On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM, mle...@ripnet.com wrote:
Tom makes the point that Gnu Radio isn't shiny. Indeed, it isn't.
Some people arrive at Gnu Radio expecting that it is an end application,
and walk away badly disappointed. They have in their mind a firm notion of
what constitutes a
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Andrew Lentvorski bs...@allcaps.org wrote:
No embedded engineer who values his job will touch a GPL piece of code with
a 10 foot pole. Period.
…and these are folks who will be out-competed in the marketplace by
competitors who are more agile and less phobic.
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Marcus D. Leech mle...@ripnet.com wrote:
I tried an experiment this evening with my 6-channel VLF receiver, which
uses a sound-card (sampled at 96KHz or 192KHz) to sample
a VLF loop antenna and amplifier, and then do power detection (and other
things) over
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Mark J. Blair n...@nf6x.net wrote:
On Aug 17, 2010, at 2:24 PM, William Pretty Security Inc wrote:
It seems that 52MHz /64MHz precision clock references are like hen’s teeth,
so I’m working on a design.
What I need to know is what sort of level is the USRP1
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Marcus D. Leech mle...@ripnet.com wrote:
Anyone know of any open-source, audio compression technologies that
scale to 96KHz sample rates?
I'm looking for something that can compress on the fly an audio
channel that has spectral components
up to the nyquist
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:22 AM, John Gilmore g...@toad.com wrote:
Nothing forces you to interact with other ham radio operators. You can
happily work in isolation communicating among your own stations if you
wish.
Unless you need to do frequency coordination, which you usually do.
Then you
As discussed in the licensing thread... In FCC-land the only people
that can legally transmit at any kind of real power level using
non-certified devices without obtaining specific permission from the
FCC are amateur radio operators.
Testing with attenuators is an obvious first step, but it
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Vincenzo Pellegriniwwvi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everybody,
I have recently had a look at two possibilities for SWRadio-aimed intensive
computing,
which i guess are the two main development lanes for our kind of stuff:
.:. Cell BE platform
.:. CUDA nVidia
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Eric Blossome...@comsec.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:41:59PM -0700, BlueEyeBirdy wrote:
Hey everyone,
I'm writing a report on gnu radio and I had a question... I believe most
everyone uses Ubuntu compared to other Linux systems for GNU radios why
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 11:32 AM, emat...@nd.edu wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Johnathan Corgan wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 7:59 AM, emat...@nd.edu wrote:
Is there any reason why the situation could not be the same as with the
USPR1, with which I can program 2 DDC's on 1 LFRX
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:36 AM, Frank Brickle ab...@arrl.net wrote:
[snip]
Short form: for dttsp-linux and general RF hardware, the Atom 330 is
unquestionably the more utilitarian alternative. This is especially so when,
given Nvidia's history regarding Open drivers, Linux support for ION is
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 9:22 PM, davek davidki...@gmail.com wrote:
what would be the best RX card and what kind of attenuation circuitry
will i need to implement for tuning in the entire bandwidth of RF from
my local cable company?
TVRX is pretty much exactly what you're asking for. It's
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Chris Albertson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
A compromise I've seen is a hack. We call it blindly blasted UDP.
You write a special case network stack that only works on a point to
point Ethernet. You don't even check for collisions at the Ethernet
level.
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Bob McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It appears that TI has withdrawn the free offering of a linux version of its
compilers that I pointed out earlier (in October) at this link.
Of interest to some folks here, an Ebay seller
http://myworld.ebay.com/fluke.l/ has many used/surplus Trimble
Thunderbolts GPSDOs for sale. I haven't received any yet, but I heard
good reviews about that seller from someone in #hamradio on freenode.
(I purchased two, and I recommend that you avail
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Bob Keyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am wondering if there are any projects to build a 'virtual transceiver'
using gnu radio, and specifically using the USRP hardware. what I mean by
this is a gui control panel to present an interface and capabilities of a
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Paul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The PowerSDR software seems to both be GPL and be available on the
sr-40 website. Am I misunderstanding what the rocky software is?
http://www.dxatlas.com/Rocky/
___
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Chris Albertson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really does not have it's own software. It's just that most softrock user
like to use the rocky software because it runs on Windows. You can't
really do much with Rocky because it is closed source, binary only.
Running the current SVN I'm having a problem with apps that display
multiple scopes (usrp_nbfm_rcv.py) for example. What happens is that
the application will update only a single scope at a time. One scope
updates for a couple of seconds then another scope does, in a round
robin fashion. The GUI
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Matt Ettus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Well here is one alternative. The S3-1500 is pin compatible with the 2000.
If enough people wish to purchase a special version with the smaller FPGA I
can have a number of them built that way. You would have to do
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Eric Blossom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the need for python to rebuild the signal chain after every
packet is an utter killer which keeps it from working remotely
efficiently. (i.e. back to back packets with the modem running at
the same bitrate as the
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Achilleas Anastasopoulos
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I apologize for the slightly off topic.
I had just received a donation from Intel of
8 quad-core XEON processors E5440 and I was thinking
of building a super fast gnuradio PC system.
Does anyone have an idea
I just thought USRP2 buyers might be interested in
http://www.jrmiller.demon.co.uk/projects/ministd/frqstd.htm
(I wish my USRP classiss had the 10mhz refclock input! :) )
___
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:27 AM, Alberto Trentadue
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
I have recently purchased the USRP and planning SDR/education
applications.
Now that USRP2 is out, what is the plan to keep USRP supported, both
HW-wise and by GNURadio?
The USRP2 does not really replace USRP.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Joreen Tan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm totally new to gnu radio and it is required for me to do a final year
project on using the usrp as a base station to send and receive gsm signals.
i would like to check, in order to use the USRP as a base station, is it
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Dan Halperin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whoa; are these actually purchaseable yet? Last I heard Matt wasn't taking
preorders and there weren't any announcements to the contrary.
I didn't think they were up when I looked this morning, but they
appear to be up now.
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Bob McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The same daughter boards that work for USRP, work for USRP2.
Any news on the WBX0510?
___
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Johnathan Corgan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 11:58 PM, Ulf Lindgren A
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been trying the tx_voice.py and rx_voice.py, and I have had some
problems with the rx_voice.py failing. However, I think there is a bug
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Eric Blossom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A new Cell product by Sony was announced this week
at SIGGRAPH:
www.sony.com/zego
Looks like a 1U cell. Not sure if they're going to give Linux access
to the RSX or not.
I pointed this out on IRC, but perhaps some
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Joel Koltner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John,
I understand that if you just provide the binaries to a customer, you must
give them a means to get the source code, and if they choose to distribute
that binary to others, they'll just pass on that original offer
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Rudy Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:55:50 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm sorry, but that is illegal. You can use the USRP, but not the
GNURADIO firmware or software.
Um, no.
Okay you got me. But answer me this: Why did we
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Steven Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
It should be a
drop-in replacement for the existing demodulator in designs, except
that the transmitted data needs to be differentially encoded (you will
NOT, however, need a differential decoder on the receive side).
Greetings. Some time ago created a number of GNURadio signal
processing blocks for audio codecs, and have recently gotten around to
finishing them up for public release (Speex and CELT, along with the
speex acoustic echo canceler). Constant bitrate support was a piece
of cake (and wow does Speex
XCVR2450: http://www.ettus.com/custom.html
!
But what about WBX0510? :)
___
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:32 PM, Bruce Perens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Folks,
I've written a draft proposal at http://codec2.org/
to create some good open voice codecs and solve the problem of proprietary
AMBE on D*STAR.
Please read it, and send comments directly to me - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Wireless Monster
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After the gmsk modulation (blks2.gmsk_mod) I have to scale the value (for
example by multiplying it by 8000) before sending it to the USRP to get the
resulting signal centered at the right frequency. If don't do it the
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Jeff Brower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
I understand completely your viewpoint. However, let me point out that one
of your key objectives should be to
increase popularity of GNU Radio software. One way to do this is to
encourage and support GNU Radio
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Jeff Brower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg-
On days that I'm in philosophical mode, I completely agree. But the reality
is that MATLAB is far more widely used
than Octave. MATLAB is at the core of the commercial and academic RF
community, Octave is not.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Jeff Brower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with Eric, well said. My one exception is your reasoning based on
what
features MATLAB and/or GNU Radio have or don't have. If you ask colleagues
why do
you need to use MATLAB they will say because it's what
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Firas Abbas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
If the I,Q bit width output of the DDC is reduced from 16 bit to 12 bit,
then I Q will occupy 24 bit (3 Bytes). Thus we will be able to maximize
the instantaneous bandwidth to 32MB/3 = 10.6MHz without scarifying much
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 7:17 PM, Mohammad Hamed Firooz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, new USRP will support Gigabit Ethernet, but most computers don't
support that. You have to buy an extra card or buscard for your
desktop or laptop.
Just about anything bought in the last few years should
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Greg Troxel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are several issues. One is following the proprietary program's
license, and another is complying with the GPL, which requires that all
of any derivative work be licensed under the GPL.
Then, there's the cultural
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Jeff Brower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Using a AMBE or other codec chip is part of the hardware versus software
decision. We want to do everything in software but there are
limitations.
[snip]
Agree. In the open source voice community, many times
43 matches
Mail list logo
