eHam.net Speak Out

Speak Out: SDR -- The Future?

72 opinions on this subject. Enter your opinion at the bottom of this page.
[Speak Out Home Page]

KB5DXY on 2008-07-20
What I find funny is everyone is ignoring the fact that all modern mid to high end transceivers ,including the Elecraft K2 I am building, is computer controlled.

The tunning knob on my K2 is an optical encoder, the computer counts the angular distance and direction to determine the amount to change the frequency. The K2 also has a DSP (Digital Signal Processing) filter. Now how is this so different from SDR?

There is still analog in SDR also. That is the function of the SoftRock and the hardware part of the SDR1000/5000. You still have to receive and detect the signal.

If you like your pretty little 765 as I like my K2, then keep it, but don't put down the future without at least trying it.

Oh, by the way, I am also building a RxTx V6.2 (a SoftRock RxTx) so I can experiment with SDR.

AB2DP on 2008-06-29
I do not like it. I am like many others an old fashion. I want to see and feel all the knobs, and have a full control.For me THE ESTHETICS of the front panel and the analog meters glooming in seme-obscurity is a must.
Believe me , every day coming home I take a look at my desk to see the full picture of the line from the left to the right:
ICOM 765, Kenwood TS-930s, Icom 745.
I strongly believe that if Icom is going to re-manufacture this Icom 765 as an aniversary, they might have the surprise to see a trimendous glich in their revenue they never expected.
What a nice dream will be for many, still paying a high price to get one of them today on eBay.

WO0Z on 2008-04-06
KG4RUL

If you want to implement that, go ahead, no one is stopping you.

The PowerSDR software is open source and many have learned to tinker with the interface.

I do suggest, however, you give the PowerSDR software as it stands a good try, first. As noted, the Softrock radios are a cheap way to try it out, especially on receive.

One thing not apparent to many that don't own these rigs is that the current interface is _very much_ a product of input from the ham operators who own them.

There are many features that are there that I have personally asked for and received and which have benefited my country count, too.

It turns out, if you're willing to give the existing software a shot, that there are good alternatives to knobs and that there are operating advantages from how PowerSDR console works, particularly the panadapter, which enables me to routinely monitor pileups very accurately (and for much less total money than rigs with an inferior panadapter). You get this advantage with a Softrock, too, so it isn't a function just of price or buying from Flexradio.

This whole business about "you don't need knobs" wasn't apparent to all of the owners early on, either, but it is manifestly true. (In fact, you can get two very fine knobs that interface to a USB port, so you can have physical knobs if you want, which I recommend if that's what you care about. Some owners still use them, but a lot of us have dispensed with "the knob").

But, as to the interface working well, why is this a surprise? Unlike conventional rigs, the interface has been done by hams!



N5JFJ -- The biggest "advertising push" comes from hams like me showing it off to other hams. This isn't something being "pushed" from on high, it's being "pulled" into the marketplace by those of us that believe in it.

AD7KC on 2008-04-06
I like knobs and buttons. They don’t crash. Even so, humans like ‘bells and whistles’ – gadgets. You know, heated cup holders, heated seats, refrigerated glove boxes, electric windows, pet rocks, ect.

All those things that are essential for living on planet earth.

N3OX on 2008-04-03
"SDR = appliance operators rig!"


What a bizarre statement. I've been thinking for a couple years now that SDR is going to let us tinker under the hood of our radios in a meaningful way again.

I can't really make any substantial modifications to the operation of my current rigs. I soldered a capacitor into my FT-857D to make the AGC time constant on SSB longer. That's it. I don't have a SMD rework station.

With a full on SDR I can dial in a gain control curve point-by-point, I'm sure... or if I can't yet and I can't program, someone is writing that up right now.

I don't want my SDR to have a mouse. A big LCD is probably fine. I want it to have a big weighted tuning knob and a bunch of other assignable multifunction knobs, but that's EASY.

If I want it to have a little backlit frequency display that isn't a LCD, that's EASY.

I want my radio to have knobs and buttons and I want to spin the big dial to tune it. I may just also want it to have a command line ;-)

73,
Dan

N3EVL on 2008-04-03
For anyone interested in trying out SDR with only minimal financial outlay, I suggest taking a look at the SoftRock kits. For only a few dollars you can build a small SDR RX. For only slightly more, there are QRP TX/RX versions. I have the 40m RX version and use it with the identical software (PowerSDR) that I use with my Flex SDR-1000. Although it's crystal controlled, it can tune over a good portion of 40m i.e the sampling rate of your soundcard such as 48KHz (or more with better soundcards). See < http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/7134 > for some reviews and a link to the softrock website.

N3EVL on 2008-04-03
KC9GUZ "SDR = appliance operators rig! "

Care to elaborate on your definition of "applicance operator's rig" ?

_My_ SDR, although completely lacking in knobs and buttons, has considerably more useful functionality than any other radio I've used and sits alongside some very state-of-the-art additional hardware that aint no toaster! It also sits next to my venerable FT101EE; maybe you think that's an appliance too? Or then again, maybe it's the "operator" that you were really refering to? Please tell.

KF4KQI on 2008-04-03
I find it almost hilarious that someone would call a SDR a appliance operators rig.

I think SDR is a great concept, I use a Flex SDR1000, and it isn't just a computer controlled radio, any radio can do that. The PowerSDR software uses your computer to do all of the DSP filtering. It is constantly updated with new features. The radio you buy today will be better tommorrow.

Just think of it as a RF interface which any radio is. Is your operating experience defined by knobs, sliders, and buttons, or is it defined by actually getting on the air and making contacts?

For me it is about making contacts. The panadapter on my SDR rig allows me to pounce on new DX stations before they hit the cluster, it allows me to watch the ten meter band for small openings without having to tune up and down only listening to a 3khz swath. I can narrow or widen up the passband to hear all of the audio of a SSB station and nothing else due to the brick wall filtering without having to tune a knob and guess if I am cutting out part of the audio bandwidth. The panadapter is something you interact with, and is real time, not some pretty display that shows useless inaccurate information.

Not bad for a rig that cost me under a grand. It's also nice to wake up some mornings and find a entirely new function on the radio due to a software update.

KC9GUZ on 2008-04-03
SDR = appliance operators rig!
Real radios have knobs and NOT a mouse and a screen.

KG4RUL on 2008-04-03
To reiterate my past post:

KG4RUL on 2008-03-25
There is absolutely no reason an SDR radio could not have the aspect to the user of a conventional radio.

This could take the form of a graphically based, touch screen display surrounded by physical buttons and knobs that change function as needed. Each button/knob would have a label on the screen that could be more descriptive than what we find on the front of a hardware radio. If you include a small finger type joystick, you can implement the computer type functions. Keyboards could be implemented as external devices or as an on-screen keyboard.

So, something that looks much like a hardware radio but, is in fact implemented in software.

--------------------

Here are some sketches of what I propose.

http://home.comcast.net/~dzabawa/SDR.bmp
http://home.comcast.net/~dzabawa/SDRBack.bmp

Looking at the front, there would be a dedicated Power button along with mike jack(s) (configurable with jumpers and software), key jack(s) and a headphone jack. The various buttons would be software defined. The knobs, both single and concentric, would be attached to rotary encoders with their functions software defined. There would be a loarge, wieghted knob for manual tuning with the possibility of a second similar, but smaller knob for a second receiver. The scren would be full color and fully addressable so it could display anything the programmer wanted to show.

The back would feature multiple antenna connectors, multiple USB ports for both programming of the device and control of other devices. An ethernet port could also be included. There would be various other jacks and connectors for functions such as ALC, IF output, etc. A single, high amperage 12VDC (nominal) power connector would provide power to all radio functions and the embedded computer.

Page 1 -->

Enter your opinion about SDR -- The Future?:

The opinions expressed within eHam.net Speak Out are those of the contributor, and not necessarily that of eHam.net. eHam.net simply provides a forum for people to express their opinions on various amateur radio subjects of interest.

Do you have an idea for a Speak Out topic? Email our Speak Out Manager with your ideas.