RE: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes????
To reiterate the original poster's comment, it is the COMPLEXITY of the multi-mode programs that he was trying to avoid, and with that stated, I agree with his thinking. The multitude of buttons, tabs, logs, maps, etc etc in such as Ham Radio Deluxe can be quite overwhelming when compared to the elegant simplicity of such as AirLink Express , if all you want to do is PSK31 or RTTY basic communications Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of g4ilo Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 3:53 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes But you are not forced to use any of the modes in a multimode program. I use Fldigi, but I use PSK most of the time, Olivia a little, MFSK and RTTY on rare occasions. I have never used any of the other modes. In the latest version I believe you can even hide the modes you aren't interested in so they aren't listed on the menu. Julian, G4ILO
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes...
In my view, the SignaLink USB interface is the way to go, both for good operation, and simplicity of installation. Also, I have found AirLink Express to be the most simple program for PSK31 or RTTY…. Even compared to Digipan . Of course one ham’s simplicity may be another ham’s complexity… and personal choices vary widely here on this. Still, I recommend AirLinkExpress be tried first. Regarding that TS-2000 …. I can only suggest the manual be read repeatedly while playing with the radio so the operator can become familiar with it. It is a fairly complex radio, albeit a good one. 73 Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of greathoun...@aol.com Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 10:22 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes... I guess I just feel into the newby bucket. Just got off the phone with a buddy, I guess I got talked into learning to do psk31. He said he was told to get a Signallink thingy. Is that the best easy one to get, or is there better? I see that you list Airlink Express, is that a easy one to learn? I have a k'wood TS2000 and a Flex 5000 That I'm trying to fumble thru.. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Oh, he doesn't know how to run it either, and I think he wants me to help him ;-) Thanks Bill N8VWI In a message dated 6/18/2010 1:10:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, k5...@yahoo.com writes: The multitude of buttons, tabs, logs, maps, etc etc in such as Ham Radio Deluxe can be quite overwhelming when compared to the elegant simplicity of such as AirLink Express , if all you want to do is PSK31 or RTTY basic communications Overwhelming yes, but also can get in your way. The same is true of logging programs. This is why I am writing my own logging program with simplicity in mind, but with all the features I want and need. It seems to me that Ham Radio Deluxe and other ham programs ( I am not picking on HRD, it is a great program ) could allow the user to go a setup area and turn off a lot of stuff that only a few users would ever need. Some programs are starting to do this as users demand more features. I am one of those who likes FLDIGI-ROL. This program is not overwhelming and still has most features that one needs. I use HRD and other programs occasionally but still come back to FLDIG verison ROL. With me it's all about compromise. Writing software that everyone likes is NOT easy. I know I have been doing it for many years. I agree with both Ed and Julian, good posts. K5WGM --- On Fri, 6/18/10, Ed G huckleberr...@q.com wrote: From: Ed G huckleberr...@q.com Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, June 18, 2010, 10:43 AM To reiterate the original poster’s comment, it is the COMPLEXITY of the multi-mode programs that he was trying to avoid, and with that stated, I agree with his thinking. The multitude of buttons, tabs, logs, maps, etc etc in such as Ham Radio Deluxe can be quite overwhelming when compared to the elegant simplicity of such as AirLink Express , if all you want to do is PSK31 or RTTY basic communications Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:digitalradi o...@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of g4ilo Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 3:53 AM To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes But you are not forced to use any of the modes in a multimode program. I use Fldigi, but I use PSK most of the time, Olivia a little, MFSK and RTTY on rare occasions. I have never used any of the other modes. In the latest version I believe you can even hide the modes you aren't interested in so they aren't listed on the menu. Julian, G4ILO image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes...
In my opinion any of those radios would be fine for digital work. I am not familiar enough with either to suggest which would be best for digital. Perhaps others here can help….. Ed K7AAT Thanks Ed, No I've had the TS2k for quite a while, so I can fumble thru it. But learning the Flex 5k Is a thrill. Anything with a manual over 200 pgs. I keep it handy, and they both do. I'll have to wait for the first, a week and a half, to get the Signal Link USB and will do a google for that software. Besides I have 3 Dr appointments next week, one even out of town...Thanks again...Bill N8VWI PS I do have a Yaesu 890AT and a Icom 745, would either of those be easier, in your opinion? I want to keep one radio for this alone.
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes????
Jon, your argument is certainly a valid one, but does not take into account those hams who only want to work one or two digital modes, PSK31 and RTTY being the primary choice. I was in that boat once, too, but am just recently beginning to agree with your view on this and have become a neophyte HRD user. I've got a heck of a lot to learn on that program, but I now realize the benefits of doing so. Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of JonP Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 1:49 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Individual software programs for various digital modes I would argue the other way. When you go to individual software programs, it means that you have to learn the user interface, set-up, and operation of a number of different programs with a number of different interfaces and a number of different approaches as to how software should be written/how software should interact with the user. When you go to a suite, there is consistency. You learn it once instead of having to learn it four or five or six times. I started with individual programs such as WinPSK, MMTTY, etc. It was a pain. I was always doing something wrong because I had just come from a different program that worked differently. And if I wanted to switch modes because I saw a promising signal ... I eventually stumbled on DM780. You only have to set up those modes that you use, and setting up an individual mode in DM780 is no more difficult than setting up that mode in an individual program. AND, the basic stuff requires only one set up one time -- basics such as my rig, my call, how I want the waterfall to look, and my macros. Especially my macros. It's very nice to have consistency so that I know a particular macro will do the same thing every time on every mode. BTW, I don't do computer control of the rig. Jon KB1QBZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com , JLA johnne...@... wrote: Hi All, I've been lurking a while and I've not found a clear (to me anyway) discussion of small, individual digital mode software programs, e.g., one program for RTTY; one program for Olivia, etc, etc... image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [digitalradio] Individual software programs for various digital modes????
Johnne, I would suggest you check out AirLink Express if you want a simple, intuitive, and elegant program for PSK31. While this program also does RTTY and CW, I find it far more simple and easy to use than any other program I have used, including Digipan. Unfortunately I do not think anyone is writing simple programs for the other more esoteric digital modes. Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of JLA Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 1:40 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Individual software programs for various digital modes Hi All, I've been lurking a while and I've not found a clear (to me anyway) discussion of small, individual digital mode software programs, e.g., one program for RTTY; one program for Olivia, etc, etc... I have a 7200 and I am not at all interested in computer control of my rig. Neither am I interested in a software suite with a zillion bells and whistles that I will never, ever use. I am neither a contester nor DX-er. I doubt very, very seriously if I will ever work any digital modes other than Olivia and RTTY. My only current digital software program is MRP40 which is FB for QRQ CW especially in bad/weak signal conditions. It is worth every penny to me as I can not copy CW at the faster rates (25+ wpm.) Any guidance/advice anyone has will be greatly appreciated. 73 de W1YB Johnne Lee image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [digitalradio] Individual software programs for various digital modes????
Jon, Do you REALLY consider Ham Radio Deluxe/DM780 to be small, individual digital mode software programs ??? Because that is what Johnne is looking for. I consider HRD/DM780 to be software suites with a zillion bells and whistles, which is exactly what Johnne is NOT looking for. Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jon Maguire Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 2:29 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Individual software programs for various digital modes Johnne Lee, 2 that come to mind are Ham Radio Deluxe/DM780 and fldigi. Google/Bing them and you won't be dissapointed. Both are outstanding and contain a plethora of modes. 73... Jon W1MNK On 6/15/2010 4:40 PM, JLA wrote: Hi All, I've been lurking a while and I've not found a clear (to me anyway) discussion of small, individual digital mode software programs, e.g., one program for RTTY; one program for Olivia, etc, etc... I have a 7200 and I am not at all interested in computer control of my rig. Neither am I interested in a software suite with a zillion bells and whistles that I will never, ever use. I am neither a contester nor DX-er. I doubt very, very seriously if I will ever work any digital modes other than Olivia and RTTY. My only current digital software program is MRP40 which is FB for QRQ CW especially in bad/weak signal conditions. It is worth every penny to me as I can not copy CW at the faster rates (25+ wpm.) Any guidance/advice anyone has will be greatly appreciated. 73 de W1YB Johnne Lee
RE: [digitalradio] Individual software programs for various digital modes????
No problem. I do it too. I have historically preferred the simple dedicated programs such as Johnne is looing for, but recently have started dabbling with HRD 5.0Beta.and DM780, and quite frankly, after only a week or so of small exposure to it I do think I could come to really enjoy the benefits of all those zillions of whistles and bells . once I become proficient with it. 73 Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jon Maguire Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 3:06 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Individual software programs for various digital modes Ed, My BAD :-) I glossed over ...small, individual I just think those two suites are the best around and are worth a view. 73... Jon W1MNK On 6/15/2010 5:42 PM, Ed G wrote: Jon, Do you REALLY consider Ham Radio Deluxe/DM780 to be small, individual digital mode software programs ??? Because that is what Johnne is looking for. I consider HRD/DM780 to be software suites with a zillion bells and whistles, which is exactly what Johnne is NOT looking for. Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jon Maguire Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 2:29 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Individual software programs for various digital modes Johnne Lee, 2 that come to mind are Ham Radio Deluxe/DM780 and fldigi. Google/Bing them and you won't be dissapointed. Both are outstanding and contain a plethora of modes. 73... Jon W1MNK On 6/15/2010 4:40 PM, JLA wrote: Hi All, I've been lurking a while and I've not found a clear (to me anyway) discussion of small, individual digital mode software programs, e.g., one program for RTTY; one program for Olivia, etc, etc... I have a 7200 and I am not at all interested in computer control of my rig. Neither am I interested in a software suite with a zillion bells and whistles that I will never, ever use. I am neither a contester nor DX-er. I doubt very, very seriously if I will ever work any digital modes other than Olivia and RTTY. My only current digital software program is MRP40 which is FB for QRQ CW especially in bad/weak signal conditions. It is worth every penny to me as I can not copy CW at the faster rates (25+ wpm.) Any guidance/advice anyone has will be greatly appreciated. 73 de W1YB Johnne Lee
RE: [digitalradio] New SCS Email Program For Pactor
Oh great! Those who have complained about the WinLink system Pactor interference haven't seen anything yet!Once this new product gets into the hands of every ham who wants to operate his own private email server we could see a huge increase in Pactor messaging stations all over the place! At least that's my initial take on the situation. I'm an EmComm WL2K user and have no personal problem with this but I'm sure others will. Ed K7AAT From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andy obrien Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2010 12:54 AM To: digitalradio Subject: [digitalradio] New SCS Email Program For Pactor FYI, Andy K3UK -- Forwarded message -- From: vk4jrc Hi Everyone, Not sure IF anyone in the group has seen this, could be interesting! http://www.scs-ptc.com/downloads/scsmail Can be run in Client or Server mode, and gives a chance for people to run a private Email network, outside WinLink, Winmor or SailMail. 73, Jack VK4JRC image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [digitalradio] Opposing 60M proposal
You have repeatedly used the term, Clog Up . Have you listened to 60M at all? I rarely hear ANY ham traffic on any of the 5 channels whenever I look. Given the light usage already in place, I do not see an issue with adding digital modes. Ed K7AAT = Can it be 'justified' to 'clog up' a new band with allowing ANY digital mode, and I am also including digitized voice into this, just to have it be there? Why not use what is already staged and developed and on the bands that already have the allocations? I personally don't see any reason to 'clog up' any more frequency allocations just to have something sitting there
Re: [digitalradio] Universal M-8000--Dinosaur in Today's World?
True, the M-8000 is old. I would suggest that it buying it or not depends on whether you want to play around with it for what it does still do well: SITOR/AMTOR, CW, WEFAX, GMDSS, PACTOR, and ACARS for example. For most of those you can find free decoders that will cover them, but it is still fun to use. If you happen to have interest in Russian stuff, the Cyrillic feature is neat, but I have to confess to not having used that feature in a decade. Used to be great for Russian CW and RTTY! If you do buy it, hopefully it is one of the later versions, like v7.5; that will have more systems --that aren't used anymore. :-) On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:06 AM, wayner rueg...@insightbb.com wrote: I have a chance to buy a Universal M-8000 decoder from a friend for $100. Is it worth it, . . . Wayner -- Ed Pusey esp...@gmail.com
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Unattended narrow mode transmission protection
Using your same logic below, it could well be determined that hams who partake regularly in 75M evening nets, or even regular QSO, etc, should take their conversations to FCC Part D Citizen's band, or other service , because those communications on a regular basis could be easily furnished through those alternative services too. I know, its stupid, but it also carries the same logic as the below example . K7AAT Adding to Skip's remarks, I will point out it is considered almost an indecency among the daily-position-report hams to mention 97.113(a)(5) of the FCC rules, which states: (a) No amateur station shall transmit: ... (5) Communications, on a regular basis, which could reasonably be furnished alternatively through other radio services. That means that a US-licensed ham violates the FCC regs when s/he regularly transmits vessel position reports, which could be transmitted using the maritime mobile service, over ham frequencies. Not being a lawyer, I am not qualified to say whether a fixed ham station which received those messages and forwards them to a web page is also in violation, though my unqualified guess is no.
[digitalradio] Airlink Express / SignaLink USB question
Is there anyone here who is successfully using Airlink Express with Windows 7? I use a SignaLinkUSB sound card interface successfuly with RMS Express, Digipan, and some other applications, all using the VOX keying method for my radio. BUT I can not get Airlink Express to key my radio with the VOX in the SignaLink. I have discovered that even though in Airlink Express Setup I have selected the USB audio codec for both Tx and Rx, I find that the new Windows 7 Volume Mixer does not recognize the Airlink Express application when I select the USB Audio Codec for speaker. ( It does show Digipan and other applications just fine.) What the volume mixer does show is AirLink Express under a different Speaker selection RealTek Digital Output, which I don't use. Anyone else have this problem in Windows 7? Ed K7AAT
[digitalradio] Re: Digital modes and old husband's tales
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien andrewob...@... wrote: The replies to Ralph's question about audio levels appear to be sound advice and certainly in keeping with what has been advised since sound card digital modes burst upon the scene. I wonder how accurate it is though?I have seen a few serious hams argue that no ALC is not really the case, that some ALC can be OK. I have also seen mention that the no ALC issue applies to some modes (like PSK) but not to others like (JT65A). I also wonder about the half-power advice that some advise. With my homebrewed interface, I could never get much above 40 watts before some ALC began to show. When I switched to a commerical interface with good isolation (Microkeyer by Microham) I can almost always get 100 watts output without any ALC action. I have not received any negative reports about my signal . If I run 100 watts SSB for phone contacts, why would I not want to do the same for digital modes assuming the signal was clean ? . Yes, I would agree I should not run 100 watts if communication was possible with less power, but I don't think a brief PSK CQ at 100 watts is going to do much more harm to my finals than a 3 minute ragchew at 50 watts, phone . Right ? Comments ? -- Andy K3UK Andy, There are some interesting figures on this web site, http://f1ult.free.fr/DIGIMODES/MULTIPSK/digimodesF6CTE_en, about some of the technical details of the different digital modes. One interesting specification is the average to peak power ratio of the waveform. For PSK the number is 0.79. This means that increasing the average output power level above 79 watts will begin to show some clipping on a transmitter designed for 100 watts output peak. The average to peak ratio is a statistical average over some period of time. There may be some short periods of time when the peak signal exceeds this ratio and begins to exhibit some objectionable distortion that may cause broadening of the spectrum, increased IMD and reduced readability. For the FSK modes such as RTTY and for some of the MFSK modes the average to peak ratio is 1.0. For these modes you can transmit at the full power rating of the transmitter without causing any distortion of the signal. The effect of ALC action on the linearity of the signal will depend on the design of the ALC. If the time constant of the ALC is fast enough to follow the envelope of the signal then it effectively produces non-linear compression of the signal which causes distortion of the waveform. If the time constant is long then the ocassional peaks will cause some gain reduction in the TX chain but it will be mostly linear for everything less than those ocassional peaks. The error rate vs SNR for digital modes has a very steep curve with a sharp cutoff of readability only for constant steady state noise conditions. For HF conditions with QSB of 20 dB to 30 dB and static crashes, a 1 dB difference in average SNR may only mean the difference of 10% (or less) error rate or readability. So increasing the power from 40 to 60 watts (1.76 dB) would cause only marginal difference in the readibility. This is my somewhat simplistic understanding of the subject. Some of the figures given here are only qualitative examples based on my experience with testing digital communications system error rates under standardized channel noise and fading conditions. I made some PSK contacts last week runing 1/2 watt of power on 30m and 20m. Now I feel a little guilty about running 25 - 50 watts the rest of the time. Ed WB6YTE
[digitalradio] Re: Double Entries on Waterfall
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Vojtech Bubnik bubn...@... wrote: Hi Ralph. The second or multiple received streams may be caused by a non-linearity somewhere between his computer and your computer. It may be his sound card, his TX, your RX or your sound card. Yes, I experienced it also. The ghost signals are of much lower amplitude though, so they are easily recognized and ignored. If I were you, I would first verify, whether you do not overdrive your sound card. Secondly I would adjust attenuator to just get some slight atmospheric noise in your receiver. This way you will maximize your receiver's dynamic range. If you still get some ghost signals, it may be a good time to upgrade your sound card. 73, Vojtech OK1IAK I agree with this. Nonlinearities in the audio stages can create multiple copies of the signal in the audio band. Nonlinearities in the RF stages would normally create copies of the signal at multiples of the RF frequency for a single tone signal. I understand that the Collins KWM-2 creates a CW signal by modulating the carrier with an audio tone. The frequency of the audio tone is set around 1700 Hz so harmonics caused by nonlinearity in the audio stages would be outside the audio band. With my TS-2000 many ghost signals can often be seen. Not only are frequency multiples of the signal seen but also a weak signal in the presence of a strong signal can often be seen equally spaced on the opposite side of the strong signal. I suspect this is due to the nonlinearities associated with quantization of the 12-bit A/D conversion. Even when a narrow bandwidth is selected, copies of the signal can be seen well outside the passband of the narrow filter. Ghost signals are seen much less frequently with my radios with analog filtering. Ed WB6YTE
[digitalradio] Re: PC/Soundcard requirements for Softrock/SDR ?
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: I am probably more of an observer than most. I would like to be able to monitor activity on all bands all the time. For less than $20 per band, a softrock receiver kit can be purchased that monitors up to 96 KHz of spectrum with a relatively inexpensive sound card. Unfortunately I don't have the space or budget for all the computers and montors that would be needed for this. Ed Thanks Ed, glad you are enjoying DX Lab Suite. I wonder what PC and soundcard capability ones needs to run softrock and similar SDR cards ? Andy K3UK Andy, I am in the middle of the learning process now but here is a little bit of what I have learned. I have tried Rocky SDR software on 3 computers, a 2.8 GHz Celeron cpu with WinXP, a 2.0 GHz dual core E2180 Pentium with WinXP and a quad core Q8200 cpu with Vista. Even on the Celeron cpu it ran fine by itself but it struggled a bit when DM780 was added to it. The dual core machine ran fine with Rocky and MultiPSK and DM780 - and a few other programs. The Vista machine of course runs with very low cpu load but has serious limitations on the software that can be installed. I unsuccessfully tried PowerSDR on a couple of the machines. SDRadio runs fine on the dual core machine. I haven't tried it on the Celeron cpu. I tried the M0GKG software on the dual core machine but couldn't get it to recognize any of the sound cards. The minimum requirements for the sound card are stereo line input and 48KHz sampling rate. This allows you to view a 48KHz wide spectrum. I found some inexpensive, used, Creative Soundblaster external USB sound cards with 24 bit, 96KHz sampling that work very well. I haven't made any sensitivity measurements but they seem to be adaquate at least for the lower bands. Unfortunately on the dual core WinXP machine, Rocky doesn't recognize this card although the other programs do. Two sound cards are required - one for the SDR radio RX and TX, and one for the audio input and output (speaker and mic). For CW, paddle inputs are included on the board that go into a serial port on the computer which does the CW keying as well as the PTT. For digital modes, a connection is required from the SDR software audio input and output and the digital mode software. This can be a third sound card or a Virtual Audio Cable program (VAC). I have not been able to get this to work on either the Vista computer or the dual core WinXP machine. On the WinXP machine, Rocky did not recognize the VAC software although other programs did. In addition, MultiPSK 4.14 crashed after VAC was installed. Windows Vista has serious limitations for the software installations. The driver signing is enforced so drivers that do not have the Micro$oft ble$$ing cannot be installed. That includes the USB to I2C driver for the DDS chip on the Softrock that enables the center frequency to be set by the software and the VAC software. The VAC web site has instructions for getting around this limitation but after following those instructions the computer freezes on startup. So at the moment I have a very high-powered, nearly new, dead computer. MultiPSK does have SDR capability built-in but I haven't tried it yet. Since my interest is in operating digital modes that may be just what I need. That will be my next area of exploration. This may be more information than you needed or wanted but I hope it is helpful. Ed WB6YTE
[digitalradio] Re: The best of all features - SdR
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lindecker f6...@... wrote: Hello Ed and all, For information, with the last version of Multipsk (4.14), you can decode 48 KHz (for standard sound cards) up to 192 KHz (with specific sound cards) if you have a SdR. Note: with standard sound cards, the noise floor must be around the 10th bit (about 1/1000 of the full scale), so the level at the SdR output must not too much low. 73 Patrick Patrick, This sounds like it is exactly what I am looking for. I would like to be able to operate digital modes with the SDR without using the VAC program. I am trying it now but haven't figured out how to use it yet. It looks like the RX from the radio and the speaker output use one sound card and the TX output and mic use the second sound card. I tried to select a sampling frequency of 12KHz but now it reports an error and does not allow me to correct the error. I will continue experimenting with it. Ed WB6YTE
[digitalradio] Re: The best of all features
Andy, I have started to become acquainted with the DX Labs suite recently since I switched to the DX Keeper logging program. On your recommendation I have installed the entire DX Labs suite and I agree it does have a very wide range of features. The DXView, Pathfinder, PropView and SpotCollector programs are very useful for monitoring the bands to find the openings and to get information on the stations worked or heard. The WinWarbler also appears to have all of the features of interest to me. I think it is amazing that one person, Dave, AA6YQ, can produce this package. And he responds very quickly to all questions about the package. It is too bad that Microsoft is not that responsive. I am probably more of an observer than most. I would like to be able to monitor activity on all bands all the time. For less than $20 per band, a softrock receiver kit can be purchased that monitors up to 96 KHz of spectrum with a relatively inexpensive sound card. Unfortunately I don't have the space or budget for all the computers and montors that would be needed for this. Ed --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: Many good points Ed, thanks for taking the time to write your comments. I would like to add that an overlooked application is Winwarbler. Winwarbler only does RTTY (AFSK and FSK) plus BPSK and QPSK 31,63, and 125, but it has in my opinion the best features. It's multi-decoding capabilities and layout are superb. When intergrated with DX keeper and Spotcollector, it is peerless. Andy K3UK On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Ed Hekmanehek...@... wrote: fldigi comes the closest to replicating the simplicity and ease of use of Digipan but it adds many other modes and features. The ability to open the panoramic window and the logbook separately from the main QSO screen is very nice since I like to be able to decode other transmissions while I am in a QSO. The radio interface is a nice bonus that was setup quite easily for a couple radios. The capability to automatically post to PSK Reporter is a nice feature but I haven't been successful with that yet. The capability to integrate with DXKeeper with a 3rd party bridge is also nice but I haven't succeded with that yet either. And I think the flarq program greatly expands the usefulness to methods of operating beyond the normal one on one QSO. fldigi has been the primary program here since last fall until I acquired a more powerful computer that could more easily handle DM780. One very nice feature of DM780 that I use frequently is the capability to hit a button and have the radio and the program switch the radio frequency and the audio frequency to put the desired signal in the center of the radios narrow band filter. That is a brief synopsys of the highlights of each of the programs for me. Thing to look forward to: Panoramic screen decoding over bandwidths of 24 KHz up to 192 KHz. More SOMR (single operator, multiple radio) capability. Better integration with logging packages across the various programs to a common database on the network.
[digitalradio] The best of all features
It looks like the thread on MixW has run the course but I wanted to make a few comments about what I felt were the best features of each of the programs that I have used. I started with Digipan and stayed with it for over 5 years because it was simple to setup and use. The capability to receive in panoramic mode and carry on a QSO at the same time has become very important to my style of operating. I grew very dependent on the capability to use the F1 key to bring up the qrz.com page for the call sign entered in the log. Unfortunately I experienced some crashes with the last version that were too frequent to be ignored. That and the lack of other modes motivated me to try some of the other programs. The programs I have tried so far include HRD/DM780, MixW, fldigi and MultiPSK. MixW was the next program I used but never as much as Digipan. The absence of a panoramic decoder prevented me from adopting as the only or primary program. It is nice that I was able to configure the functions keys to be the same that I had become accustomed to with Digipan. And one uniquie feature of MixW that I have used many times is the capability to select many transmissions to monitor - each in separate windows - and to be able to select a different transmissionj mode for each of those windows. It is not as straightforward as it could be but it can be done. DM780 was the next program that I spent some getting to know. Limited computer power did cause some problems when DM780 was running concurrently with my weather station program, Weather Display. Weather Display would crash very consistently with significant activity in DM780 and even more quickly when iexplorer was running. But now with a much more capable PC I have been exploring other very nice features of DM780. The capability to push a button and have the radio shift frequency to put the signal of interest in the center of the narrow passband is extremely valuable for operating in crowded band conditions. The capability to carry on a QSO with the screen operating in panoramic mode is very important to me. The automation posting of spots to PSK Reporter and the automatic uploading of QSOs to eQSL and LOTW is very nice. The one drawback for me is the inability to assign operations to the function keys to match the configurations used with Digipan, Mixw, fldigi and MultiPSK. I dabbled with MultiPSK over the years but began using in daily last year when I discovered that it had the capability to capture call signs spotted. With a utility from Sholto, KE7HPV, this is being used to automatically post call signs dexcoded to the web page, www.hamspots.net. I also did some experiments with the ALE400 mode with good success. fldigi comes the closest to replicating the simplicity and ease of use of Digipan but it adds many other modes and features. The ability to open the panoramic window and the logbook separately from the main QSO screen is very nice since I like to be able to decode other transmissions while I am in a QSO. The radio interface is a nice bonus that was setup quite easily for a couple radios. The capability to automatically post to PSK Reporter is a nice feature but I haven't been successful with that yet. The capability to integrate with DXKeeper with a 3rd party bridge is also nice but I haven't succeded with that yet either. And I think the flarq program greatly expands the usefulness to methods of operating beyond the normal one on one QSO. fldigi has been the primary program here since last fall until I acquired a more powerful computer that could more easily handle DM780. One very nice feature of DM780 that I use frequently is the capability to hit a button and have the radio and the program switch the radio frequency and the audio frequency to put the desired signal in the center of the radios narrow band filter. That is a brief synopsys of the highlights of each of the programs for me. Thing to look forward to: Panoramic screen decoding over bandwidths of 24 KHz up to 192 KHz. More SOMR (single operator, multiple radio) capability. Better integration with logging packages across the various programs to a common database on the network. It is quite late here now so anything I say from now on will probably be nonsense so I will terminate this for now and hope that others will offer their highlights and lowlights of the currently available software and their wishlists for the next generation of radio software. Thanks, Ed WB6YTE
[digitalradio] Re: Really beating the AGC issue with PSK ?
Andy, I also have a TS-2000. Are you using the Packet filter menu, 50A? This can set the bandwidth down to about 100Hz. The DSP on the TS-2000 is not the best but I find it quite effective most of the time. It does produce a lot of ghost signals and aliases. The 12-bit DSP probably limits the IF dynamic range to less than 70 dB. The TS-2000 also does not have the best front end dynamic range. It is very rare to find signals with more than 60 dB difference in signal strength in the passband so I find this adequate for almost all the operating I do. The notch filter also works quite well although I haven't used it on the TS-2000. I also use an IC-735 with a 250Hz CW filter. Some modification was required to enable the CW filter in SSB mode. This doesn't have the problem of ghosts and aliases of the DSP filtering but it is a bit wider. For the best performance, the narrow filter has to be as close to the antenna input as possible in the circuit. A 100Hz wide roofing filter would do the job but I haven't heard of anybody installing one. Ed WB6YTE --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: From time to time we have had discussions here about the problem with PSK (and other modes) when a strong stations appears to grab the waterfall and wipe out all the other stations within a 2-3 Khz range. Because of this phenomenon, when I purchased a new rig, I looked for one that could have AGC totally off (when needed) and one that can employ narrow DSP filtering. I must say that I have not really solved this issue . I can see a marginal difference with AGC turned off but strong signals still essentially desensitize other stations in the waterfall. The DSP features do better and I can get rid of the phenomena by turning to a narrow filter. However this does not help if the offending station is with 300 - 500 Hz ( a lot when dealing with narrow digital modes). Does anyone have any advice on how to once and for all solve this issue? My rig is a TS2000 Andy K3UK
[digitalradio] Re: QRV 14074.0 ALE-400 FAE
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lindecker f6...@... wrote: Hello Ed, Nice report. the beginning and increased towards the end until the connection was lost. After one minute without possibility to acknowledge a frame, the ionospheric conditions are supposed to be very bad and the disconnection is automatic. I don't think useful to wait more than one minute. One feature request: Would it be feasible to make the panoramic display active while using the RX/TX window for a QSO - possibly in another mode? It would be possible but complex...the best is to start another occurence of Multipsk on the same PC (leaving the serial ressource for the occurence susceptible to be switched in transmission). 73 Patrick I hadn't thought of trying multiple instances of MultiPSK but I have used other programs concurrently - MixW, fldigi and DM780. Actually DM780 is running continuously on the same computer posting call signs on 30 meters to PSK Reporter. There are features in each of those 4 programs that I would like to see combined into a single package. - Hi I have just about finished setting up all 4 programs to use the same logging program - DXKeeper - with the same database file - from 2 different computers. Thanks for building that support into MultiPSK. Ed
[digitalradio] Re: QRV 14074.0 ALE-400 FAE
Tony, Sorry I didn't have time to stop and chat. I copied your QSO with John, VE5MU, from beginning to end while I was eating dinner and reading the mail. You were strong at the beginning but John was stronger at the end. The repeat rate was around 2:1 at the beginning and increased towards the end until the connection was lost. Sholto and I worked each other some time ago with this mode. It works quite well for a chat like that. Patrick, F6CTE, Thank you for your very generous contribution to the community. MultiPSK is ideal for those of us who like to experiment with various modes. MultiPSK is running 24/7 here capturing call signs on 30 meters PSK. I had been looking for a program that could capture call signs when the 30mdg group asked me to spot for them last year and pointed me to MultiPSK. One feature request: Would it be feasible to make the panoramic display active while using the RX/TX window for a QSO - possibly in another mode? Ed WB6YTE --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony d...@... wrote: Still QRV... 14074.0 USB - ALE-400 FAE -- ARQ CHAT MODE... Time is 0245z... Tony -K2MO All, Anyone care for an ARQ chat? I'm QRV ALE-400 FAE... 14074.0 USB + 1600Hz -- beaming west. Tony -K2MO
Re: [digitalradio] Sunair RT 9000A Help
At 03:32 PM 12/12/2008, you wrote: Hi, I am looking for a service manual or any good source of information on the above Radio. Having just picked up 5 of these transceivers and 6 remote heads RCU 9310B from an auction here . Have muddled around and have 2 working but a manual etc would be great. Rather than asking your question on this digital radio forum, you might get a better response if you post to a different Yahoo discussion group such asManual_Exchange .. . . . . or, you could simply contact the company at http://www.sunairelectronics.comand ask them about a manual. Good luck on your search. Ed Dial Broadband has arrived Nationwide! Up to 5 times faster than traditional dialup connections from $13.33/month! See the demo for yourself at a href=http://www.BigValley.net;www.BigValley.net/a
Re: [digitalradio] Sunair RT 9000A Help
At 04:56 PM 12/12/2008, you wrote: Hi Ed, Sorry if this was not the place to ask this question, as the RT 9000a is a digital HF Transceiver I thought that this would be a good place to ask. 73 Phillip I wasn't trying to flame you, but I do think you might get a better response on manual_excha...@yahoogroups.com . Good luck. Ed Dial Broadband has arrived Nationwide! Up to 5 times faster than traditional dialup connections from $13.33/month! See the demo for yourself at a href=http://www.BigValley.net;www.BigValley.net/a
[digitalradio] Re: CWType Using Buxcomm
Dennis, I am not familiar with the Rascal with CW cables but it sounds like the CW cable is plugged into the paddle jack instead of the straight key jack. I use a Rascal for digital modes with the TS-2000. But for CW I use a separate com port with a homebrew interface (transistor, resistor and diode) connected to the straight key input jack. I have used cwtype and MixW for CW with this configuration. Let me know if you have more questions. Ed WB6YTE --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Wyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BlankI'm still experimenting with various cw programs and have in the past used CWType with my Alinco DX77 withgood results. Currently I am trying it with my KWTS2000 and having a bit of difficulty. I'm using the Buxcomm Rascal MarkVGLX with the cw cables. When I set the program up I'm placing the Pitt to none, the key to DTR, the COM-Port selection to COM-Port (via Windows API) and the COM-Port to COM4 (Which I'm setup to use). Placing the rig in the CW mode and pressing the VOX button on it will only transmit dits. An example is the word TEST; it will transmit dit-dit dit dit-dit-dit dit-dit. I am using the 1/4 inch plug. Using the 1/8 inch plug causes a continuous transmitted signal without keying the rig, automatically sends a signal. Does anyone have any ideas on using this interface for CW. Maybe the Rascal MarkVGLX wasn't meant to be used with the KWTS2000. 73, Dennis Wyman (KA6GDT)
RE: [digitalradio] Icom Data Mode / ACC(1) Socket?
On my 746Pro, audio appears to be present at the ACC1 socket in all modes. Only the front panel mic audio is disabled in the USB-D and LSB-D modes. Ed - VE4EAR -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Sent: April 7, 2008 3:43 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Icom Data Mode / ACC(1) Socket? All, Can anyone tell me if the ACC(1) socket audio on an Icom rig is disabled when the rig is taken out of data mode? I was told that USB-D / LSB-D must be selected for the ACC socket to work when using the port for sound card modes. Thanks, Tony -K2MO Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Check our other Yahoo Groups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Oregon Governor Allocates $250,000 for Digital Communications Network
Not knocking the volunteers for sure. I do have a question. How come the money wasn't invested in public safety equipment using public safety NTIA assigned frequencies to do the same thing? the cost involved to purchase commercial equipment, antennas, peripherals, labor to install, and money to implement training for multiple employees, for every county in the State. That $250.000 would be a drop in the bucket. The State is getting one heck of a deal by providing this equipment to the local ham ARES/RACES county groups and letting those hams provide all the rest of the necessities. Ed K7AAT
Re: [digitalradio] PSK250
Andrew, Thank you for the info. It was exactly what I was looking for. Ed K7AAT Dial Broadband has arrived Nationwide! Up to 5 times faster than traditional dialup connections from $13.33/month! See the demo for yourself at a href=http://www.BigValley.net;www.BigValley.net/a
[digitalradio] Re: Building a USB Sound Interface
Kevin, An article was posted on eham.net last year that my interest you. http://www.eham.net/articles/14023 This describes a simple interface using a small USB hub, a USB sound card and a USB to serial converter. This could probably be disassembled and repackaged into one small box. Ed WB6YTE --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Gmail - Home [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, Strange question I am sure, but please bare with me. I like to build a lot of my own gear, allows me to learn new things along the way, it also saves a heap of money considering the prices some of the interfaces are costing. I have so far been using a soundcard and direct connection to my TS- 480S/AT, with a small interface. Now I want to go a little further and build a slightly better one, but I want to build one with a usb connection so it makes a quick changeover. I have looked through Google with little success, so I am asking does anyone know where one could find information on building a USB sound w/interface? If not I will have to stick with my current interface. Thanks and A Merry Christmas/Season Greetings from Sunny NZ. Kevin, ZL1KFM.
[digitalradio] Re: The sorry state of VHF/UHF Packet
So I'll add a few more cents. Packet died in the US because it was too popular for what it could do. The number of For Sale messages and announcements that were sent worldwide just overwhelmed users and BBSs. It came to the point that there was too much content and nothing that you wanted to read. And while there were faster networks, 1200 bps was the standard and it was slow. And it gets real slow when you add other 1200 baud nodes or digipeaters to the path. And BTW, you will never even get 1200 bps sustained throughput, as the turn-around for most radios is abysmal. And in this entire thread, I'm surprised that I haven't seen any comments about D-STAR! 960 bps is built into every radio and the ID-1 can do 128 kbps. It's not AX.25, but it is packet digital data. It's pretty cool to put two ID-1s back to back and watch the amount of data that can be transfered. And since the ID-1 have Ethernet jacks, that means that you can do any Internet protocol that you want.
[digitalradio] Re: OFDM Proposal
Rud, I would really enjoy hearing some discussion on the use of OFDM on HF. I work on an OFDM project and have an understanding of how it works although I am not a system designer. I have also tried OFDM with HamPal (digital SSTV) and WinDRM (digital voice) and it seems to me that it offers a lot of potential for improving performance with HF multipath fading. To stimulate some discussion I would like to ask some questions for the experts in the field. The limitation that is often experienced with HamPal is that the probability of getting a complete file through without errors is small so it usually requires a manual request to fill in the holes. Looking at the waterfall display it is apparent that frequently there are transient holes in the spectrum due to multipath fading. Could a higher higher success rate without the fill requests be achieved with some combination of better FEC, slower data rate, better spreading of the data over frequency and/or time? There have been many discussions of the timing problems associated with using Pactor with computer sound cards. Would it be feasible to use OFDM (or any other mode) with much longer ARQ cycle times (several seconds) to accomodate the computer timing limitations? BPSK31 has become very popular due to its success with relatively low signal to noise ratios. I have noticed, though, that it does not perform well with the rapid flutter experienced with propagation over the pole even with good signal levels. Could this be be overcome with a little lower data rate (longer bit periods), better FEC, wider bandwidth, OFDM, etc? I have noticed that with signals coming over the North Pole, RTTY often works better than PSK31. Since RTTY (and MFSK, Olivia, etc.) only uses one tone at a time, it seems to me that OFDM which uses the entire bandwidth all of the time would be a more efficient use of the bandwidth. Is this reasonable? How do the various modes compare for efficiency of the bandwidth usage? I am familiar with Shannon's theorem but would like to know how OFDM compares to other modulation modes. There is quite a range of applications or uses of digital modes within the ham radio community. Each application has very different requirements. The applications range from: 1) Weak signal communications that require minimal information exchange and can take extended time periods (JT65, etc.). 2) Real time keyboard to keyboard QSOs with speeds ranging from a few words/minute to 50+ wpm. These uses can usually tolerate some errors. Narrow bandwidth also seems to be an advantage for these uses for a few different reasons. 3) Net operations. ARQ cannot be used since this is one to many communications. I have not participated in this type of operation so I am not familiar with how it is used or what is required. 4) File transfer or email - The highest possible data rate is preferred but the mode must be adaptable for varying propagation conditions. This requires zero error so usually uses some form of ARQ. What other uses can others suggest that would have distinctly different requirements? Ed --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rud Merriam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is a proposal for an OFDM protocol with a bandwidth of 493 Hz. The symbol rate is 29 Hz allowing 17 subcarriers. That provides 16 subsymbols and 1 pilot carrier. With PSK modulation and a 5 ms guard interval the effective symbol rate is 25.3 Hz which provides 405 bps. Any guesses on how well that would work? g Rud Merriam K5RUD ARES AEC Montgomery County, TX http://TheHamNetwork.net
[digitalradio] Re: The Bozo's Guide to HF JT65A has been updated.
Andy, Nice work on the document. I am just a few days behind you on the learning curve. I was able to get it set up and running with the documentation provided with the software but a few things had to be learned by experience and experimentation. Your document has all the essential information for the new user and should make this mode useable for many new operators. I had an exciting introduction to JT65A the day before you published your document. After reading about this mode on this group for several weeks I finally downloaded and installed it last Friday. Since my computer has multiple sound cards, the information in the DOS window was essential for selecting the correct input and output sound card numbers. After getting it set up I hit the monitor button and watched the trace for awhile (7076 KHz). I couldn't hear anything but wondered what that faint line was on the waterfall. I was astounded when ZS6WN popped up in the text window with -23 dB SNR. After sending a few replies it was a thrill to see his response. The only thing I would suggest adding is a little more explanation about how to use the information in the DOS window to select sound card numbers for the input and output with multiple sound cards installed on the computer. Thanks for your administration of this group and for the document. Ed WB6YTE --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Bozo's Guide to HF JT65A has been updated. Thanks to those that contributed suggestions. http://www.obriensweb.com/bozoguidejt65a.htm It is likely to require a few more updates to ensure that the basic's are explained.
Re: [digitalradio] The Bozo's Guide to HF JT65A has been updated.
Andy is there some way to mark additions and revisions so that we do not have to scan it completely? Nice work. Really appreciate it. Andrew O'Brien wrote: The Bozo's Guide to HF JT65A has been updated. Thanks to those that contributed suggestions. http://www.obriensweb.com/bozoguidejt65a.htm It is likely to require a few more updates to ensure that the basic's are explained. Again, any stupid errors or things that are just plain wrong...let me know.
[digitalradio] ALE usage guidelines
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ed, You can find much more info on set up of PCALE, and general ALE operation on the HFLINK group. http://hflink.com 73 Bonnie KQ6XA Thanks again, Bonnie. I just submitted a request to join the hflink group. I have a few more questions about basic operation using PCALE that I couldn't find answers for on the hflink web site. I was listening on 14109.5 today. Another station called QRZ and my station automatically answered and set up a connection. We communicated for awhile on ALE then moved to PSK on 14070. What caused my station to automatically answer the QRZ call? What is the standard protocol? Are we expected to QSY to another mode/freq when the connection is established? What do these acronyms mean and how are they used? AMD (general CQ?) DTM DBM MOTD Under the configuration menu what are the 3 mode options used for? MIL-STD-188-141 MIL-STD-188-110 FS-1052 Appendix B Is there a usage guide available on the web site? Thanks, Ed Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] New PCALE Beta Version Re: ALE activity today
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ed WB6YTE wrote: I installed and attempted to setup PCALE yesterday but encountered a few problems. I did not find my radio (TS-2000) in the MIL-STD-188-141 menu. Is this program limited to the radios listed? There is only one com port selection for radio control. Can separate com ports be selected for radio frequency control and PTT control? How do you set the radio control serial port baud rate, etc? Hi Ed, It seems you may be using the older version. Try the new PCALE Beta v1.062G available for download on the HFLINK website: http://hflink.com/beta Remember to download all 3 files: ALE.exe ALE.DAT and the channel fill file. You will find more user support on the HFLINK group. 73---Bonnie KQ6XA Thanks, Bonnie. I have the newer version loaded and found the separate com ports setup. Are there settings in one of the menus for the baud rate, etc. Since the TS-2000 is not listed as one the radio choices, is there a way for me to create a command file for this radio or is it limited to just one manually selected frequency? Where can I find a general description of ALE operation? Thanks, Ed Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: ALE activity today
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A lot of ALE action today, 20M (14109) has been quite active with netcalls and soundings. For example , I just decoded K5SKH with fair signals [13:49:40][FRQ 14109500][SND][ ][TIS][K5SKH ][AL0] BER 30 SN 10 Since this week is ALE activity week, you should hear more, this may be the week to try ALE, if you have not already. Andy K3UK Andy, I tried to install and setup ALE yesterday without success. Questions: How do you select the sound card? How do you select the radio control com port, baud rate, etc. How do you select the com port used for PTT? Thanks, Ed WB6YTE Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: ALE activity today
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A lot of ALE action today, 20M (14109) has been quite active with netcalls and soundings. For example , I just decoded K5SKH with fair signals [13:49:40][FRQ 14109500][SND][ ][TIS][K5SKH ][AL0] BER 30 SN 10 Since this week is ALE activity week, you should hear more, this may be the week to try ALE, if you have not already. Andy K3UK Andy, I installed and attempted to setup PCALE yesterday but encountered a few problems. I did not find my radio (TS-2000) in the MIL-STD-188-141 menu. Is this program limited to the radios listed? There is only one com port selection for radio control. Can separate com ports be selected for radio frequency control and PTT control? How do you set the radio control serial port baud rate, etc? Ed WB6YTE Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Digital Voice: Some thoughts after one week.
Some more info: I found a paper that describes some tests done with 2.4Kbps and 1.2kbps voice transmission over HF paths. It sounds like the 1.2 kbps gives useable voice quality. I talked to a friend who had done some research for the military back in the '80s on digital voice transmission over HF. He said that the state of the art back then was about 2.4Kbps but there was a technique developed for decoding the speech into text with a very limited vocabulary for tactical operations - around 300 words - and sending the words with minimum coding required for the limited vocabulary. The transmitted data was then reconstructed into speech at the receiving end. The data rates achieved with this method were as low as 300 bps. There were a few problems with this method, though. First it introduced substantial delays due to the processing required for the speech recognition. Second, the Aussies got very upset when their speech came out the other end of the link with a midwestern accent. :) Finally, when attempts were made to apply this method to an application for the Marines for fire control communications, the Marines were unable to come up with a 300 word vocabularly that didn't contain profanity or obscenities so the project was killed. Seriously, long distance HF propagation imposes some very challenging problems with long fades that can only be overcome with long interleaving of the data which creates long delays in the transmission. I will continue to study the issue and report any interesting ideas that show promise for weak signal digitzed voice communications. Ed --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Ed Hekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony DXDX@ wrote: Ed wrote: Are there any communications engineers in this group that can give us some idea whether a useable quality digitized voice can be sent over a 2.5 KHz wide HF channel with SNR comparable to or less than what is required for analog voice? I was thinking about this today Ed. I'd sacrifice a bit of voice qaulity for better SNR performance. WinDRM defaults to the MELP codec and I was wondering if the SPEEX or LP-10 offer an improvement in SNR performance? Tony KT2Q Tony, The key to better weak signal performance will be primarily in how the data is sent over the air. Observing the signal for digital SSTV on 20M has been very interesting. Often a hole in the spectrum can be observed as it moves across the spectrum. It takes out about 20% of the spectrum and has a time span at one frequency of around a second. The packaging of the data must be done with enough redundancy spread throughout the spectrum so it can be recovered in spite of these spectrum holes. On 80M atmospheric noise tends to have short impulses that take out the entire signal for much shorter periods of time - much less than a second. To mitigate this, the data redundancy must be spread over time so the data can be recovered in spite of a complete loss of signal for a few milliseconds. Of course adding redundancy means reducing the data rate for the encoded voice data. This would probably require some adjustments to the voice coding algorithm. With cellular signals, although the maximum data rate may be 8K bps, the effective rate is usually less than 1/2 that due to the fact that speech is not a constant signal - there are holes in it for short periods of time during which no data needs to be sent. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: First DRM Reception
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jhaynesatalumni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony DXDX@ wrote: Jim You need to mute the MIC audio on your sound card. That will stop the WinDRM digital signal from making it to your PC speakers and mixing with the decoded voice. Once it starts to decode, WinDRM will playback the audio into your sound card speakers. [snip...] Well, thanks, but... The soundcard mixer stuff doesn't seem to work under WINE. I guess I have to use the native Linux mixer. And my soundcard has only one output, not separate line and speaker outputs. That's why I think I need another sound card. I use a USB sound card adapter ($10) and a set of headphones with a boom mic ($4) with XP to simplify the setup. The USB sound card driver installation was done automatically by XP. I don't know how difficult it would be with Linux. Ed Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Digital Voice: Some thoughts after one week.
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've heard DV using LCP-10 and a 16 tone modem as well as a 39 tone modem at 1200 bps...it sounds robotic at best. But that could have been just the systems used (ANDVT/Mil-STD-188-110) Walt/K5YFW Walt, Thanks for your very interesting and informative comments. I would be very interested in meeting you on the air for an extended conversation on the subject. We should be able to connect on 40M or 80M in the evenings. I often monitor 7295 +/-. I can also be reached on EchoLink. Some of the questions I have are: 1) Can you suggest a reference on HF propagation that may show distributions or histograms of fade depths, durations and bandwidths? 2) For the examples of military equipment you gave, did they use voice bandwidths (~2.5 KHz) or were the bandwidths larger? 3) With military communications I expect that voice quality and accuracy of the communication is essential. For ham weak signal applications where accuracy is not a life and death matter, can we gain any performance by trading codec data for FEC data? If voice quality at 2400 bps is considered acceptable for military applications, can we get better SNR performance with useable voice quality for ham applications at codec data rates less than 2400 bps with stronger FEC? Is there anyone reading this thread that could develop additional experimental modes for WinDRM? Ed WB6YTE Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Digital Voice: Some thoughts after one week.
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Ed Hekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I found the specifications. The spec used for broadcast DRM can be found here: http://webapp.etsi.org/exchangefolder/es_201980v020101p.pdf The WinDRM spec can be found here: http://www.qslnet.de/member/hb9tlk/drm_h.html The WinDRM specification is very sketchy but after a quick review it suggests that the speech data rate is near the minimum possible and there is little room for additional FEC coding. The documment suggests that the minimum data rate for voice is 1000 bits per 400 ms frame (2.5 kbps). The subcarrier modulation is QAM16 or QAM64 and there are two levels of FEC to choose from but the FEC is not described. The interleaving of the pilots and overhead data is described but not the interleaving of the voice data. I will have to have a conversation with one of the speech codec designers I work with. Ed Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Digital Voice: Some thoughts after one week.
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ed wrote: Are there any communications engineers in this group that can give us some idea whether a useable quality digitized voice can be sent over a 2.5 KHz wide HF channel with SNR comparable to or less than what is required for analog voice? I was thinking about this today Ed. I'd sacrifice a bit of voice qaulity for better SNR performance. WinDRM defaults to the MELP codec and I was wondering if the SPEEX or LP-10 offer an improvement in SNR performance? Tony KT2Q Tony, The key to better weak signal performance will be primarily in how the data is sent over the air. Observing the signal for digital SSTV on 20M has been very interesting. Often a hole in the spectrum can be observed as it moves across the spectrum. It takes out about 20% of the spectrum and has a time span at one frequency of around a second. The packaging of the data must be done with enough redundancy spread throughout the spectrum so it can be recovered in spite of these spectrum holes. On 80M atmospheric noise tends to have short impulses that take out the entire signal for much shorter periods of time - much less than a second. To mitigate this, the data redundancy must be spread over time so the data can be recovered in spite of a complete loss of signal for a few milliseconds. Of course adding redundancy means reducing the data rate for the encoded voice data. This would probably require some adjustments to the voice coding algorithm. With cellular signals, although the maximum data rate may be 8K bps, the effective rate is usually less than 1/2 that due to the fact that speech is not a constant signal - there are holes in it for short periods of time during which no data needs to be sent. Can someone tell where to find the specification for the modulation format used by WinDRM? Ed WB6YTE Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Digital Voice: Some thoughts after one week.
I found the specifications. The spec used for broadcast DRM can be found here: http://webapp.etsi.org/exchangefolder/es_201980v020101p.pdf The WinDRM spec can be found here: http://www.qslnet.de/member/hb9tlk/drm_h.html Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://standraise.corp.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://standraise.corp.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Digital Voice: Some thoughts after one week.
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been QRV on digital voice ,using WinDRM, and thought I would offer some rookie/newbie random thoughts. 1. This mode's performance may appear counter-intuitive for most digital mode operators. By that I mean, we associate digital modes like PSK31, Olivia, MT63, etc, with the ability to communicate under weak signal conditions. To be able to communicate when SSB analog voice signals are not reliable. It is the opposite with Digital Voice , as manifested in WinDRM. Perfectly copyable CW and traditional SSB voice signals do not translate in to enough signal to maintain the digital voice transmissions. e.g. my analog QSO today with Gerhard OE3GBB was about a 449 RST. That is; Readable with practically no difficulty, Fair signals . However, I had to focus my brain quite a bit to pick his voice out between the QRM. When we switched to DV, the audio was stunning in quality (better than FM on 2M) but I only copied about 40% of what he sent, the rest was just silence. So, I am not sure what use this communication method has if we need good signals rather than fair or weak signals. If one can copy a person fair to well with SSB analog, why do we need to switch to DV voice? 2. The software (WinDRM) is very well designed and fairly easy to figure out. The ability to have the software switch Mic/Line In settings in the sound mixer is very useful. The waterfall and other tuning display indicators are extremely well thought out. 3. There is something odd about copying HF signals with good audio fidelity. My old ham brain is so used to Donald Duck under water SSB audio that hearing a DV signal does not sound like real radio. It IS real radio because it is sent/received via radio waves , but it feels like you are on Echolink , IRLP, or Skype!. 4. It is exiting to be on air with just the few that are active. If you expect to hear LOTS of DRM signals, you'll be disappointed. Activity is less than Hell or MT63! 5. WinDRM shows that DV can be done well without expensive outboard hardware devices (AOR). It works with a fairly low CPU PC. I think we are in the Betamax-VHS era for amateur radio digital voice, with several incompatible DV modes. Andy K3UK Andy, I've had some of the same thoughts. Much of the attraction of Ham radio to a lot of people is the ability to work long distances. CW still lives and PSK31 has been widely accepted because of this. It was quite a thrill when I worked someone in Russia with PSK31 who was using a homebrew rig with 5 watts output. PSK31 has opened Ham radio to a lot of people who can't put up a big antenna or run high power. When I first tried analog SSTV a few months ago I thought about how primitive it was compared to digital communications today. However when I tried HamPal it was very disappointing to find out how difficult it was to receive a picture even with an S9 signal. The picture quality is stunning but the success rate is so low that it will never replace analog SSTV. I had hoped that DV would be able to improve the quality of communication over analog voice in conditions when analog voice was marginal. It seems that if we could trade some of the voice quality for better weak signal performance it would be much more attractive to many hams. With SSTV, weak signal performance could easily be improved by reducing picture resolution and reducing the data rate. That is a little more difficult to do with voice since voice communications must be in real time - we can't just slow the data rate down to fit the channel conditions. I work in cellular communications and know that good voice quality can be maintained with a data rate of 8k bps. It seems reasonable that useable voice quality can be produced with half that data rate. Are there any communications engineers in this group that can give us some idea whether a useable quality digitized voice can be sent over a 2.5 KHz wide HF channel with SNR comparable to or less than what is required for analog voice? Ed Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: 7296 LSB CQ Digital Voice
Andy, I am monitoring but with an S9 noise level here this evening it is very unlikely I will here anything out of town. Ed WB6YTE --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am on 7296 LSB calling CQ for the next hour between 0300 and 0400 UTC, mostly at 00, 15, 30 and 45 minutes past the hour with ID tones then digital CQ data file. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: WinDRM voice tonight anyone?
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am interested in trying my first digital voice QSO, using WINDRM, anyone want to also try it tonight ? I just discovered WinDRM tonight and would like to try it but I don't get home until after 7PM PDST. I will listen around 7290 - 7299 in the evenings the next few nights. You can usually contact me on EchoLink when I am in the shack. Ed WB6YTE Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: WinDRM voice tonight anyone?
Andy, I didn't hear any signals last night either. After I wrote that post I realized that EchoLink uses one of the sound cards required for WinDRM. It will take a few minutes to set up another USB sound card for EchoLink tonight. How is the evening propagation on 40M? If we don't connect tonight or tomorrow night, we can try 14.238 MHz on Saturday. Ed WB6YTE --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ed. I will give you a shout on Echolink. I may also try it with my neighbour who is also a ham (we should have a good signal to noise ratio!) . I heard no signals last night , did you? Andy K3UK Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: First DRM reception, sort of
Andy, 14233 is used for HamPal DRM pictures. I have copied several pictures there over the past few weeks but the success rate of HamPal without using the BSR is very low. I am looking forward to trying WinDRM for voice - haven't heard anything on 40M yet. Ed --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have heard no digital voice signals thus far but I did capture this on 14233... A data, versus voice, transmission from KB6QEX with SNR of 11.5. Andy K3UK Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] Re: Viewing Modulation with Oscilloscope
Hi, Rick. I just joined this group and did a search on Pegasus and found your post. What a coincidence that I was perusing the bands with Multipsk and found you in a QSO with NU4M using MFSK16! I just bought my Peg a couple weeks ago and it has taken over my life. I was looking for software that would let me key the rig via software and I think you gave me the anwer here with the mention of the DX Lab Suite. I looked at Commander but it seemed to be saying that I had to be running other control software like TenTec's or N4PY's to work with it. That's OK I have both of those. So I'll go back to that and see if it will send key down/up commands to the Peg from Multipsk. Anyway thanks for the tips on the software and the ALC. I was using the same method of tuning up with another rig, my FT-767GX and thought the signal sounded clean even tho I was getting the light. Hope to read you on 10.136 agn, maybe you'll be able to hear me too, I'm pretty antenna challenged here on the 5th floor of my apartment building. I went out at midnite and dropped a 35ft length of magnet wire out the window and tied it to a small tree with a piece of plastic fishing line. Works better than anything I had tried inside the apartment. Tunes from 10 to 40 meters. But a good stiff breeze might snap it any time and I'll have to make another midnite run. Oh well I've got 500ft of the magnet wire. 73's Ed - N2JLI --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if other hams do what I do in order to roughly determine if you are sending a clean digital signal, with proper settings on the rig and/or the sound card. I use another rig to monitior the modulation here in the shack with no antenna connected on that rig. If you turn everything down and then slowly increase drive levels it seems to me that I can easily hear if things are starting to get more distorted. Usually I run fairly low power where it is just starting to drive the rig and produce some output that I can hear on the monitor rig. On my ICOM 756 Pro II, I have found that even if I have the RF power set to minimum, which is considered to be 5 watts, and with the sliders on the sound card to a fairly low 1 1/2 on the master and wave outputs, I will not see any power output on the LCD bargraph unless I turn up the rig's RF power control. But even with a minimum I can often work stations who say my signal is reasibably strong with good IMD. But at that point it is barely copyable on the monitoring rig so I may only be running a watt or two. If I run the RF power all the way to 100%, the output goes just past 50% so is probably pushing things a bit too much and I keep it well back from there. I do not trigger any ALC under those conditions and have to increase sound card output to make the ALC start to indicate. If I run the ALC beyond the maximum recommendation, you can hear the signal quality change to a distorted pattern quite abruptly. So I normally run things with no ALC indication at all, and that is what I have read is the best procedure. Not all rigs will let you do that. My Ten Tec Pegasus, which works well for digital modes (with the software that supports the Peg such as the DX Lab suite along with MultiPSK that work together), I find that the ALC light always seems to trigger, even with a clean signal. The main thing is to be sure your sound card is set properly, perhaps by monitoring the signal. I am so thankful for the QuickMix applet that lets you nearly instantly switch settings in your sound card for different purposes. Before that I was constantly having to tweak the sound card settings every time I wanted to operate a digital mode. 73, Rick, KV9U Richard wrote: I am interested in verifying that I am not over-driving PSK31. Is there a simple signal conditioning interface to an oscilloscope input? Thanks Rich Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) SPONSORED LINKS Ham radio http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=msk=Ham+radiow1=Ham+radiow2=Craft+hobbyw3=Hobby+and+craft+supply w4=Icom+ham+radiow5=Yaesu+ham+radioc=5s=101.sig=NStjWgsFtXmQaGrYd 1LT5w Craft hobby http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=msk=Craft+hobbyw1=Ham+radiow2=Craft+hobbyw3=Hobby+and+craft+supp lyw4=Icom+ham+radiow5=Yaesu+ham+radioc=5s=101.sig=RIfve- PXBTtOVJV48uzEVQ Hobby and craft supply http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=msk=Hobby+and+craft+supplyw1=Ham+radiow2=Craft+hobbyw3=Hobby+and +craft+supplyw4=Icom+ham+radiow5=Yaesu+ham+radioc=5s=101.sig=Qz1j uq9z5gSL9A5AR8aLNA Icom ham radio http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=msk=Icom+ham+radiow1=Ham+radiow2=Craft+hobbyw3=Hobby+and+craft+s upplyw4
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Do we really need to know?
Bonnie, Are you suggesting that we require a typing test to get a ham license ? And whattyping speed do you think would be needed to get an entry level license ? 73-:) Ed KM9Iexpeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy wrote Do we really need to know the type/speed of a ham's computer? Hi Andy,I would rather know what the other hams typing speed is.Mine is 70WPM :)What's yours?Bonnie KQ6XA__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] Do we really need to know?
Andy, I see nothing wrong with including a description of a ham's computer in the equipment description. It has more to do with the digital process than either their transceiver or antenna. The more you know about the other ham and his/her stationthe more there is to talk about.Ed KM9IAndrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do we really need to know the type/speed of a ham's computer? I see many include this in their description of their operating equipment. Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone calls to 30+ countries for just 2¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
RE: [digitalradio] Laptop computers for digital modes
I purchased one a couple of years ago cause I needed 1) Real DOS, 2) a serial port, 3) something to stand alone for decoding. They are a bit pricey, but they work!! Ed Pusey From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jhaynesatalumni Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 10:17 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Laptop computers for digital modes I hope this doesn't come off sounding like a commercial, as it isn't intended to be and I have no connection with the company, just thought it might be of interest to some people. These days they don't make laptops with real RS-232 ports. www.heartlandamerica.com seems to have a lot of older model refurbished laptops that do have RS-232 ports. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to telnet://208.15.25.196/ Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ Looking for digital mode software? Check the quick commerical free link below http://www.obriensweb.com/digimodes.html SPONSORED LINKS Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply Ham radio YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
RE: [digitalradio] Winlink Scanning
The Erlang numbers are commonly used when sizing telephone systems. Just look at an normal family. If you have four people in the house with one phone, then the odds are pretty high that you will get contention over the use of the phone. If you have two phones, the odds drop dramatically. Three is even better and four goes to zero. But buying four phone lines is expensive, especially when the probability of all four people needing the same phone line is essentially 0. Erlang's numbers are based on the probability for different types of needs. If there is only one PMBO, it doesn't matter if they are scanning or not. There's a maximum of one connection. If there are two PMBOs, then if they are on the same channel, there is a higher probability that someone will try yo use both at the same time and cause contention. But if they are on two different channels, then the odds go down. (duh!) Now if we go to three PMBOs on three different channels, things are good. But can we handle about as much traffic if we only use two channels? If a PMBO could hear and talk to all other devices then you could only have two channels running at any time, therefore no advantage. But since everyone hears differently, there could be some sharing that occurs, but then the hidden transmitter problem occurs. I believe that I am correct in assuming that the PMBO is the fixed station portion of the network, and if not, ignore everything else I'm about to say. Now, where Erlangs enter the equation is how many conversations can occur per day for 1, 2, or 3 PMBOs on different channels. Sometime unexpected is that 2 PMBOs can handle more than 2* a single PMBO and that 3 can handle more than three individual channels. The situation is that conversations are not generally randomly spread out through the day. There are some times where many people try yo talk at once. It's some rough math, but it goes back to the phones in a home as explained above. Now, in my book, it makes absolutely no sense for the PMBOs to be scanning, that's something that the user stations should be doing. After all, when you have two phones in the house, just look to see which one is not in use. That's called scanning. Now the third option of two transceivers is doable, but generally only if the transceivers are at different sites, which is really option B. I had one network using adjacent channels for transcontinental traffic and we found out that we had some big problems because the two channels were nominally in the same passband for the receiver. The receiver would adjust the AGC and bury the weak one in the noise. -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Skip Teller Posted At: Thursday, April 14, 2005 8:46 PM Posted To: FT-817 Conversation: [digitalradio] Winlink Scanning Subject: [digitalradio] Winlink Scanning Does anybody here understand the application of Erlang B? I have put forth a suggestion on QRZ.COM that the scanning Winlink PMBO's do serves to prevent a user from discerning if a PMBO is busy or not before taking up a frequency and calling repetitively to find out. Here is my last question to K4CJX, who has not yet answered. Any comments? I don't know anything about traffic analysis! Quote (k4cjx @ April 14 2005,09:54) Regarding scanning, use Erlang B, and basic traffic enginering, and you can see that it is a more optimal solution to scan. OK Steve, Here is an Erlang B calculator. http://www.cas.mcmaster.ca/~qiao/publications/erlang/newerlang.html What values do you assume for the case of: A: A Winlink PMBO scanning two frequenices, accepting connections on only one frequency at a time. B: A Winlink PMBO monitoring one frequency only. C: A Winlink PMBO using two transceivers, scanning two frequencies. It looks like to me that the traffic handling capacity does not change unless there are two transceivers at the PMBO, capable of connecting on two different frequencies at the same time, and both feeding the Internet with traffic simultaneously. This would increase the number of lines from one to two. As Mark observed, one transceiver scanning two frequencies still equals one line, not two, so I agree with his observation. Do you agree? If not, then how did you arrive at a PMBO scanning two frequencies as a more optimal solution and is it optimal for the user population or for spectrum usage? Intuitively, it still seems to me that there is a tremendous advantage to both the user and the spectrum to eliminate scanning so the user can tell if a PMBO is available, or busy on an alternate scan frequency. In the case of no scanning, it is CERTAIN he is not busy on an alternate frequency, and if he is busy with a station you cannot detect, then when he transmits his bursts, if you cannot hear that either, then you are out of range, so you do not need to use up a frequency trying to connect when there is no hope of making a connection. This
RE: [digitalradio] Visual BASIC [was: Win Link]
Indeed, a large majority of programming is done in VB. It's not just Microsoft who says so. And just to let you know, "commercial shrink wrapped software" represents a relatively small amount of the programming is done by professional programmers. 1) Feel free to your own opinion, but one of the biggest changes in VB recently is that Microsoft did a rather major overhaul to support many of the modern constructs. This caused some compatibility problems, just as C to C# did. And yes, presence of VB on a resume can sometimes be a detractor, but then again so will being a CEO on a programmers resume. There are MANY programming positions for which VB is appropriate and a lot more non-programming jobs where it is appropriate. 2) VB doesn't bind that badly, there are definitely solutions for running VB on other platforms. Designing for ANY platforms bindsa program to that platform, unless the program doesn't really interact with the system. Java has significant problems with portability, if you don't believe so, then just look at all of the exceptions and work arounds that are included in most Java applications that work on different platforms. Heck, just try to print something and see what hoops you have to go through. 3) Oh, and there's never been a versioning issue with Java? Or C? Or any other language or OS? That's life, get used to it. Microsoft changed the way that ports were accessed between those versions of OS. Anything that tried to get to the ports directly was stopped by the OS, something that needed to be done to better support the multi-threaded operation of the OS. As far as I know, EVERY language got hampered by this issue. You've evidently not studied the industry well over the last few years and realized how the .Net development platform virtualizes the choice of programming language. There are very few, if any things that one language can do that the other cannot do. Now programmers are able to pick and choose the language that best fulfills the task that they have at hand, or their experience dictates. There are some things that PERL can do better than other languages, some things that VB can do better, and some things that C# can do better. Pick and chose the one that works best for you. From: Dean Gibson AE7Q [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 3:08 PMPosted To: FT-817Conversation: [digitalradio] Visual BASIC [was: Win Link]Subject: [digitalradio] Visual BASIC [was: Win Link]On 2005-04-12 22:22, Dave Bernstein wrote:Perhaps your definition of "Professional Programmer" is different than mine, but when I last checked VB (including VB.net) was in the top 5, if not the top 3, among professional developers. According to whom, Microsoft? How many serious commercial packages canyou name that are written in VB? Not many.I've been professionally programming for over 40 years, from mainframesto Windows systems to embedded systems. Not only does no one I've everworked with program in VB, but everyone in the industry that I knowbelieves that it is a hacker's language. Students starting out atUniversity in Washington (and presumably other universities) in ComputerScience think it is a hacker's language. This, despite the fact thatBASIC was developed at a University (Dartmouth, I believe) many yearsago. Presence of VB experience on a resume is a negative. So why isthere all this negative feeling about VB?1. Like Fortran (which I learned on), the VB language is "hacked" byMicrosoft to have modern language features, rather than being properlydesigned.2. VB binds both the developer and the user to a specific OS, an OS soldby a manufacturer whose goal has been to stamp out every bit ofcompetition. When most languages are supported on many, many,architectures, VB (and .NET) are supported only by a predatory company.Why on earth UNNECESSARY bind yourself to ANY specific architecture whenyou don't have to, but ESPECIALLY Microsoft? Why not choose Java?Especially for ham radio, where a significant number of users runLinux? Good programmers look for ways to INCREASE the portability oftheir code, not DECREASE it.3. VB communications programs can work fine on Win 95/98 systems and not at all on Win NT/2k/XP Pro. WIth great reluctance a few years ago I bought a VB program to communicate with the computers in my Audi (using the ODB-II serial interface); it worked fine on Win 98 (where the author had developed it), but NOT AT ALL on WinNT/2k. The author knew this but didn't know how to fix it. Fortunately, another developer came along with a package NOT written in VB, and I junked the VB program.I don't release the source code to DXLab for 2 reasons:1. Working with users, designing, implementing, and testing are fun; coordinating an open source community is work.I agree with that. However, you don't have to maintain an open source community in order to release source under the GPL.2. I once provided the
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Visual BASIC [was: Win Link]
There definitely will be VB for many, many more years. It is not going away, especially after the major development that was put into it for .Net. Whatever you have heard from which you construed that VB is dead, just assume that the source is bad or your interpretation is bad. I KNOW that there will be VB in VS05 From: Robert McGwier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 8:09 PMPosted To: FT-817Conversation: [digitalradio] Re: Visual BASIC [was: Win Link]Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Visual BASIC [was: Win Link]There is almost no one I respect more than David Bernstein as a programmerbut Microsoft has said it is definitely going to blow off all those developersand tell everyone VB is dead. As such, it will be. I do not believe there willbe VB in VS 2005.net.C# and even C++ are "forms programmable" and I think Microsoft believesthat VB had lost its place. They are pretty much sharpening the coffin nailshaving publicly announced the end of VB.Bobrrlanders2 wrote:Having worked 25+ years in Fortune 500 companies here in the St. Louisarea, VB is heavily used. VBA in Access and Excel even moreso. VB.NET is following in VB6's footsteps. Like it or not, for business purposes, quite often it's "good enough"...I didn't make the rules, just get paid to write VB and VB.NET.And yes, you can actually write good code in VB.NET...althoughit's harder in VB673, Rod WI0T The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Is packet dead (was Winlink take over) - aka learn from the past
Comments embedded From: Joel Kolstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, April 07, 2005 1:31 PMPosted To: FT-817Conversation: [digitalradio] Re: Is packet dead (was Winlink take over) - aka learn from the pastSubject: [digitalradio] Re: Is packet dead (was Winlink take over) - aka learn from the past Hi Ed,That was a very informative post; thanks! I was very much 'into' the modem-based BBSes back in, e.g., the mid-80s, but never made it onto packet at that time.Let me add a few comments: How many of you are on high-speed DSL/Cable modem connections? Why not on dial-up? Dial-up is just too slow for the communications that most of us do today.I disagree. I do have DSL or cable modem access at work and at home, but dial-up speeds are still quite 'reasonable' for casual usage (checking e-mail, perusing a few 'lightweight' web sites such as QRZ or eHam or the Yahoo! groups or Amazon.com, etc.). Yes, it does change my surfing habits -- I'm not going to download some 40MB comedic video file of cats making fools of themselves right then and there, although I might decide, that, e.g., a 4MB document from work is worth the 10-15 minutes wait.I don't know the numbers, but I'd bet your a nickel that for _home_ users dial-up Internet access still FAR outnumbers DSL/cable modem access -- if only due to the price differntials, with dial-up access typically going for $10-$25/mo whereas DSL/cable is more like $30-$55. A lot of people simply can't afford or aren't willing to pay the extra $50/mo, whereas $15/mo isn't so bad.So, in my mind, the Internet starts to become 'usable' at, say, 32kbps. 64kbps is quite desirable, and 128kbps is getting to be pretty leisurely (at 128kbps, many times the overall delay in 'casual web page viewing' has more to do with latency and server response times than the raw data transfer rate... of course, this doesn't apply to large streaming downloads...).[Woodrick, Ed]But to perform a lot of operation, VoIP, video, trunking requires a lot higher speeds. For emergency communications, we need a heck of a lot more. We need to send 4MB pictures over the network. We need to send databases. We need to send normal size email. One big difference is that we tend to useyour 32kbps channel as shared as opposed to single pipe per person. Put 10 people on the channel and you get 3kbps! But there are a few. the Japan Amateur Radio League (JARL) has worked with Icom to create D-Star. D-Star supports user communications speeds up to 128kbps. The nicest thing about it is that the interface is Ethernet! That makes it relatively simple for most folks to connect.Yes, I think Ethernet or USB are the 'defacto' interface standards today. Serial ports are also still pretty viable, IMO, given all the low cost USB -- RS-232 converters available. Using the old Centronics printer port was always a horrible hack, though... and using parallel ports in EPP or ECP mode tends to make porting to, e.g., Linux or Macs noticeably more difficult.[Woodrick, Ed]Parallel ports have all but disappeared. Serial ports are right behind. USB ports (not adapters) are peripheral connectivity ports of choice for most people now. ButEthernet is the NETWORK PORT OF CHOICE! No special software or cables, just a good ole Ethernet cable. But there are currently two drawbacks, first, the repeaters are available yet, and second is the price. I don't see why they don't just use WiFi or WiMax as their 'backbone' connection -- why this insistance on 10GHz hardware? I mean, there's nothing wrong with it technologically, but by having to develop their own 10GHz transceivers they're significantly rasising the price of the system.[Woodrick, Ed]Hmmm, why would this not be a good idea? Because every computer userin the world has access to it? Now I'm not against it, and it would be good if amateurs built it, but it won't be an amateur network. But, whatcan happen is that the band utilization will increase, decreasing feasibility. As with many new products, the price is rather high, higher than most HF radios. People are so used to doing digital radio modes with soundcards that the rather limited bandwidth of them (20kHz) will prevent their usage with higher speed (64kbps+) modes and we're back to separate TNC boxes. Still, even in small runs I think you cab sell a decent TNC for $500.Hmm... perhaps looking at those 96ksps 24bit sound cards wouldn't be such a bad idead...![Woodrick, Ed]No, they aren't used to soundcards. Actually a relatively small number use soundcards, primarily becauseit is a relatively small number that know how to turn a computer on. And it is not the sound cards that allow higher speeds. It's the radios that prohibit it. You just can't do high speed on a voiceradio. And you know, at 128kbps, it really isn't fast enough to support the communications that we desire today. I think 128kbps is plenty. My cell phone has huge latencies when used
[digitalradio] Is packet dead (was Winlink take over) - aka learn from the past
happening tothe packet network. With worldwide coverage, there were a number of people who didn't know how to use packet properly. You know, sending a For Sale message for a HT in the US to For Sale - Europe! There were also a number of people that just couldn't help but interfere. Those are the same people that send Spam and Porn to the groups today So what happened to Packet? It collapsed under its own weight. 1200 bps is no where near fast enough for backbone communications (we were using 300 bps for HF) and the number of messages just clogged the system up. BBSs started implementing two ports, one for forwarding and another for users. That extended the life, but wasn't a solution. So Packet went from a network of lots of good information to thousands of For Sale messages that no one really cared about. The quality of information decreased dramatically. The reason why the thousands of people joined the network disappeared and people became disenfranchised with packet. It was a meteoric life, just about 5 years. So, will Winlink take over? No. They'll possibly be able to create some buzz. They've mitigated some of the problems, like the backbone. But as long as they are using 1200 bps packet, they'll lay victim to the bandwidth limitation. And that's the simple crux of the matter, bandwidth. This message would have taken hours to be sent over a multi-hop packet network. Message sizes were often limited to a few thousand characters. File transfers were possible, but only for very small files and often discouraged. And yes, that makes those text diehards really happy. But that doesn't make everyone happy. How many of you are on high-speed DSL/Cable modem connections? Why not on dial-up? Dial-up is just too slow for the communications that most of us do today. We are used to transferring MB files and high resolution photographs. Browsing web pages is one of our primary means of communications! This stuff just doesn't work on 1200 bps packet. So, what options are there? Not many. Which is possibly one of the reasons why it is hard to get youngsters involved in the organization. But there are a few. the Japan Amateur Radio League (JARL) has worked with Icom to create D-Star. D-Star supports user communications speeds up to 128kbps. The nicest thing about it is that the interface is Ethernet! That makes it relatively simple for most folks to connect. No special software or cables, just a good ole Ethernet cable. But there are currently two drawbacks, first, the repeaters are available yet, and second is the price. As with many new products, the price is rather high, higher than most HF radios. And you know, at 128kbps, it really isn't fast enough to support the communications that we desire today. To do that would require connectivity comparable to DSL/Cable, an order of magnitude higher. But at least D-Star works, it's here and it's fairly reliable. Now we just need to build the network to support it. Ed - WA4YIH The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Winlink take over?
I can't count the number of personal messages and bulletins my packet BBS has forwarded in the last 10+ years. I'm glad not everyone thinks the way you do about automation of text. BBS traffic (Packet) on dedicated channels is just fine, to me. What is scary is the push to open up our HF communications so that automated data can share voice spectrum. Ed K7AAT The K3UK DIGITAL MODES SPOTTING CLUSTER AT telnet://208.15.25.196/ Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Dial Broadband has arrived Nationwide! Up to 5 times faster than traditional dialup connections from $13.33/month! See the demo for yourself at www.BigValley.net
