My intent was not to emulate the exact H/W and its problems, but the APIs used (eg, programs using TinyFSK send [ , then text and ] to end the TX). I know TinyFSK has issues. But I was not intending that Elecraft copy the problems. I just wanted something similar to what TinyFSK does ( send a '[' to start transmit, send characters, send ']' to end). It could even be something different. Just something other than having to string together KY macros which doesn't seem to work well with software other than the K3 utility in conversation mode.
As to the emulating of the winkeyer, I can't comment too much on it as I'm not a CW guy nor a user of a winkeyer product. If it is tough to get a good emulation on it, then it may not be a good candidate. I can live with that, others may have different opinion. The intent is to reduce the number of cables and boxes involved. One cable from the K4 to the computer and I get everything I need to do every digital mode that can be generated on a computer). In addition, I don't have to rely on the Windows machine to do any thing but send data characters to the machine at rates faster than the radio can put it out on the air (e.g send RTTY characters at 9600 baud for 45.45 output). That ensures, I'm not at the mercy of Windows stalling on a character send due its lack of being able to do anything with determinism. That's why I'm. not a fan of using windows keying a line to generate FSK. Too many non real time issues to have the guarantee. My goal is as perfect a(n) RTTY signal as I can get when I'm using that mode. I've been looking at the TinyFSK code to see if I can fix the issues i have with it - I've already found one bug in the software (500 doesn't fit in 8 bits). But that project got put on hold when K4 was announced with the hope I wasn't going to need it. But if I need it to get a near perfect 45.45 baud, I'll resurrect it and make it work. The little arduinos should be more than capable. If not with the original code, I'll put a better RTOS on it. As to taking business away from Mortty and Winkeyer, Is Elecraft wrong for taking business from the SDR guys because they put that capability in their radios? Is it wrong that I don't need to buy remote rig anymore? Again, no. That's two businesses that loose out because of the K4. And I was considering the purchase of both of those up until the K4 was announced. It's the nature of business - adapt or die. So far Elecraft has done well adapting. From what I see the K4 is a great example of adapting. They listen to their customers and to date they can see the handwriting on the wall when things change (touchscreen with knobs, SDR, Ethernet, remote capability all built in). As an example of listening, I can personally attest to it. When I chatted with Eric at Dayton about the K4, I gave him an idea for the machine. It was good enough that he stopped chatting, put a note in his phone and asked me not to patent it. I don't think he was kidding either. Maybe he was, but it did make me feel good. I just hope that idea made it into the radio. Joe, KO8V > On Jul 20, 2020, at 12:52, Bob Wilson, N6TV <n...@arrl.net> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 7:03 AM Joe DeVincentis <j...@ko8v.net > <mailto:j...@ko8v.net>> wrote: > Personally, I'd like to see the K4 support something like the TinyFSK > protocol for doing RTTY. > > There's really no urgent reason to do this once the KY host command is > improved to allow message stacking with interrupt capability. If you want to > use TinyFSK (which has its own problems), connect a Mortty to the K4 ACC > port, same as you would on a K3. If you don't want to solder your own DE-15 > connector, or if your ACC port is already occupied, use a Y-BOX > <https://bit.ly/Y-BOX> plus 3.5mm stereo to dual RCA cable to connect Mortty > to K3 or K4. I have a few of both still in stock. It will take a few weeks > to order more boards if there is sufficient demand. > > It could present multiple serial ports. one for CAT, one for FSK and one for > Keying. > > This is already in plan. The K4 provides two virtual serial ports via the > USB cable (FTDI), one legacy 9-pin serial port, plus the 15-pin ACC port. > Any of them may be used for FSK keying, PTT, and CW keying, using MMTTY or > your logging software. This is keying via TXD, DTR, or RTS pins, with no > external hardware required (unless using ACC pins). EXTFSK will be required > on the virtual serial ports. The 9-pin legacy port will not require EXTFSK > if your PC serial port or USB-to-Serial adapter doesn't require it (example: > Edgeport/4). > > The FSK could emulate tinyFSK and the keyer could emulate the K1EL keyers. > That way programs don't need to fight over who gets the serial ports. > > There will be no more fights over the serial port because the K4 has more > than one, and they will operate independently and in parallel (unlike Icom > rigs, which provide one and only one virtual serial port pin at a time for > PTT keying). > > TinyFSK has a problem. Using it with MMTTY and a Mortty, try the "send > RYRYRY... forever" macro while using TinyFSK.FSK. Hear the problem? It > hesitates every 32 characters or so. So its timing is not as "perfect" as > claimed, at least not with that configuration. > > While I despise the following phrase as a SW guy (specifically embedded real > time operating systems): Hey, it's just S/W. I can see this as very doable > in the K4 given what I know about the architecture to date.. Much harder in > the K3s. > > As a software guy, you can appreciate that it is impossible to perfectly > emulate someone else's code (or chip) if you have no access to the source > code, and only work from the external API. Lots of devices have attempted to > emulate the WinKey interface, but none of them are 100% compatible with the > chip. This includes RemoteRig boxes, the YCCC SO2R Box, the Mortty, etc. > None of them will pass the WKTEST program > (https://www.hamcrafters2.com/WKTESTX.html > <https://www.hamcrafters2.com/WKTESTX.html>), last time I tried. The > RemoteRig emulator works OK with N1MM+, but not with Win-Test or DXLog.net > (unless you select a unique option). These programs all use the WinKey chip > differently. They work fine with a real chip not with the emulators. The > only devices that pass the WinKey 100% compatibility tests are devices that > use a real WinKey chip inside, such as those provided by the microHAM devices. > > Retooling the K4 to put a real WinKey chip or Mortty hardware inside, or > attempting emulation via firmware, could delay K4 shipment or distract from > other higher priority issues. It could also raise the price a bit. I don't > think anyone wants to see either. > > Finally, there's no reason for Elecraft to try to take sales opportunities > away from the manufacturers of WinKey and Mortty devices, is there? > > 73, > Bob, N6TV > https://bit.ly/Y-BOX <https://bit.ly/Y-BOX> ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
