Another reason for using IF higher than 0 Hz is the high inherent
noise level of typical transistors and opamps at low frequencies (so
called 1/f-noise). This and the leakage of the VFO signals made me to
move away from the zero-IF in my early switching (and Tayloe)  mixer
experiments. Fortunately, before spending too much time for
re-inventing the wheel came Gerald's famous first article in QSX - and
here I am!

Now is the time to modify the wheel!

73,
Ahti OH2RZ

On 21/05/06, Frank Brickle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The DSP software is already capable of 0 Hz IF, and has been since its
> earliest version. IIRC the 11025 Hz IF is primarily a consequence of the
> frequency response of typical soundcards, which start rolling off
> somewhere in the vicinity of 200-300 Hz.
>
> 73
> Frank
> AB2KT
>
> Peter Martinez wrote:
> >>From G3PLX:
> >
> > The software that comes with the SDR1000 uses an 11.025kHz intermediate
> > frequency. I understand the reasons for doing it this way, but even before
> > the SDR1000 appeared I was doing software radio with an I.F. of zero. By
> > this I mean that the sine and cosine RF oscillators were set right in the
> > middle of the wanted signal, not offset by 11kHz.  This may sound impossible
> > to those who were brought up with analogue RF, but that's because it could
> > never be done with analogue circuitry. With DSP it's actually easier to have
> > the 'IF' frequency down in the audio band than to push it up where you can't
> > hear it.
> >
> > The big advantage of zero IF is that the 22kHz image response problem
> > vanishes. Any slight amplitude or phasing unbalance in the Tayloe sampler
> > just results in an equally-slight amount of in-band distortion. The
> > strongest image-frequency signal you ever need to reject is the wanted
> > signal itself. You don't need to worry about a much stronger unwanted signal
> > 22kHz up the band.
> >
> > When I got the SDR1000 kit (I got a very early one), I used it with this
> > technique, and the results were excellent, except for one thing. It took me
> > a while to trace the problem, but I found it in the end and the cause was a
> > surprise.  The problem showed as noise around the centre-frequency of all
> > received signals, but it varied across the bands, and was absent when I
> > unplugged the antenna. It was so bad that it made the receiver unusable on
> > some bands with some antennas. But if I used the SDR1000 to tap-off and
> > demodulate the intermediate-frequency of another receiver, it worked
> > perfectly.
> >
> > The cause was oscillator radiation. The DDS oscillator (right in the middle
> > of the wanted signal) was radiating, intermodulating with all kinds of
> > low-frequency noise sources external to the receiver, and the resulting
> > unwanted products (either side of the oscillator frequency) were re-radiated
> > into the antenna. The effect is well-known to anyone who has ever
> > experimented with home-brew direct-conversion receivers, where it usually
> > shows as a raw power-line buzz in the speaker.  It's possible that this
> > effect may well have shown in the early work on SDR and it may have been one
> > reason for offsetting the passband by 11kHz in the present software.
> >
> > The fix is to stop the local oscillator radiation. Screening helps a lot but
> > another way is to add an RF stage, or configure the receiver as a superhet
> > with the Tayloe sampler at the I.F. frequency.  My early SDR1000 kit didn't
> > have a pre-amp and I understand the current kits do. The local oscillator
> > radiation is probably considerably lower on the present kits, so the zero-IF
> > technique would probably work a lot better than it does on mine.
> >
> > Has anyone here who is writing his own SDR software tried this on the latest
> > hardware?  I can provide more details of the zero-IF technique if required.
> > All the well-known modes can be implemented this way, both for receive and
> > transmit.  Maybe the present SDR software could be patched to implement
> > zero-IF, or my own zero-IF software could be run in parallel on another
> > soundcard.  Would anyone like to have a go?
> >
> > 73
> > Peter
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > FlexRadio mailing list
> > FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> > http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> > Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/
> > FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FlexRadio mailing list
> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/
> FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com
>

_______________________________________________
FlexRadio mailing list
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archive Link: http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/
FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com

Reply via email to