write, test things, and then let you tell us what broke. ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Cecil Bayona KD5NWA www.qrpradio.com I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't; only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...
Re: [Flexradio] Change to floats in Preview 9, speed up, and EQ
Hi all, audiophiles included (like myself), Just wanted to remind that any HF equipment doesn't deserve to be called SSB transceiver if it has no equalization of the transmitted signal. It is extremely important in SSB DX work when you want to get through the QRM and other noise. As Bob let us understand, SSB, AM and FM DO NEED shaping. We do not need flat frequency response for the best intelligibility with the legally or technically limited powers and bandwidths. In addition to the frequency shaping we need amplitude compression or even clipping. Read this article from 1970's, it is still true: http://kotisivu.dnainternet.net/ahti/sdr-1000/filtclip.pdf . Now with the DSP tools we can make everything in a more elegant and efficient way. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year with the wonderful presents from FlexRadio, 73, Ahti OH2RZ - Original Message - From: Robert McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 8:29 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Change to floats in Preview 9, speed up, and EQ Gerald, Frank, Eric, and I have come to an agreement on what the new EQ will look like. It will not be like a ISO centered RANE lookalike( but not function-alike !) but will provide the necessary shaping so that you do not get this very flat response that sounds so different on TX from that which people are accustomed to (they are accustomed to at least a bit of preemphasis and some other shaping). The new EQ will be 10 bands or less and not work above 6 KHz. We will concentrate on those areas where SSB, AM, and FM needs the shaping. It will be implemented using 512 sample buffers to limit latency to 11 ms. This was NOT that different from the delay through the low frequency filters in the IIR version. Expect this out in preview 10. Your results are consistent with mine. We are taking cache hits 1/2 as often on average and the total memory bandwidth demands are down under 50% from before. Slow off chip (not cache) memory was a big limiting factor before. The use of floats in the optimized FFTW routines more than make up for the slightly loss of speed when the floating point unit is used to do floats/doubles. Many functions automatically promote to doubles so this can be a net loss. In this case, the overwhelming increase in speed in FFTW3 more than makes up for the occasional sin/cos promotion to double and then conversion back to float. Also, we just left the oscillators running as doubles so the phase wrap glitch occurs once a week! On my wife's sempron, with almost no cache, the lowered memory bandwidth demand dropped it from 65% to 25%. Thanks and again, our apologies for not testing the EQ after the change. Bob N4HY
Re: [Flexradio] #9 Formal Testing
Just think, we give you the choice. You can choose to either be a Luddite with the stable release or you can jump in the fray with the latest beta. You can even do both on the same day since you can keep every release on your computer.Some days I fell like a Luddite, some days I don't. ;) Oh and the Luddite stuff is what we document in the manual. Thanks to all of you who provide the great testing and feedback on the latest stuff. Next year we plan to make more frequent official releases, say every two to three months. 73, Gerald K5SDR FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of KD5NWA Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 6:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re: [Flexradio] #9 Formal Testing One additional difference, there is the stable release, and the Beta, the Beta is for the brave souls who choose to be experimented on. At 05:36 PM 12/23/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A step above the old Morey Goldberg method of testing. Morey was an eclectic engineer in Syracuse, NY who sold boards and kits for converting your TV into a Genuine VT100 DEC computer terminal and other such nonsense back in the 60s and 70s. Morey would come up with a design, have the boards made and then sell the kit to customers without ever having made a prototype. Testing was done over the phone by Morey having the customer try different things until the board would sort of work. I used to visit him once in a while because he was a font of knowledge and ideas and had a philosophy of life that was certainly not main stream. Kind of like an old hippy today. He had a heart of gold but was a terrible businessman and was always being chased by his creditors. Advertised in Wayne Green's Kilobyte Magazine in the wayback. My point! While Morey never really told anyone they were the first testers of his latest creation the word slowly got out and then people began to question him on his latest designs before they would buy. If a person had good knowledge of TTL logic and a some test equipment then Morey's stuff made a bit of sense because the hardware was VERY low cost. With a bit of troubleshooting and minor redesign you could make a terminal emulator real cheap. The difference here: We are told UP FRONT! You are part of a giant earth shaking experiment. There is an initiation fee. $1400 to buy the black box if you don't have the time/skill to roll your own. There are even some written instructions to help you get started. BUT! For the latest trick pony in the circus you get to learn all about the good and bad along with the creator of the pony. No instructions! Be thankful there are email addresses and the several forums to answer questions and complaints. Warning! You have to deal with the hay before and after the pony. Instructions for the home office. Eric1, please reach behind your computer and pull the plug from the wall. Go away and enjoy the holiday and leave us to our own devices for a few days. We'll be here when you get back. Maybe we will even have answered some of our own questions by then. Gerald, thanks again for a fresh challange in my long, interesting career in electronics. Bob McG, I love it! 73, Larry Taft, PE K2LT Bob McGwier wrote It is very formal. We write, test things, and then let you tell us what broke. ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Cecil Bayona KD5NWA www.qrpradio.com I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't; only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ... ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
[Flexradio] Formal Testing
I plan to don a Tux in the next few days, then try out the latest release. That will be my formal testing. Thank you to everyone who has contributed to the radio and software development this year. I have derived many hours of pleasure discovering and using the new capabilities and undocumented features (bugs). Its all good! Even though I am a mild mannered Child Psychiatrist by day, I am a electronics and radio technophile by night. It is almost a game with me now every time Jim Lux (or Bob, or Phil, or Eric, or etc.) writes about something, I findI find I have something new to look up (Google). It's amazing how much a non-professional (ham) can learn just casually following the posts. My education may be eclectic and spotty, but it runs deep in a few places thanks to the reflector and it's denizens. I not only have a better radio over time, but a continuing education experience, too. Best of the New Year to everyone! Rob K2UP
Re: [Flexradio] on filtering in general
At 04:30 PM 12/23/2005, Gerald Youngblood wrote: Jim, I think we are in violent agreement that the bulk of the specialized audio processing should be outside PowerSDR. We want to provide basic audio processing that will be useful to most of our customers. I believe that basic EQ functionality is needed to compensate for different microphones and operating conditions. However, don't need to provide recording studio type tools. Precisely.. you probably want a bit better than a tone control, but more than that is mass overkill. You have the ability right now to integrate other audio processing tools using VAC. This allows the transfer of audio between the processing program and PowerSDR using digital steams. Also, it is easy to set up CuBase, which comes with the FireBox to give you recording studio type processing right now. Indeed, although there might be a need somewhere down the road to have multiple audio i/o stream ports from the SDR software (i.e. raw I/Q at IF, baseband w/no processing, after/before processing), but I suspect there is some moderately convenient way to do this. The pro-sumer recording studio market drives low cost audio stream management. So what I am saying it that what you are suggesting is off the shelf today. You just have to take the time to set it up. There might be a hook or two that's not available (in the middle of the processing stream), but I agree in general.
[Flexradio] Formal, shmormal!
Hah! Thanks for the interesting discussion. Well as long as you keep putting out the betas, I'll keep loading them and using them. I love the new stuff - I'm having a blast with this thing! (Tonight I'm actually using the SDR as a spotter while receiving on a new tube regen that I've been breadboarding. It's my ubergeek meets luddite setup: leading-edge, 21st century SDR working next to a dual-triode regenerative receiver from the early 20th...) Mark The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen. ~Tommy Smothers -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gerald Youngblood Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 7:45 PM To: 'KD5NWA'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re: [Flexradio] #9 Formal Testing Just think, we give you the choice. You can choose to either be a Luddite with the stable release or you can jump in the fray with the latest beta. You can even do both on the same day since you can keep every release on your computer.Some days I fell like a Luddite, some days I don't. ;) Oh and the Luddite stuff is what we document in the manual. Thanks to all of you who provide the great testing and feedback on the latest stuff. Next year we plan to make more frequent official releases, say every two to three months. 73, Gerald K5SDR FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of KD5NWA Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 6:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re: [Flexradio] #9 Formal Testing One additional difference, there is the stable release, and the Beta, the Beta is for the brave souls who choose to be experimented on. At 05:36 PM 12/23/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A step above the old Morey Goldberg method of testing. Morey was an eclectic engineer in Syracuse, NY who sold boards and kits for converting your TV into a Genuine VT100 DEC computer terminal and other such nonsense back in the 60s and 70s. Morey would come up with a design, have the boards made and then sell the kit to customers without ever having made a prototype. Testing was done over the phone by Morey having the customer try different things until the board would sort of work. I used to visit him once in a while because he was a font of knowledge and ideas and had a philosophy of life that was certainly not main stream. Kind of like an old hippy today. He had a heart of gold but was a terrible businessman and was always being chased by his creditors. Advertised in Wayne Green's Kilobyte Magazine in the wayback. My point! While Morey never really told anyone they were the first testers of his latest creation the word slowly got out and then people began to question him on his latest designs before they would buy. If a person had good knowledge of TTL logic and a some test equipment then Morey's stuff made a bit of sense because the hardware was VERY low cost. With a bit of troubleshooting and minor redesign you could make a terminal emulator real cheap. The difference here: We are told UP FRONT! You are part of a giant earth shaking experiment. There is an initiation fee. $1400 to buy the black box if you don't have the time/skill to roll your own. There are even some written instructions to help you get started. BUT! For the latest trick pony in the circus you get to learn all about the good and bad along with the creator of the pony. No instructions! Be thankful there are email addresses and the several forums to answer questions and complaints. Warning! You have to deal with the hay before and after the pony. Instructions for the home office. Eric1, please reach behind your computer and pull the plug from the wall. Go away and enjoy the holiday and leave us to our own devices for a few days. We'll be here when you get back. Maybe we will even have answered some of our own questions by then. Gerald, thanks again for a fresh challange in my long, interesting career in electronics. Bob McG, I love it! 73, Larry Taft, PE K2LT Bob McGwier wrote It is very formal. We write, test things, and then let you tell us what broke. ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Cecil Bayona KD5NWA www.qrpradio.com I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't; only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ... ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz ___ FlexRadio mailing list
