eHam.net Survey Home

eHam.net Survey

Survey Question

Recent Surveys

VEC Testing Fee...What is the right amount?
2009-04-26

On-Air operating standards...How have they changed over the years?
2009-03-09

Are you active on 23 Centimeters (1240-1300 MHz) and above? Tell us about your experiences, best DX, sucess, failures etc etc.
2009-01-31

How old were you when you became a ham?
2008-12-29

The Antenna - Buy or Build? Ham radio has changed over the years...Do you still build antenna's, or do you buy a commercial product?
2008-11-20

View All Survey Questions

Have a good idea for a eHam.net Survey question?
Enter your idea!

Manager - VK5LA
Andy Williss (VK5LA)

Welcome to the Survey Page.

The goal is to help us all gain a better understanding of the ham community... what we like... what we don't like... about various aspects of our hobby. Let's make it fun and maybe kick up a little dust once in a while. I hope you all will participate and enjoy the questions.

Please enter your ideas for future survey questions yourself (click on the "Enter your idea" link just above) or send them directly to me at surveymaster@eham.net .

I often get comments that there is a commercial interest in the survey questions and that some of the questions are "rigged"...I assure all eham users that the questions are
in no way influenced by any company, person or persons.
The questions in the survey all come via contributions to eham or are just plain made-up by your humble survey manager.

Please note that there are many potential surveys in our queue, and many of them are duplicates. Sometimes we combine several questions into one. We at eham.net make every effort to present all content in a way that will be easily understandable and useful to an international audience.

$\'\'$

Software Defined Radio...what is your interest?
Posted: Jun 15, 2009 (1257 votes, 90 comments) by VK5LA

Survey Results

I haven't even heard of it...	3% (32)
I've looked at some sites on the web...	27% (339)
Downloaded some software and had a play...	7% (92)
Bought a Reciever kit to experiment with...	5% (61)
Have built a functioning Transciever...	5% (58)
Using a commercial SDR Rig...	17% (218)
No way! Give me knobs and buttons any day!	36% (457)

Survey Comments

NO WAY!!!
Yes, SDR's and synthesized rigs have instant frequency selection and read-out to 10 Hz (or better) and great stability. But, a tracking preselector or roofing filter and one bandwidth setting filter CAN'T BEAT three or four continuously tuned circuits before the bandwidth is set. I wonder if an SDR would let you receive FM through an AM detector??? Posted by N9LCD on July 3, 2009

I have friends who have a Flex radio, and it's interesting and versatile, but I think it's too "Rube Goldberg" for me. I do have a current Yaesu HF radio that can be updated by computer. But I just don't care for a computer/radio where you only have a video screen and no physical controls other than a keyboard and mouse. If the computer goes awry, no radio. Posted by WB4TJH on July 3, 2009
computer wizzbang
What's it take to keep one of these wonder radios working when the power goes out? Posted by K1DA on July 3, 2009
SDR
I have built several Softrocks including the first 40 Meter version that got it's power from a USB port. The last transceiver I built was for 30 meters that used VE3NEA's (Alex) Rocky program. What a hoot. Softrocks are a good inexpensive way to learn about SDR's. Sometimes though, I just want nothing to do with computers :-). Tom, ak2b Posted by AK2B on June 30, 2009
Software Defined Radios
I have built several SoftRocks, receivers as well as complete transceivers. I am using them with transverters for RxTx on 2m, 902, 10Ghz. I LOVE the Softrocks! The software is the biggest hassle, but once you have it setup they are great. I have also ran QRP on 80 and 40m CW and PSK using the Softrock transceivers, running 1w. Great fun. The SoftRock V9 receiver is fantastic.. 160-10meters. I use PowerSDR software for SSB and Rocky for CW and PSK. I also own a SDR1000 for use on 2m and HF bands. K0AWU Bill EN37ed Posted by K0AWU on June 29, 2009
LEARNING CURVE
I bought a Flex Radio 5000A in March 2009 including the auto tuner and second receiver. After they solved the Windows Vista driver issue, I discovered a whole new world using it on CW, SSB, PSK31, RTTY and transverter hookups. It requires a 4 QUAD processor for dependabilty and any future software enhancements but well worth it. Am able to now receive in dual diversity mode and also full QSK using two antennas. The best part as far as I am concerned is the ability to use an accurate 10 MHz reference (Z3810A GPS unit). Will make a sked say on 14.0100000 Mhz if you would like. ICOM, Kenwood and YAESU radios are now obsolete-hi. Posted by K3ROJ on June 29, 2009
Why not both?
I love my boatanchors, and enjoy my ricebox, but find SDR intriguing as well. I haven't gone much beyond the looking-on-the-internet stage but think SDR is kinda cool in its' own way. I don't see why one has to be at the exclusion of the other. It's all good. 73, Mark Posted by WA5VQM on June 27, 2009
computer stuff
I'll vote with my radio dollars and it won't be for version 3 update 2 of anything that is supposed to be a radio. Posted by K1DA on June 27, 2009
Not for me
Each to their own, but I have to agree with K9FON on this. Posted by KC5MO on June 27, 2009
NO WAY!
I have to stare at a monitor all day why do i want to stare at one for my ham bobby?? Posted by K9FON on June 22, 2009
SDR Rocks!
Imagine recording a whole contest and playing it back, any mode, any frequency. This is possible today with some of the SDR receivers that are available. Yes it would hog up gobs of hard drive space, and yes it's probably over kill. Once a person gets over having to have a knob in front of them to play radio, then the advantages of SDR start to become clear. Yes I like the old radios myself. I own a Johnson Ranger, TS-520, and even more modern radios like the FT-897. But I have several SDR rigs around also. Posted by N7BUI on June 22, 2009
Do you really want a computer for a radio?
So the question is this do you really want a computer for a radio? The PC I use for ham radio have been less than 100%. Blue screen of death, MS updates that cause the world to stop while you fix DDL and registry issues, crashes for unknown/unexplainable reasons, driver conflicts and the list goes on and on. And don't even get me started on viruses and spyware and malware and running all of the anti software to try to keep those issues in check.. Lets face it the standard response to any PC issue is "reboot". I love the simplicity of a conventional radio, I will take a radio with knobs that works every time over beating my head up against the wall with another round of PC/operating system/application update nightmares.. Posted by W9CN on June 22, 2009
SDR is Ok
but there are growing pains. So far, SDR works well for CW and SSB ONLY if the computer and sound card are very FAST and of good quality. The average PC can run SSB but probably not CW because of the delays. In order to run the digital modes additional software is required to connect the sound card to the digital software, IE, DM780, Digipan or MIXW. More delays. If the PC owner is careless (virus and lots of JUNK) forget SDR or get a dedicated and high power PC. Under the right operating conditions SDR can be a lot of fun and there is no doubt the software filters are excellent. Posted by K6ACJ on June 21, 2009
MMMMultiple posts
What gives, eham? STILL haven't fixed this annoying glitch! I'll probably come back in another year and it'll STILL be the same. Maybe, next time, I'll remember and NOT POST! Posted by WB6DGN on June 21, 2009
SDR
I use computers. I drive a car. I am fairly adept at both but I enjoy neither. They are merely a means to an end. I haven't been "on the air" in well over a year, at least in a QSO; but I've spent many hours on the bench with my radios. I have no desire to contaminate my enjoyment by bringing a computer into the mix. It's bad enough that some of my newer radios have to be programmed with a computer Posted by WB6DGN on June 21, 2009
You'll either like it or hate it, but you won't be indifferent.
G4ILO: ...the idea of needing a computer just to make a QRP CW contact seems nonsense, and having to deal with the support hassles of a general purpose operating system is a real turn-off. Fair point ...but once you actually hear the darn thing you'll be surprised to find out that your home made $150 SDR receiver sounds as good (if not better) than $2K 'knob' radio. Unfortunately most radio amateurs had no chance to evaluate SDR based on first hand experience. For those not afraid to step in the future, here is a demo file we call ' the magic sounds of SDR' : http://www.genesisradio.com.au/help/help1.html You'll either like it or hate it, but you won't be indifferent. 73 Nick Posted by VK1AA on June 20, 2009
Behind the Curtain
Yes, SDRs are truly wonderful and getting better every day. Yet here is a thought: Linking anything with a computer and eventually with the World Wide Web introduces the people behind the curtain. When two licensed hams communicate directly over the air, they are in full or we could say complete control of the communication. Their use of the medium is completely under their control. The computer is, after all, a very dependent device. It is completely dependend upon "services" under the control of multitudes of unknown people. It cannot be a simple device of communication as for example two transceivers operating simplex. Computer "communication" is dependent on others. Amateur radio communication without computers is totally independent of others. Just keep that in the back of your mind as you enjoy SDRs and such. Keep and use your independent radios as well as you computer dependent ones. Someday you will be glad you did. Posted by AI2IA on June 20, 2009
Could offer some good ideas...
I believe that there will be more and more software integrated into every device we use. Getting in at the ground level would be a good way to make sure that HAM interests are not lost or forgotten. Also it may lead to some affordable ways for others to be introduced to HAM radio. IE - if SDR radios are not 'all that' but work and are an affordable option it could serve as a launch platform or incentive to 'push' users into a hardware upgrade of sorts and move to a dedicated radio platform to enable more advanced feature that would be limited to a more normal rig. To wit - there have been estimates made that put computers in 9 out of 10 households in America and that is a largely untapped resource from the HAM perspective. Look at all the users that are talking all over the world with VoIP solutions like the Teamspeak and Ventrilo software that is a free download. Something to think about and follow none the less. Posted by AC7NT on June 20, 2009
What ever works for you!!
I my self am not totally convinced Computer technology is that reliable and if i ever went SDR i would certainly make it a point to keep a backup radio.I am hounded constantly by my ATT and my Credit card and satellite provider to go 100% computer billing and paying saving them paper work. Nope i'll pay via computer but i still want that bill in the mail box as like i said i'm not convinced on Computer reliability. Posted by K0PD on June 20, 2009
It's ok... I gess
SDR... I wish such it was less expensive. I think "Martha" said it was a "good thing" but what does she know? She still thinks a "ham" is something served on holiday tables. Posted by KA4AIY on June 19, 2009
SDR
I've personally never understood the “either or” concept toward anything. I have built a Softrock receiver, a Warbler PSK-31 transceiver and just bought a v6.3 RXTX. But I also have a HW-101 and just purchased a Hammarlund HQ-110 receiver. I even have an old Westinghouse RA-DA. I like the best of both worlds. If it transmits or receives, then it’s cool. But to each his own. Ham radio has plenty of room for everyone, from CW to digital. Cheers, Steve KI4WGI Posted by KI4WGI on June 19, 2009
NO DIFF...! ! !
The diff between a SDR , and a brand new state of the art radio today.. barely a diff.. I am building a RXTX6.3 right now, and so far so good. I see it as a pioneering way to get young people excited about radio/computers/internet/RF/antennas.. SDR is the future of radio, and just like spark gap, and AM radio.. SDR is paving the way for future generations to get involved with radio... see my website at http://www.hamkitt.com 73 see ya on the air.. Joe Leto KJØL Posted by KJ0L on June 19, 2009

I think the concept is great and there are a lot of folks buying them. I prefer my older radios (IC-756, IC-775DSP, and FT-1000D) mainly because of ease of use and 200 watts of output (when needed). I will probably obtain one of the FT-9000 400 Watt radios when the used cost has gone down more. Then I could unload my three amplifiers. I have been licensed for almost 50 years and like others, have seen tons of improvement in ham gear. SDR is the future. Semper Fi, Tommy - K6YE DX IS Posted by K6YE on June 19, 2009
The old and the new
I like the older tube transceivers because they are not as fragile, and I can see what I'm working on. I like tubes and non SMT components for several reasons. I also have some of the newer radios, PROIII, Orion II, 7800, etc. You have to be careful with them. I might try one of the Flex radios someday. I had the K3, and wasn't impressed regardless of what the cult fanatics say. Assembling preassembled modules with surface mount components on them is not true kit building, that's like assembling a PC, which is not kit building either. The newer radios are more and more becoming, homogenized, fragile little trinkets with disposable modules that are cheaper to just replace than try to repair. The newer ham will be the appliance operator who knows little about electronics theory, and how their equipment works unless they actively seek the knowledge out themselves. Hopefully for their own benefit they will. We have it so easy these days. Fortunately, antenna systems are still left, and that's great. Still something left to challenge the mind. The proliferation of SMT disposable electronic trinket toys controlled with microprocessors and source code are here to stay. So we should accept them for what they are and get used to them. None of this will keep me from enjoying ham radio because there is still much there to experiment with, but no thanks to VOIP interfaces (ECHO freak, WIN freak) that is not radio. W3VR Posted by W3VR on June 19, 2009
Cheating???
"I view using a computer to send or receive code as cheating." I guess I don't understand the above comment: last time I listened to the W1AW code bulletin on any of my SDRs or my old FT101, my brain still had to decode the CW. Where does an SDR introduce cheating? Posted by N3EVL on June 19, 2009
Room for both, but excited about SDR
I am in the process of completing a RXTX6.3 and am thoroughly enjoying it so far. although my aging eyes and very rusty soldering skills aren't as good as i'd like, i've been able to get the kit together without any problem. I think i'll still keep on using my ts2000 because i just like it, but i also expect to get a lot of use out of the RXTX6.3 while traveling. SDRs are the future of radio. Posted by N1IG on June 18, 2009
Fantastic advancement
I built my first radio RX when I was 10, so 44 years ago. Built and used almost everything since then. When it comes to serious DX, or weak signal work, SDR really makes a difference. Have two Perseus, some SoftRock, some home made, often used as IF for VHF/UHF/satellite tfc. A true revolution in listening and operating! Most people that has negative opinion never tried a modern, direct sampling SDR receiver. Let try, taste it, and then, of course, one may return to the analog radio for the pleasure of seeing a filament glow. But if you do a serious technical comparisons, there is no game. Marco IK1ODO / AI4YF Posted by IK1ODO on June 18, 2009
Cheating???
"I view using a computer to send or receive code as cheating." I guess I don't understand the above comment: last time I listened to the W1AW code bulletin on any of my SDRs or my old FT101, my brain still had to decode the CW. Where does an SDR introduce cheating? Posted by N3EVL on June 18, 2009
SDR? No tnx
Right now I’ll vote ‘No way, give me knobs and buttons any day!’, but I can be flexible, since I’ve never tried SDR. I’m old school ham radio, licensed since 1963, but new school in that I design & program automated test equipment with a graphical touch-panel user interface using Labview. I like to keep computers separate from my ham radio equipment, except for a few operating aids on a nearby laptop. I view using a computer to send or receive code as cheating. I guess you could call me a purist. Never cared for mixing rock n roll into country music either. If I sat down and used an SDR I might change my tune, but I’m not motivated to do so. Maybe it’s because I’m not a contester, just a casual cw dx’er & rag chewer, not real demanding of my equipment, which, by the way, is an IC-706MK2G. Even that’s not as satisfying as my old Heath SB-102 was. Posted by WB2NVY on June 18, 2009
All SDR is not the same
“I still see many hams who do not understand the distinction between CAT controlled xcvrs and SDR. When you say software defined radio, they assume you mean CAT.” Indeed there really is a lot of misunderstanding of what SDR really is or is not. And just like the confusion between “CAT control” and “SDR”, there is also a general lack of understanding about the key differences between the ways “SDR” in amateur radio circles is implemented. Some products like the Flex’s, Softrock’s, RFSpace, QuickSilver, Perseus etc. are all designed from the “SDR first” perspective and therefore tend to be much more open in the possible ways to use, control, and operate them. The more traditional radios from the big 4 or 5 all start with a predefined, and a rather narrow, “knobs and buttons first” user control paradigm, and because of that will forever be limited in their ultimate capability. They may even offer a highly proprietary spectrum display hardware of some kind. Those proprietary displays are often low in capability, and performance. Additionally no amount of firmware updates to them will ever add things like “N” number of RX’s or natively support (without extra wires and cables) things like CWSkimmer, or any of the other “sound card” based programs and modes. Their underlying design architecture simply precludes it. The evidence of this fundamental limitation of those “knobs and buttons first SDR” radios is widely evident with all of the different efforts going on to graft the various PC based SDR’s to them. Just seems like an awfully expensive way to get knobs and buttons onto a PC based SDR. Posted by N9DG on June 18, 2009
I like old rigs
A OM stated: "Ham Radio...it's not about interacting with the equipment... it is about making contacts..." For me it is exactly the opposite. For me it is all about interacting with the equipment. I like old rigs with all their knobs etc. The contact, for me, is just a by-product to prove the equipment. Of course I use a PC in a CW contest, but i like most using the rig without any computer. Posted by DL3ZM on June 18, 2009
SDR
I have been a ham for 45 years and this technology is by far a quantum leap in usability and enjoyment. Until you really experience this you will not understand how much much it will improve your operating enjoyment. I do not miss the knobs and widgets, I can accomplish much more with a few mouse clicks! I suggest you find someone with a SDR and visit them on a contest weekend and experience what the software and hardware can do. Try a CW contest and dial in a 25Hz filter and enjoy picking out signals with no ringing or artifacts and you will be a convert. Tim W4YN Posted by W4YN on June 18, 2009
SDR
Softrock is the way to go if you're a kit builder. Nothing like the satisfaction of putting something on the air that you built yourself. Posted by KC5FGK on June 17, 2009
SDR for <$100
I still see many hams who do not understand the distinction between CAT controlled xcvrs and SDR. When you say software defined radio, they assume you mean CAT. The softrock receiver and tranceiver kits are a great intro into the capabilities of SDR...and CHEAP (which we know has universal appeal to almost any ham). I've built two of the softrock tranceivers. Each kit cost less than $50. All you need in addition to the kit is a computer to connect it to, and an antenna. These kits do involve some small SMT devices...but if you're gonna build any modern kits these days, learning to solder SMDs is a necessary skill to acquire. For someone who travels a lot carrying a laptop anyway, another black box the size of a sardine can and a portable antenna is the ultimate portable hamshack for me. What I find interesting about the softrocks in particular is the amazing quality for such a minimal investment. The components external to the softrock hardware are infinitely upgrade-able without needing to discard the hardware...software, soundcard, antenna, etc. This makes it easy to start out with a very basic (cheap) setup to try it out. But beware, it's easy to get hooked on SDR. I know I am. That being said, I still have my Kenwood Hybrids when the shack gets a little chilly and some heat from the 6146's is a welcome and nostalgic trip back to my beginnings in ham radio, 73, Brian AC7NA Posted by AC7NA on June 17, 2009
I do both.
I've my pile of vintage boat anchors that I absolutely love to play with, nothing like tuning up the finals every time you move more than a few kHz to make you feel like a radioman! But then I have built a SoftRock 6.2 RXTX (that got me the SDR bug) and now I have my HPSDR setup that I am still in the process of assembling. The boat anchors are a hell of a lot of fun and I wouldn't ever give them up, but the SDR stuff outperforms it by far and from what I am seeing from the specs on the HPSDR stuff there isn't much out there that can beats it's performance either at any price. I'm looking forward to verifying those claims for myself very soon. If I feel like knobs, there are knobs available for my SDR radios that feels just like what you'd find on any analog radio. And I might give one of em a go too, but so far it's easier, faster and far more precises to just use the keyboard and mouse to explore the spectrum. To each his own, unless you are like me and want it all. Posted by KV1M on June 17, 2009

"In other words, this is not an either/or situation. You can have the best of both worlds. " Yeah I might end up buying a Flex-1500 just to play with it... Posted by N3OX on June 17, 2009
Full or Semi-SDR
While there are now several choices for full SDR radios like the Flex, I find it more enjoyable for me to use a Semi-SDR rig, the Yaesu FT-2000D. Its like an SDR with knobs. Ture, it isn't totally "hackable" and infinitely adjustable but the design offers me the flexibility of a radio whose operating parameter as adjustable and upgradeable thru software and can be controlled thru the traditional front'panel knobs or CAT. In addition, I am currently looking at the RFSpace SDR-IQ (a real SDR) as an add-on Specturm Scope for my FT-2000. There I can use the power of an SDR using the computer as the only control. FYI, I operate the FT2kD using the knobs as I am accustomed to.... Posted by KG6YV on June 17, 2009
Software Defined Radio
Fortunately because of their price, the software defined radios are a nice addition to the shack. In other words, this is not an either/or situation. You can have the best of both worlds. Posted by COOWALLSKY on June 17, 2009
SDR
For me ham radio is not about the equipment per say, it's about making the contact with what little I have to work here. I guess I should say it's not about interacting with the equipment... I could care less about rubber textured knobs, how a case is painted, what a rig looks like sitting on my desk, the cheesy slow "band scopes" and so forth. True SDR rigs that use a computer to modulate, demodulate, and filter a signal to me are the holy grail in radios. Playing with the beta software is a eye opener. The dizzying speed the updates come in improving the receiver, transmitter, and the interface are astounding. It seems to make the news updates on some sites when other companies release a firmware update to a firmware defined rig. I use a SDR1000 currently, I have a 3000 on order. These rigs drip with a high performance to price ratio that coupled with the ability to see signals on the band real time and interact with them are amazing. My knob rigs get dusty... and so does my FlexRadio as it sits about 12 feet away from me, I have a hard time remembering what it looks like... I don't care! When I get the new pretty blue one in, I'll probably take it out of the box, flip it around in my hands to check it out, exclaim "nice!" then pluck it down where the SDR1000 is and promptly forget what it looks like as well, I may remember to dust her off in a few months... Posted by N4BFD on June 17, 2009
Why resist?
A Software Defined Radio is like a car that improves its MPG rating over time without any additional hardware or cost. I've owned an SDR-1000 since 2005 and it was a great radio back then. However, it is a better radio now (2009), and will be better in the future. It also seems as if SDR owners are more enthusiastic and have a more positive outlook about their radios than non SDR owners. Quite frankly an SDR may actually be better for your health because of the pure enjoyment involved in operating one. Posted by AB2VW on June 17, 2009
SDR
For me ham radio is not about the equipment per say, it's about making the contact with what little I have to work here. I guess I should say it's not about interacting with the equipment... I could care less about rubber textured knobs, how a case is painted, what a rig looks like sitting on my desk, the cheesy slow "band scopes" and so forth. True SDR rigs that use a computer to modulate, demodulate, and filter a signal to me are the holy grail in radios. Playing with the beta software is a eye opener. The dizzying speed the updates come in improving the receiver, transmitter, and the interface are astounding. It seems to make the news updates on some sites when other companies release a firmware update to a firmware defined rig. I use a SDR1000 currently, I have a 3000 on order. These rigs drip with a high performance to price ratio that coupled with the ability to see signals on the band real time and interact with them are amazing. My knob rigs get dusty... and so does my FlexRadio as it sits about 12 feet away from me, I have a hard time remembering what it looks like... I don't care! When I get the new pretty blue one in, I'll probably take it out of the box, flip it around in my hands to check it out, exclaim "nice!" then pluck it down where the SDR1000 is and promptly forget what it looks like as well, I may remember to dust her off in a few months... Posted by N4BFD on June 17, 2009
Someday
I didn't vote in the survey because none of the categories seem to fit for me. My category would be "plan to build one, but prefer to finish some other projects first." As far as knobs vs. no knobs, I believe at least one radio fits the category "SDR with knobs" as discussed in a QST article within the past year. Personally, I find computers and software very annoying. I hate having to use a mouse all day and get tennis elbow. I like things that turn off when I tell them to, instead of asking me if I want to do updates, yada yada, or lock up. Linux/Ubuntu is not as bad, but still I hate it. Even my Moto-Q takes minutes to boot up before I can use it...but in fairness my BlackBerry (for work) takes only seconds. Posted by K5END on June 17, 2009
Kachina and Pro 3 Like Them Both!
I have both the Kachina 505DSP, the grand daddy of SDR transceivers and the Icom Pro 3. I use them both but find myself on the Pro 3 for the most part. I guess I just enjoy the tactile part of operating. Spinning the big vfo knob on the Pro 3 just feels a lot more like "radio" than clicking on an up or down arrow. They both work great, both have good receivers, although the lack of a noise blanker is evident in the 505 and they both get great reports from near and far. I guess I am a bit old fashioned and like the hands-on feel of analog. The newer radios, with a mix of the two, like the Icom 7700 and the K3 might be the way to go to get the best of both worlds. That is the way I will go next time around. Posted by W2FBS on June 17, 2009
Not for me
I like the look and feel of a real radio, and I dislike computers even though (or perhaps because) I have been working with them all my life. I use computers for the things they are good at, like logging or data modes, and even write my own software for it. But the idea of needing a computer just to make a QRP CW contact seems nonsense, and having to deal with the support hassles of a general purpose operating system is a real turn-off. If SDR came as a dedicated board, which could have a screen interface or one with knobs then I'd be more interested. My Elecraft K3 is essentially an SDR with an integrated analog interface. So I'm not anti-SDR per se, I just dislike current implementations that require Windows (or Linux.) Posted by G4ILO on June 17, 2009
Flex radio user
If you're looking for something very different in a radio operating experience and you're not afraid of using a computer interface then I highly recommend it. It is a very immersive user experience compared to a standard rig - being able to see a large swath of spectrum in one eye full and spot that station 100kc or more up without spinning the dial you are less likely to miss out on a contact - when I compare it to one of my standard rigs it's like taking the blinders off. Posted by N7BCP on June 16, 2009
Software defined radio
I have a FlexRadio systems flex-3000 and love it to death. I don't even turn on my knob rigs anymore. SDR is a joy to operate and easier and faster to manipulate. Once you try one, you will never go back! Posted by K6XR on June 16, 2009

I like radios and I like computers. I just prefer them to be separate items. Half of the fun of being a ham is collecting radios(for me anyway). Sadly my collection is a bit dry at the moment. I like to turn knobs! I also like to see a slight glow in the background.;) Posted by KB3LAZ on June 16, 2009
Not for me
I don't even like rig control programs, much less a SDR. I agree totally with K7AAT. I look at the computer screen enough because of logging and digital programs. Posted by WB4M on June 16, 2009

"Yup, but no one's doing it" Actually, everyone's doing it, but in firmware... so that's not exactly what I meant... :-) Posted by N3OX on June 16, 2009

"It is interesting to read the debate -- which seems to center on the knobs vs. no-knobs controversy" That doesn't change the fact that if you want to go buy a powerful SDR and just start using it, you can't buy it with knobs. That's why the debate, I think. In the end, for a large number of hams, the innards of the radio are a magic box that does a reasonable job at decoding signals. For them, the only advantage of the SDR might be that the company can improve specs and add features. But that can pale against the significant disadvantage of the screen and mouse based interface that's the hallmark of the commercial stuff. " If one really wanted to control an SDR with knobs it would be relatively easy to do. In fact, it would be quite easy to build an SDR that is completely indistinguishable from the current crop of "traditional" ham transceivers." Yup, but no one's doing it. And there are several good reasons for that I'm sure, not the least of which is that for the commercial offerings, encoders and buttons are expensive, and furthermore, if they offered "just another radio" they wouldn't pick up people who really like the idea of alternate tuning schemes and a big computer monitor instead of a little display. I think the debate will rage on over people hating to click with a mouse and look at a computer screen, because in the end, it doesn't matter what's under the hood for most hams. When they want a new radio, performance probably isn't a very serious concern when you get right down to it. What matters is whether or not they enjoy interacting with the radio. I love the idea of being able to hack around "under the hood" with a SDR when I get some time to do that, but as cool as it would be to write your own stereo diversity reception plugin for your SDR, I can't imagine that particular aspect will drive sales much. Given the fact that the future is software defined and people like knobs, I think there's an opportunity for a well designed USB peripheral with some assignable buttons and a big, balanced, weighted, free spinning VFO knob (not a Griffin Powermate... I have one and it's not the same). Something that the manufacturers need to think about, IMO. "Likewise there is discussion on using a MIDI work surface (lots of knobs and switches) to control a Flex transceiver. " It's a start... but it's a hack in terms of the broader market. The fact that your interface is flexible doesn't necessarily mean it needs to eschew the big, physical knob. 73 Dan Posted by N3OX on June 16, 2009

<There might be a place for it, but have you ever tried peaking a coil with a digital meter?> This comment kind of gets to the point. In a SDR there is NO coil to peak. There is only the equation that represents the "coil". Because it's an equation, it is always peaked perfectly. Wrap your mind around that idea. Then wrap your mind around the idea that if you can think of a better equation, or computer process it is trivial to implement, and its trivial to implement for the entire fleet of radios. 73 W9OY Posted by W9OY on June 16, 2009
Love it!
My shack line-up consists of an FT-101EE, Flex SDR-100, HPSDR. I occasionally fire up the FT-101EE but it feels odd to operate now: despite the myriad of buttons and switches, there's little real interaction and, as others have stated, once you've used a panadapter and can see and interract with the band spread out before you, its very hard to go back to anything less. Pete, N3EVL Posted by N3EVL on June 16, 2009
Results Suprised Me
I guess I qualify as an old timer...licensed since 1963 and an avid SDR fan and user. Happy to see so many SDR enthusiasts because it really is the future of communication technology. BTW I started with a Knight T-60 and old military surplus(WW2) receiver, had and still have a 70's era FT101, 80's era Kenwood TS450, 90's era TenTec Pegasus(firmware defined) and a Flex SDR1000. I'm also an EE and a retired computer industry executive. Love it all. Posted by W4KOV on June 16, 2009
The fun is back again
I ended my review of my Flexradio 5000A with: “SDR is the future and it is now here! And it is great fun.” I have not had so much fun playing radio since my early days as a ham (I was licenced in 1954). As "small pistol" DXer with a wire antenna (Carolina Windom 40 Short at 25 ft.) running barefoot, I cannot believe the DX I am hearing and working. And the “radio” I bought last year is now so much better as new versions of the “software” comes along. This gives the same sense of excitement and expectation I had in the early days as I built rigs and modified them. Posted by K2HGO on June 16, 2009
Knobs and SDR not incompatible
I just saw a very nice presentation at the SeaPac hamfest given by Dan, N7HQ where he demonstrated a state-of-the-art SDR setup built into 1970's era Heath SB-104 cabinets. All of the knobs and buttons worked! The LED display showed the frequency. There's no reason you can't mix SDR and knobs. It's also important to remember that the SDR world allows people to mix and match a virtually infinite number of software based radio components in order to build radio systems. Anyone with experience with it knows that the older, hardware based radio world is much more limited (not to mention expensive) in this regard. Posted by VE6VQ on June 16, 2009
Love it!
My shack line-up consists of an FT-101EE, Flex SDR-100, HPSDR. I occasionally fire up the FT-101EE but it feels odd to operate now: despite the myriad of buttons and switches, there's little real interaction and, as others have stated, once you've used a panadapter and can see and interract with the band spread out before you, its very hard to go back to anything less. Pete, N3EVL Posted by N3EVL on June 16, 2009
Software Defined Radio
It is interesting to read the debate -- which seems to center on the knobs vs. no-knobs controversy. Frankly, it is possible to control the mostly-analog radios from a computer just as it is possible to have a completely software-defined radio controlled from a bank of knobs and switches. I use Ham Radio Deluxe and/or fldigi to completely control an Elecraft K2. Likewise there is discussion on using a MIDI work surface (lots of knobs and switches) to control a Flex transceiver. The real difference with SDR has to do with internal architecture and not user-interface. The key factor is how the software does frequency selection, filtering, and modulation/demodulation, not whether you control it with a mouse or a knob. I have a couple of softrock boards and I own a Flex 5000a with all the bells and whistles. The Softrock boards are elegant in their simplicity. Where else can you get a multi-mode HF transceiver for $35? The Flex outperforms any other radio I have ever used. It certainly has its quirks and I can see places where the user-interface needs work (including a good tuning dial). But hey, that can be added by plugging a device into the computer and writing a bit of code. If one really wanted to control an SDR with knobs it would be relatively easy to do. In fact, it would be quite easy to build an SDR that is completely indistinguishable from the current crop of "traditional" ham transceivers. So don't get lost in the "knobs" vs. "no knobs" debate. That is not SDR. Look at how it works under the hood. That will tell the real story. 73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL Posted by WB6RQN on June 16, 2009
More than radio required
Lots of good comments here, but if I were to boil it all down to one basic issue for me, I would pick radio, rather than computer and radio, for almost all my operations. I don't like the thought of needing a video monitor, keyboard and/or mouse to operate my radio, for one. Ed - K7AAT Posted by K7AAT on June 16, 2009
The Future is here
People should investigate what the future of electronic components holds for us. It is the inexorable march of commerce towards less expensive components, smaller size, software controlled. It will soon come to pass that outside of power production and the efficient delivery of power to the intended load (amplifiers and matching), there will be little available in the way of discrete components. The place for radio experimentation these days is in fact primarily in digital signal processing and the delivery of services to the end user where ONE of these services is DSP. This means software development. To be honest, it is this which brought me back to amateur radio, and to the development of SDR after longer than a decade of radio silence. To my mind, these ARE the good old days. Posted by N4HY on June 16, 2009
Love My SDR
I have owned an SDR-IQ for almost 6 months. When I first heard about them, I just didn’t see how one of those little black boxes could add anything to my station. The best description of how I feel now was said earlier by N9DG (I could not have said it better) looking at band activity with “regular” radio is like looking through paper towel tube. With my SDR I can see the whole band. I say again “I CAN SEE” the whole band. Beyond that I’m having the time of my life “SEEING” what’s everywhere else. You would be surprised what’s out there that you never know about looking through a paper towel tube. Until you actually use one, you don’t know what you are missing. Posted by N3UJJ on June 16, 2009
SDR really is fun
I've been using the Flex SDR1000 for a few years and the software upgrades have really been a lot of fun to play with. I'm also using an HPSDR and it's just as much fun as the Flex and has a few advantages. I mostly operate CW, so for me the filters are a big plus. A lot of my enjoyment comes from learning from the great minds that are engineering this stuff. If you want to learn about DSP, hang out with the HPSDR or Flex folks and read some of their code (the software kind.) Also, it's kinda fun to use an SDR panadapter for all kinds of other radio shack tasks - things like observing the resonant frequency of a tuned circuit, testing oscillators, looking at frequency spectra, etc. Posted by W8XR on June 16, 2009
Software Defined Radio
I played with the early Soft Rock 40 as it was cheap. I have built several SoftRock 40's since. They are flea power but it is all about learning and the antenna. You can put some major funds into the comercial SDR's, so if you tinker, the sofytrock is a great way to get started. The kit goes for about $12 for a receievr and $%% for a Tranceiver. Posted by KD5YYK on June 16, 2009
Software Defined Radio
I played with the early Soft Rock 40 as it was cheap. I have built several SoftRock 40's since. They are flea power but it is all about learning and the antenna. You can put some major funds into the comercial SDR's, so if you tinker, the sofytrock is a great way to get started. The kit goes for about $12 for a receievr and $%% for a Tranceiver. Posted by KD5YYK on June 16, 2009

I use an SDR-1000. The receiver is sensitive, the bandwidths (filters and TX) are infinitely adjustable... the panadapter is impossible to live without once experienced. I can never go back to my radio with knobs. I'm not saying everything about the SDR/Flex series of radios is great. The ergonomics and attractiveness of the interface have a VERY long way to go in my opinion. But this is true of any relatively new technology, especially in ham radio. Posted by K1PGV on June 16, 2009
Best of both worlds
I love my HPSDR xcvr, honestly the best receiver I have ever owned. I too like the look and feel of "real" radios.... so I installed my HPSDR board set into an SB-104 case. Yes all the controls work, including the s-meter. Pics here: http://alvargi.50megs.com/HPSDR/ Posted by N7HQ on June 16, 2009
More than radio required
Lots of good comments here, but if I were to boil it all down to one basic issue for me, I would pick radio, rather than computer and radio, for almost all my operations. I don't like the thought of needing a video monitor, keyboard and/or mouse to operate my radio, for one. Ed - K7AAT Posted by K7AAT on June 16, 2009
Like & Dis-like
The Technology has been around for many years, however the SDR application itself would be considered disruptive technology in the Amateur Community. I have been using a Flexradio for years, and absolutely love it. I started with the SDR-1000, and moved onto the 5000A. Even sold my Mark V as I could not stand to see such a good rig gathering dust in the corner. When asked about the technology and was it worth the expenditure, my response has always been "either you like it, or you dis-like it. There seems to be no grey area." This can be seen in the above results as well as comments. So for those who "looked at a website" and or/are considering buying an SDR rig, I invite you to take that curiosity a little further and find an SDR user in your area and give it a go before spending the money. You will know quickly whether you like it or dis-like it. And for those who dis-like the SDR application, I completely understand. I have some older analog rigs with plenty of knobs in the shack that I will never let go. 73, Mike W5CUL Posted by W5CUL on June 16, 2009
Like & Dis-like
The Technology has been around for many years, however the SDR application itself would be considered disruptive technology in the Amateur Community. I have been using a Flexradio for years, and absolutely love it. I started with the SDR-1000, and moved onto the 5000A. Even sold my Mark V as I could not stand to see such a good rig gathering dust in the corner. When asked about the technology and was it worth the expenditure, my response has always been "either you like it, or you dis-like it. There seems to be no grey area." This can be seen in the above results as well as comments. So for those who "looked at a website" and or/are considering buying an SDR rig, I invite you to take that curiosity a little further and find an SDR user in your area and give it a go before spending the money. You will know quickly whether you like it or dis-like it. And for those who dis-like the SDR application, I completely understand. I have some older analog rigs with plenty of knobs in the shack that I will never let go. 73, Mike W5CUL Posted by W5CUL on June 16, 2009
Not even close
Firmware defined radios do not even come close to a "true" software defined radio. I have owned a lot of hybrid DSP analog radios and some of the newer firmware defined radios and the FLEX SDRs beat them hands down. Radios with software "front ends" are nothing more than "lipstick on a pig". The excitement of getting new radio features, sometime several in a single day with a software update is phenomenal. Posted by W4TME on June 16, 2009
Different strokes for different folks...
I've been using commercial SDR's (SDR-1000, FLEX-5000A, FLEX3000) for almost five years and am totally sold on the technology. It may not be your cup of tea but where else can you potentially get a new radio every day with just the click of the mouse? Posted by K5KDN on June 16, 2009
SDR-1000
I have been using the SDR-1000 for about a year now and have been having a ball. I like knobs too but when you get the panadapter running real time in front of you and can scroll or click to a station or spot you quickly forget about the knob, I know I did. Posted by K0EOO on June 16, 2009
Got a Flex
Bought a Flex 5K! The best investment ever. Easy to use and with brick-wall filtering which is beyond belief! Posted by K2CM on June 16, 2009
True SDR -The way to go
My rigs include some vintage Drake & Yaesu. I even have the IC-746PRO. But I'm a little nostalgic you see. I used to have the TT Orion (good radio). But the Orion was let go because I use the FlexRadio 5000A as the main unit now. SDR has opened a whole new experience in my 42 years of operation. SDR is so far advanced in features and capabilities, you become a high performance, efficient operator. The screen+mouse combo is far superior to buttons & knobs. SDR is a milestone for ham radio and has matured as a primary radio for any shack. Posted by WC4R on June 16, 2009
I'll Stick With The Knobs
I have never used this type of "control system" but have seen it in operation at several stations. No thank you. I kinda compare it to a microwave oven. When they first became available to the public they were repotedly going to change the way we cook. The new, how do you say, "cat's ass." Today about 99.9% of them are only used to heat or reheat something. I do not know of anybody that uses one to "cook" with. I'll take a home cooked meal in a conventional oven any day. 73's Ken KK4BH Posted by KK4BH on June 16, 2009
Generation III SDR
I am using a Generation III SDR receiver called the QuickSilver QS1R. It connects the Antenna to a very fast ADC chip and an FPGA at it's heart. The end user GUI is a separate piece of code that runs nicely over the Internet remotely from the QS1R server. Learn more about the future of SDR here: http://www.srl-llc.com/ here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qs1r/ de Ken N9VV Posted by N9VV on June 16, 2009
SDR
I have a Flex 5000a and an Icom 756 PROIII Why would anyone buy a hardware radio? Posted by K1OIK on June 16, 2009
Hottest Receiver, Hottest Support
Hottest receiver (actuall both receivers) I've ever used. Best DSP I've ever used. Best support I've ever received. Both the radio, and the software. The radio is great, the software and features get better, every day. I MEAN EVERY DAY, SOMETIMES TWICE A DAY! AND THE SOFTWARE AND UPDATES...ARE FREE! Posted by W9OL on June 16, 2009
Don't knock until you try
I have a Flex 5K now, also had the SDR-1000 and the great Softrock SDR receivers before that. Until you actually listen to and use the Flex 5K, you don't know what you are missing. You will soon get over the lack of big knobs. Although does best with 2 big lcd monitors and a fast up to date PC. The other radios now available are actually Firmware defined radios, not software defined radios. 73 John N3WT Posted by N3WT on June 16, 2009
Don't knock until you try
I have a Flex 5K now, also had the SDR-1000 and the great Softrock SDR receivers before that. Until you actually listen to and use the Flex 5K, you don't know what you are missing. You will soon get over the lack of big knobs. Although does best with 2 big lcd monitors and a fast up to date PC. The other radios now available are actually Firmware defined radios, not software defined radios. 73 John N3WT Posted by N3WT on June 16, 2009
tubes forever
I'll stick with my Drake C-line... Posted by VE3ACY on June 16, 2009
SDR Radio
Have a FDR FLEX 5000A AT Florida QTH and just bought a second one for summer QTH. Best receiver I have had, once you have use the built in panadaptor you hate to operate without it. So easy to use, you don't need knobs. Posted by W1FC on June 16, 2009
Radio + Computer = The Best
Communications and computing are interrelated, so the SDR concept is a natural extension of technological advancement. I own a Kachina 505DSP, SDR-1000 and FLEX 5000A. All are great, with superior GUI and excellent radio performance. It's the wave of the future. With that said, I grew up with radios with knobs. I like knobs, and it's somewhat a natural to tune with a knob, for instance. But SDRs are for me. 73... Jon W1MNK Posted by W1MNK on June 16, 2009
SDR Radio
Hello I am now the owner of a Flex 3000 and have been using it for the past 3 weeks. Fantastic , What a change from the regular Knob radios. Super reciever, great audio, a pretty good learning curve. All in all looks like the future of Ham radio is here. Ed NP2G Posted by NP2G on June 16, 2009
The New Era
Once upon a time, There was Galenite Radios, remarkable inventions for their time, and then it was something funny that replaced Galenite called 'Tubes', strange looking metalic objects inside glass, but probably one of the best times of radio. Then it came the tiny little Transistor giving small dimensions to almost everything electronic and the radios became pocket sized. And the time passed, and suddenly something peculiar emerged, something called Super Dream Radio, but it was indeed like a dream where you cannot touch things, just feel. And SDR was good, and the man enjoyed it, and the radio appart from the ears was also an eyes delight. 73, Christos SV1EIA Posted by SV1EIA on June 16, 2009
Flex-5000 is Fantastic
Currently using the Flex-5000A. It is light years beyond conventional rigs both in terms of performance with close-in QRM and ease of use. It is great for CW, digital modes, and SSB. Once you have used the Panadapter for a few hours you will very quickly lose your "knob addiction." Having used an SDR for 8 months, I could not imagine going back to a conventional rig. I have been licensed for 40 years, and this is the most excitement I have ever had in amateur radio. 73 Dale W4AEJ Posted by W4AEJ on June 16, 2009
not enough choices
Not enough choices for voters. I would love to try one of the Flex 1000 or 5000 rigs, but can't afford the price tag. Maybe in a few years the price on the used market will let me try one out... 73 Dan -- Amateur Radio Emergency Service, Clark County Indiana. EM78el K9ZF /R no budget Rover ***QRP-l #1269 Check out the Rover Resource Page at: <http://www.qsl.net/n9rla> List Administrator for: InHam+grid-loc+ham-books Ask me how to join the Indiana Ham Mailing list! Posted by K9ZF on June 16, 2009
Good for a 756
I use a computer display for my Icom 756 that has developed those pesky blue line's. It was less expensive than replacing the display and work's very well. So, as said already.."Their is a place for it" Posted by KF4OZJ on June 16, 2009
So enabling
Have a couple "Commercial SDR" rigs. Also have some of the more experimental offerings from HPSDR and a Softrock. And have also used a ESS Time Machine for the IQ mixer mixer feed several of the different PC based SDR programs. They are all loads of fun to use and run. I find them easier to figure out and use than the typical current menu driven knobs/button radio with thier 100's of cryptic user settings to wade through. Now whenever I use a knobs only radio it seems like my 'view' of the radio spectrunm is like looking through paper towel tube, there is just so much stuff going on around the frequency that you are listenting to that you never even know about with just knobs and buttons and/or slowly tuning the band. For those who think PC based SDR's are just a 'picture of a radio' on a computer screen then you are completely missing the whole point of the technology, or what it offers. When I run my SDR's I don't even see the radio (or even the computer that it is running on) at all, I only see the graphical representation of 96 or 192 kHz (or more) slice of the RF spectrum. And then I have the ability to directy interact with that view of the spectrum, no right or left knob twist interpretations needed. And yes I work with computers all day at work. Computers are just a tool, nothing more, nothing less. So are knobs, they are just tools, or a part of a tool. So I see using a computer for my radio at home not an issue at all. I've always seen that 'use a computer at work' complaint as a 'strawman' argument anyhow... When I feel like using a retro radio that only has knobs, then I'll use one without any menus, synthesizers etc. I surely am not going to spend a lot of money on a new firmware only radio that just emulates what my 25 year old Corsair can do... Posted by N9DG on June 16, 2009
Software defined radio
There might be a place for it, but have you ever tried peaking a coil with a digital meter? N5TSH Posted by N5TSH on June 16, 2009
There is a place for it ...
There is a place for it in amateur radio for as long as it continues to use RF energy for the transfer of communications. You might say, "Why would it not?" Events can happen. Condtions can change. Systems can evolve without limit. In any case, it is not for me. If holding an actual knob in your hand or depressing an actual button on your transceiver is an analog action, then so be it. I suppose that the best way I can say it is this: It is like using a computer generated image of a hand using a computer image of a telegraph key to send Morse Code. (I do not mean using a keyboard to send Code.) I mean looking at an image of a hand on a key on the screen as Code is being sent. It would just be a creepy thing to do. You may of course think differently. Posted by AI2IA on June 15, 2009

To post a comment, you must be logged in.

If you are not a member, become one now!