Re: [digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-22 Thread Rein Couperus
I use a CHEAP usb sound card adaptor ( 8 EUROS) on one of my old 
Dell laptops which has no soundcard sucessfully for pskmail/puppy linux.

Rein PA0R

I would be interested to know if Linux even supports these cheap USB sound 
devices? I did run Linux in the shack for a while and unfortunately sold one 
of the original RigExpert devices because it wasn't usable under Linux and at 
the time I though I wouldn't revert back to Windows. But in the end I did as 
apart from Fldigi most of the ham software on Linux is second rate compared to 
that available for Windows and I got fed up at not being able to try some 
newly announced thing that came only in a Windows version.

Julian, G4ILO

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rik van Riel  wrote:

 On 08/14/2010 02:15 PM, g4ilo wrote:
  Well, that isn't my experience. Regardless of the chip set used, it's the 
  entire product including the drivers that will determine the performance.
 
  My suspicion is that these devices run at a fixed sampling rate, and that 
  resampling to the rate requested by the software is carried out by the 
  drivers.
 
 Not an issue for me since I run Linux and fldigi.  The digital
 mode program fldigi simply gets the audio off the device at one
 of the native sampling rates of the device and does good quality
 sample rate conversion internally.
 
 I believe you if you have seen the Windows drivers for the device
 do a terrible job of sample rate conversion. However, I'm not going
 to experience that issue myself and am quite happy with the device
 in my setup :)
 
  Personally I don't think it is worth economizing in this area.
 
 That I can agree with.
 
 -- 
 All rights reversed.







http://www.obriensweb.com/digispotter.html
Chat, Skeds, and Spots all in one (resize to suit)

Facebook= http://www.facebook.com/pages/digitalradio/123270301037522

Yahoo! Groups Links





Re: [digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-22 Thread chas
g4ilo wrote:
 I would be interested to know if Linux even supports these cheap USB sound 
 devices? I did run Linux in the shack for a while and unfortunately sold one 
 of the original RigExpert devices because it wasn't usable under Linux and at 
 the time I though I wouldn't revert back to Windows. But in the end I did as 
 apart from Fldigi most of the ham software on Linux is second rate compared 
 to that available for Windows and I got fed up at not being able to try some 
 newly announced thing that came only in a Windows version.
 
 Julian, G4ILO
 


that above is EXACTLY my complaint and major, pet peeve.. I would love to run 
my digital off my MacPro but none of the software for Winmor, MixW, Telnet 
has been ported to OS-X that I am aware of.

result is, I am either sneaker netting files from the Mac to my doze laptop 
or sending it to my //MARS/ telnet account then copying the data into an EEI 
or whatever.  sucks.  BUT, I feel the same way about what I consider the best 
email program (Agent by Forte) and my favorite photo program (ACDSee).

So, as long as those are in Doze, I have resigned myself to running second 
rate software on my Mac IF I can even find something comparable.

thanks for the thread.  If anyone finds a comparable Mac OS-X set of digital 
programs to replace the MixW, Telnet and Winmor, please post it to this list.

to the point of a sound card, I like the SL/USB so much, I bought one for 
each of my transceivers.  so, I can unplug one from the T-41 and plug in 
another, depending on my needs.  Since I got my Pro3, I find it hard to go 
back to my 480HX except for QSY checking for propagation.

73

chas

-- 
ch...@texas.net   k5dam  Houston, TX

http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member14013.png
--


Re: [digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-21 Thread Rik van Riel
On 08/14/2010 02:15 PM, g4ilo wrote:
 Well, that isn't my experience. Regardless of the chip set used, it's the 
 entire product including the drivers that will determine the performance.

 My suspicion is that these devices run at a fixed sampling rate, and that 
 resampling to the rate requested by the software is carried out by the 
 drivers.

Not an issue for me since I run Linux and fldigi.  The digital
mode program fldigi simply gets the audio off the device at one
of the native sampling rates of the device and does good quality
sample rate conversion internally.

I believe you if you have seen the Windows drivers for the device
do a terrible job of sample rate conversion. However, I'm not going
to experience that issue myself and am quite happy with the device
in my setup :)

 Personally I don't think it is worth economizing in this area.

That I can agree with.

-- 
All rights reversed.


[digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-15 Thread graham787
Yes the  11K  sample  rate may be a  problem with the  'new' time  critical  
modes, wspr used to  have a sample rate problem where the  card rate reduced 
the 'tx' time and caused problems with  sync frames  , the othere week while  
running  Ros MF-1/7 on 500 Khz , local decodesd where scrabled , as if there  
was -rf- in the  audio.. after checking  and  finding all was fine..spotted 
that digipan had pulled the card clock to 11K , re set the  driver to 48k and 
all was fine, my st5  dident have these  problems 

G.. 



--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, g4ilo jul...@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Peter Frenning peter@ wrote:
 
 
   The Signalink USB (which I recommend myself with the caveats on my
  homepage), uses one of the same Cheap chips used by the low cost general
  purpose adapters, in this case the USB Audio Codec. As a class of
  devices you are certainly correct in your assumption about the drivers,
  but again, as a class of devices, they support all std. sampling rates
  from 48000 and down, with one notable exception: 11025 (this became a de
  facto std many years ago when it was the fastest rate these newfangled
  devices (i think the first was a SoundBlaster 8-bit adapter) would do),
  many many applications default to this, and for compatibility reasons
  its being fudged in the Windows driver SW rather than aborting the
  requesting application. Funny enough (or not as things may be) Linux
  drivers don't do this and abort any application requesting 11.025 from
  one of these devices! (this is the only case I know of where resampling
  comes into play).
  
  Anyway, if your purpose isn't high quality HiFi or ultra high sampling
  rate for SDR radios, i can recommend the cheaps sound cards - get real,
  they have more than sufficient dynamic range, and you only need a
  frequency response of some 500-2500 Hz anyway!
  
 
 But there is more than frequency response and dynamic range required to 
 preserve the information needed to decode digital modes.
 
 Your statement that the cheap devices do not support 11.025kHz sample rate 
 may have something to do with why I found them so poor as that is the (fixed) 
 rate used by the AGWPE soundcard packet modem. It is also the default rate 
 used by MixW.
 
 As I said before, I could see the signal on the waterfall but it was just not 
 being decoded. Really, if you want to be confident you have the best chance 
 of decoding that weak signal it is better to be using a good quality device. 
 After all, you spend hundreds if not thousands of pounds / dollars on the 
 transceiver, why penny pinch on the sound card?
 
 Julian, G4ILO





[digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-14 Thread g4ilo
I had one that looks exactly like that though it was sold under another name, 
and I could not decode 300baud packet at all with it. When used to play back 
recordings of very weak EME CW all I could hear was band noise.

I did try it on my Echolink node for a bit with no apparent problems. So my 
opinion is that while these cheap USB sound devices may work fine for normal 
computer audio they are not a good idea at all for digital modes. You may not 
even realize why it isn't working, or what weak signals you are missing.

Julian, G4ILO

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rik van Riel r...@... wrote:

 The Asterisk (VOIP) people have even written up instructions
 on how to create a PTT circuit with this device.  However,
 I am just using the radio's VOX mode for now :)
 





Re: [digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-14 Thread Peter Frenning
lør, 14 08 2010 kl. 13:57 +, skrev g4ilo:

 I had one that looks exactly like that though it was sold under another name, 
 and I could not decode 300baud packet at all with it. When used to play back 
 recordings of very weak EME CW all I could hear was band noise.
 
 I did try it on my Echolink node for a bit with no apparent problems. So my 
 opinion is that while these cheap USB sound devices may work fine for normal 
 computer audio they are not a good idea at all for digital modes. You may not 
 even realize why it isn't working, or what weak signals you are missing.
 
 Julian, G4ILO
 

In my experience most of the inexpensive USB sound devices I have tested
contains either the C-media, USB Headphone Set or USB Audio Codec
chip sets, all three yields a signal to noise+signal span of at least
100dB (I've seen as high as 112dB). In any case they are more than good
enough for the most demanding digital modes - even EME!


Vy 73 de OZ1PIF/5Q2M, Peter 


*
** Genius is one per cent inspiration, **
** and ninety-nine per cent**
** perspiration.   **
**   -- Thomas A. Edison   **
*
email: peter(no-spam filler)@frenning.dk
http://www.frenning.dk/oz1pif.htm
Ph. +45 4619 3239
Snailmail:
Peter Frenning
Ternevej 23
DK-4130 Viby Sj.
Denmark
*


[digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-14 Thread g4ilo
Well, that isn't my experience. Regardless of the chip set used, it's the 
entire product including the drivers that will determine the performance.

My suspicion is that these devices run at a fixed sampling rate, and that 
resampling to the rate requested by the software is carried out by the drivers. 
Resampling can be done accurately, at high CPU cost, or less accurately but 
more quickly. Any resampling is undesirable, but its effect may not be very 
noticeable with the slower digital modes because if a weak signal doesn't 
decode you may think that's just because it is weak.

Personally I don't think it is worth economizing in this area. And no, I don't 
have shares in SignalLink.

Julian, G4ILO

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Peter Frenning pe...@... wrote:

 In my experience most of the inexpensive USB sound devices I have tested
 contains either the C-media, USB Headphone Set or USB Audio Codec
 chip sets, all three yields a signal to noise+signal span of at least
 100dB (I've seen as high as 112dB). In any case they are more than good
 enough for the most demanding digital modes - even EME!
 
 




[digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-14 Thread g4ilo
I hadn't heard of this software.

I have had two of these one pound USB eBay sound devices. One was so poor you 
could see the noise it generated on the waterfall. I tossed it.

The second one I bought to use for computer audio so I could free up the 
on-board sound card for digimodes. After a week, whenever I plugged it in 
Windows threw up an A USB device has had a serious failure message. I tossed 
it.

Julian, G4ILO

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, J. Moen j...@... wrote:

 On another reflector, Jonathan Naylor G4KLX talks about his D-Star Client 
 software which is a soundcard program to operate D-Star through an analog 
 radio.  Since the fancier soundcards and even USB fobs typically have extra 
 circuitry that ends up filtering the lowest audio frequencies that are used 
 by gmsk, he recommends getting the cheapest and simplest USB sound fob you 
 can find.  His own fob was purchased on eBay for 1 pound.  
 
 I suspect the various digital modes have different audio requirements, and 
 the gmsk requirement represents one extreme.  Perhaps some of the very weak 
 signal modes require a sound device with minimal distortion and may represent 
 the other extreme.
 




Re: [digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-14 Thread Peter Frenning
lør, 14 08 2010 kl. 18:15 +, skrev g4ilo:

 Well, that isn't my experience. Regardless of the chip set used, it's the 
 entire product including the drivers that will determine the performance.
 
 My suspicion is that these devices run at a fixed sampling rate, and that 
 resampling to the rate requested by the software is carried out by the 
 drivers. Resampling can be done accurately, at high CPU cost, or less 
 accurately but more quickly. Any resampling is undesirable, but its effect 
 may not be very noticeable with the slower digital modes because if a weak 
 signal doesn't decode you may think that's just because it is weak.
 
 Personally I don't think it is worth economizing in this area. And no, I 
 don't have shares in SignalLink.
 
 Julian, G4ILO

 The Signalink USB (which I recommend myself with the caveats on my
homepage), uses one of the same Cheap chips used by the low cost general
purpose adapters, in this case the USB Audio Codec. As a class of
devices you are certainly correct in your assumption about the drivers,
but again, as a class of devices, they support all std. sampling rates
from 48000 and down, with one notable exception: 11025 (this became a de
facto std many years ago when it was the fastest rate these newfangled
devices (i think the first was a SoundBlaster 8-bit adapter) would do),
many many applications default to this, and for compatibility reasons
its being fudged in the Windows driver SW rather than aborting the
requesting application. Funny enough (or not as things may be) Linux
drivers don't do this and abort any application requesting 11.025 from
one of these devices! (this is the only case I know of where resampling
comes into play).

Anyway, if your purpose isn't high quality HiFi or ultra high sampling
rate for SDR radios, i can recommend the cheaps sound cards - get real,
they have more than sufficient dynamic range, and you only need a
frequency response of some 500-2500 Hz anyway!



Vy 73 de OZ1PIF/5Q2M, Peter 


*
** Genius is one per cent inspiration, **
** and ninety-nine per cent**
** perspiration.   **
**   -- Thomas A. Edison   **
*
email: peter(no-spam filler)@frenning.dk
http://www.frenning.dk/oz1pif.htm
Ph. +45 4619 3239
Snailmail:
Peter Frenning
Ternevej 23
DK-4130 Viby Sj.
Denmark
*


[digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-14 Thread g4ilo


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Peter Frenning pe...@... wrote:


  The Signalink USB (which I recommend myself with the caveats on my
 homepage), uses one of the same Cheap chips used by the low cost general
 purpose adapters, in this case the USB Audio Codec. As a class of
 devices you are certainly correct in your assumption about the drivers,
 but again, as a class of devices, they support all std. sampling rates
 from 48000 and down, with one notable exception: 11025 (this became a de
 facto std many years ago when it was the fastest rate these newfangled
 devices (i think the first was a SoundBlaster 8-bit adapter) would do),
 many many applications default to this, and for compatibility reasons
 its being fudged in the Windows driver SW rather than aborting the
 requesting application. Funny enough (or not as things may be) Linux
 drivers don't do this and abort any application requesting 11.025 from
 one of these devices! (this is the only case I know of where resampling
 comes into play).
 
 Anyway, if your purpose isn't high quality HiFi or ultra high sampling
 rate for SDR radios, i can recommend the cheaps sound cards - get real,
 they have more than sufficient dynamic range, and you only need a
 frequency response of some 500-2500 Hz anyway!
 

But there is more than frequency response and dynamic range required to 
preserve the information needed to decode digital modes.

Your statement that the cheap devices do not support 11.025kHz sample rate may 
have something to do with why I found them so poor as that is the (fixed) rate 
used by the AGWPE soundcard packet modem. It is also the default rate used by 
MixW.

As I said before, I could see the signal on the waterfall but it was just not 
being decoded. Really, if you want to be confident you have the best chance of 
decoding that weak signal it is better to be using a good quality device. After 
all, you spend hundreds if not thousands of pounds / dollars on the 
transceiver, why penny pinch on the sound card?

Julian, G4ILO



[digitalradio] Re: Good USB sound card ?

2010-08-13 Thread graham787
Thanks for  the  link , 

G.. 

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, GregCT n1...@... wrote:

 
 
 This is the one I use, the CreativeMedia X-Fi. Its a little bit larger that 
 today's standard 'thumb' drives, but does double as one. Works well with the 
 rigblaster as well as other 'standard' sound duties for the PC and laptop, 
 (voice chat, music etc).  
 
 http://us.store.creative.com/Sound-Blaster-XFi-Go/M/B002651ZNI.htm
 
 I noticed that most of the replies seem to be aimed at all in one digital 
 interfaces that include soundcards, this one is a stand alone sound card.
 73
 Greg
 N1KPW
 
 --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, graham787 g0nbd@ wrote:
 
  Looks like theRDX-150-EF  has been  dropped
  
  any ideas on a 'good'  usb card for  data  use ??
  
  Tnx - G.