Hi Roger,

Vy nice to hear from you ... I believe you are throwing not a stone 
in the pond but a lighted match in the petrol.... hi

I can share one of my ideas ... SDR still has a lot to pedal before 
it can respond to all requirements of a contester and VHF-SHFers 
looking for bouncing signals where IMD is important.

My few million $$$$ idea is to have one conversion to a "not too 
expensive commercial filters" IF, as an example: 10.7 MHz, usually 
with 20kHz BW.  From 10.7 MHz or the like you will need a strong QSD 
or possibly an I-Q Mixer (you could select Pericom PI5C3125 and 
74AC00 decoder (see Marco, IK1ODO QSD trial) or a SR40 V7 like mixer) 
converting to I-Q baseband.

You will need some intelligent front end control. The system will 
look at the widest possible bandwidth, when zooming into the 
interested signal, the IF filter will be inserted and the DDS or PLL 
oscillator will be tuned to the signal. Your BW now will be 20kHz in 
place of 100 or 250 or expected 400 kHz. A good audio card like Delta 
or better and your SDR software will give you all the power of 
filtering.

You could have a similar set-up for HF up to 50MHz with the best 
front end mixer … guess what ??? … A 2 or 3 transformers H-Mode mixer 
followed by a good diplexer and post mixer amp driving a good quality 
xtal filter (8 to 10 MHz)… followed by a QSD or I-Q Mixer and what 
necessary . In HF you may or may not need to have a very large BW to 
monitor, maybe on 28 and 50 MHz yes. 

I have tested a similar set up for HF and it works very nicely. I did 
not make any real measurement but I can send you a Winrad screen 
print tuned on 7MHz

These are ideas … good or bad … but you can still send $$$$ … hi. 

Maybe I am the one throwing the lighted match in the petrol 
thank….boooom !!!

BTW, I have replaced the second mixer with an I7SWX 2T H-Mode Mixer, 
and re arranged 2nd IF gain in an FT1000MP ... during a "strong" SSB 
contest with one splattering station at -3.5kHz and a clean one at 
+2.5kHz they never missed any signal (low) they could hear... no 
bubbling.

73

Gian
I7SWX


--- In [email protected], Roger Rehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello, All,
> 
> Bob and Alberto's comments on the 'quality' of sound in a DC-SDR 
> provide me to ask a generic question which I have been pondering 
for a 
> while now.  This forum has a lot of talent so I am asking it here 
first.
> 
> What was said about the exceptional 'clarity' of signals derived 
from 
> direct conversion SDRs has been my experience as well, whether the 
> radio was a simple homebrew design, a SoftRock, an SDR14, or 
even 'The 
> Time Machine'.  It has also been true whether I was using Linrad, 
> PowerSDR, Winrad, Rocky, KGKSDR, Spectraview, etc. as the software 
> backend.  The 'old-style-radios I used for comparison were FT1000MP 
Mk 
> V and Elecraft K2 [and before that IC735 and IC970, but these last 
2 
> are not really in the same class at all].
> 
> So the sound effect is not limited to one type of hardware or one 
> particular piece of software.  I agree that it likely relates to 
the 
> lack of crystal filters, etc.  Unfortunately, in some situations 
these 
> filters seem to be a 'necessity' and that is the reason for this 
> email/question, as I ponder which course to take as I upgrade my 
> [contest] station here.
> 
> The problem that has made me unable to go totally SDR, and for 
which I 
> really wish I had a solution, is that I do weak signal contest work 
[50 
> MHz to 24 GHz] but live in an environment where during a [VHF and 
up] 
> contest I have more than 1 full-legal-power-on-multiple-bands 
station 
> operating within a few miles of me [one a multi op].  The extremely 
> high RF levels from inband signals from these stations trash the 
front 
> end of any radio [SDR or not] that I have had available to me that 
> doesn't have a narrow roofing filter [1st IF filter] to greatly 
> attenuate the inband signal [as long as it is outside the roofing 
> filter].  Given that the multiop stations usually have the lower 
four 
> bands [50-432 MHz] continuously occupied at 1.5 kW output, this is 
a 
> great problem on these bands.  On the bands above 432 MHz it is of 
> course not a problem.  My FT1000MP has a 4 kHz roofing filter 
instead 
> of the stock 12 kHz filter, and the improvement this gives under 
these 
> contest conditions is tremendous, as long as the strong stations 
are 
> not within 4-5 kHz or less of where I want to operate.  The K2's 
> variable bandwidth crystal filter also does a very good job and 
before 
> I put the narrow roofing filter into the FT1000MP the K2 ran rings 
> around it in terms of strong signal immunity.  The SDR's fold up in 
> this environment with spurious signals, increased noise, etc.
> 
> I wonder if a hybrid approach such as something with an 
architecture 
> like the Orion I or II might offer the best of both worlds in terms 
of 
> performance in the environment described.  The Ten-Tec Orion has a 
> conventional front end and what is arguably the best roofing filter 
> arrangement of any commercial conventional radio and follows that 
with 
> digital processing.  Might this be the best way of achieving 
> outstanding, 'bullet-proof' receiver performance?
> 
> One of the great attractions of the SDR radios from an operational 
> standpoint is the fact that they have wideband displays that from a 
> EMEer or contester's perspective are extremely useful for showing 
just 
> 'what is going on' away from the operating frequency and on other 
> bands.  During a contest I constantly monitor bandscopes on  all of 
> 50-432 MHz simultaneously for this reason.  The roofing filter 
approach 
> of minimizing the signal that gets thru to the processing stages 
seems 
> diametrically opposed to the use of a wideband display and 'doesn't 
> fit' with the direct conversion model.
> 
> One could achieve perhaps [for a station with my requirement] the 
best 
> of both worlds with an Orion-type receiver with conventional front 
end 
> with very good performance and narrow roofing filters, and stealing 
> tiny bits of time to step the LO to sweep the band and generate a 
> bandscope waterfall that way.  Or if one designed the radio with 
the 
> 'usual' 2 receivers, using the second receiver hardware [when not 
in 
> dual-receive mode] to do the same.
> 
> Of course with each of these designs, best-possible performance of 
the 
> RF preamp [if used], First Mixer, and Post-Mixer amp is needed, and 
> these stages must be designed and implemented so that they are not 
the 
> limiting factors to strong signal performance.
> 
> So my question is this.  Is it possible to design a direct-
conversion 
> SDR with wideband display that will under the strong signal 
conditions 
> that I have described offer the same protection from overload from 
> strong signals while trying to listen to weak [and other strong] 
ones 
> that architectures such as the Orion II or the modified FT1000MP 
for 
> example provide?  Will the 'best' implementation of a DC SDR always 
> suffer IN THIS REGARD in comparison to the 'best' implementation of 
a 
> receiver using narrow 'roofing' filters?
> 
> I ask this question now because [1] I just finished a contest 
weekend 
> and all of these issues are [too] fresh in my mind, and [2] I am in 
the 
> process of deciding whether to move for my contest station to [1] 
> multiple Orion II's [operated using N4PY software so all can be 
> operated from a single computer screen] or [2] Multiple 
> SDR-1000/2000/etc, or [3] a combination of the two.  It might for 
> example be optimal [for a VHF contest station] to use an Orion for 
each 
> of the lower 4 bands where strong signal performance is paramount, 
and 
> then use an SDR for 903 MHz and up.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your collective wisdom, and
> 
> 73,
> 
> Roger Rehr
> W3SZ
> Roger Rehr
> W3SZ
> http://www.nitehawk.com/w3sz
>


Reply via email to