TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4

To: <n4py3@earthlink.net>, "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4
From: "rick@dj0ip.de" <Rick@dj0ip.de>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 18:45:27 +0100
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
And try 100 Hz which is where I run in CW contests.

73 - Rick DJ0IP

-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl
Moreschi
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 4:17 PM
To: tentec
Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4

There's a big difference between 600 and 400.  The steep skirts add a lot of
latency.  Try 600 or 800.

Carl Moreschi N4PY
58 Hogwood Rd
Louisburg, NC 27549
www.n4py.com

On 12/8/2015 10:14 AM, Barry N1EU wrote:
> 400Hz in all cases was the receive bandwidth setting.
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Carl Moreschi <n4py3@earthlink.net 
> <mailto:n4py3@earthlink.net>> wrote:
>
>     That's a function of the receive filter used.  The narrower the
>     filter, the more latency.  What receive filter were you using?
>
>     Carl Moreschi N4PY
>     58 Hogwood Rd
>     Louisburg, NC 27549
>     www.n4py.com <http://www.n4py.com>
>
>     On 12/8/2015 8:41 AM, Barry N1EU wrote:
>
>         I just measured 170msec latency on the 6500 in cw receive.  It's
>         a lot (too
>         much for serious contesting IMHO) but it's not 350msec.
>
>         My methodology was to transmit a single dit using another rig
>         and used a
>         microphone/soundcard to record the tx sidetone of rig 1 and then
the
>         received dit on rig 2.
>
>         For comparison, my Orion II measured 45msec and my ANAN-100D SDR
>         70msec for
>         cw rx latency.
>
>         73, Barry N1EU
>
>         On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Barry N1EU<barry.n1eu@gmail.com
>         <mailto:barry.n1eu@gmail.com>>  wrote:
>
>             I will personally measure the latency of the Flex 6500 and
>             get back to
>             you.  I'm not believing 350msec at this point.
>
>             73, Barry N1EU
>
>             On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 7:59 AM, rick@dj0ip.de
>             <mailto:rick@dj0ip.de><Rick@dj0ip.de
>             <mailto:Rick@dj0ip.de>>  wrote:
>
>                 Sorry Barry, latency measured on the Anan does not
>                 necessarily apply to
>                 the
>                 FLEX 6000.
>
>                 Less than a year ago it was 350mS on the 6xxx, as
>                 measured by Rob
>                 Sherwood.
>
>                 We've had this discussion before and Rob jumped in and
>                 confirmed the 350
>                 number.
>                 I'm not sure which reflector it was on.  Might have been
>                 here, might have
>                 been on the Eagle or OM7 reflector.
>
>                 As I said, it may have changed but not long ago it was
>                 at 350.
>                 Until someone steps up and states that (s)he has
>                 measured it and found it
>                 better, that's the number I'm sticking with for the Flex
>                 6xxx radios.
>
>                 FB on the Anon latency numbers.
>
>                 At 25mS you can still hear in between dits at 40 wpm but
>                 just barely.
>                 When you go above that, you no longer hear between dits.
>
>                 After about 40 or 50ms latency, you (or rather I and a
>                 few friends) can no
>                 longer transmit clean CW by listening to the real time
>                 signal.  In that
>                 case
>                 we have to mute the radio and listen to the sidetone of
>                 the keyer because
>                 the delay is annoying and confuses the OP.
>
>                 Delay is still an issue but it has gotten a lot better.
>
>                 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>                 (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
>
>
>
>                 -----Original Message-----
>                 From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com
>                 <mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com>] On Behalf Of Barry
>                 N1EU
>                 Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 1:49 PM
>                 To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
>                 Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4
>
>                 Ha, I love a good tussle  ;-)
>
>                 I measured it on an ANAN-100D about a year ago.  I've
>                 seen numbers for the
>                 Flex 6K that are similar.  Latency of about 100-150msec
>                 for cw receive and
>                 ssb receive and transmit.  CW transmit latency in the
>                 ANAN and Flex is
>                 very
>                 low (on the order of tens of msec) because they both
>                 optimize it in the
>                 FPGA.
>
>                 73, Barry N1EU
>
>                 On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 5:45 AM, rick@dj0ip.de
>                 <mailto:rick@dj0ip.de><Rick@dj0ip.de
>                 <mailto:Rick@dj0ip.de>>  wrote:
>
>                     Yes, it used to be much worse.
>                     It is now 350 mS unless there has been some VERY
>                     recent change.
>
>                     Barry, if you say it's better, please specify who
>                     measured it and
>                     approximately when.
>                     Otherwise I strongly disagree.
>
>                     I am quoting recent measurements by Rob Sherwood.
>                     Somewhere buried in 10,000 emails I have a recent
>                     email from Rob
>                     confirming this.
>                     It was while running one of the big contests earlier
>                     this year.
>
>                     I'm not talking about old 5000 rigs, I mean the new
>                     flagship line, 6xxx.
>
>                     73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>                     (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
>
>
>
>                     -----Original Message-----
>                     From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com
>                     <mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com>] On Behalf Of
>                     Barry
>                     N1EU
>                     Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 11:29 AM
>                     To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
>                     Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, 
> Issue 4
>
>                     Rick, the latency on the latest SDR offerings has
>                     come WAY down,
>                     especially on the Flex 6000 series.  They ARE
>                     contest capable.
>
>                     I agree on the knobs.  I applaud the Flex Maestro
>                     interface panel - I
>                     think it's a harbinger of products to come in the
>                     future, where many
>                     vendors can offer various front panels that can be
>                     interfaced to many
>                     different SDR types.  Or someone could write the
>                     code to use an Orion
>                     front panel to control an SDR, etc.
>
>                     For me, the draw of the direct sampling SDR radios
>                     (ANAN, Flex 6K) is
>                     that their receivers simply sound better than the
>                     best superhet/dsp i.f.
>
>                 radios.
>
>
>                     With the introduction of the not-overly-impressive
>                     IC-7300, perhaps
>                     we'll be seeing several direct sampling (DDC/DUC)
>                     bundled in a fully
>                     knobbed self-contained box in the next 1-3 years.
>
>                     73, Barry N1EU
>
>                     On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 7:24 AM, rick@dj0ip.de
>                     <mailto:rick@dj0ip.de><Rick@dj0ip.de
>                     <mailto:Rick@dj0ip.de>>  wrote:
>
>                         EXCEPT . . .  for latency and lack of affordable
>                         knobs.
>
>                         Last reviews I saw still had turnaround latency
>                         between TX and RX at
>                         350 mS.
>                         If both ops are running SDR, and trying to run
>                         full QSK, that's 0.7
>                         seconds.
>                         It's gonna sound like "Chop Phooey" on the air!
>
>                         The set of knobs (Maestro) for the lowest cost
>                         $2000 Flex Radio (in
>                         the class that interests most of us) is $1200 or
>                         so.  OR...the big
>                         single knob from Flex will set you back $200 if
>                         you are willing to
>                         wait long enough to get one.
>
>                         A decent 3rd party set of knobs, such as the
>                         Wood Box Radio T-MATE-2
>                         probably has enough knobs for most of us, but it
>                         will set you back
>                         $300 AND Flex software won't support it.  You
>                         need a 3rd party
>                         software (i.e. N4PY Radio Control Software) to
>                         use it with your Flex.
>                         Get it all set up and working with your WIN7
>                         computer, then upgrade
>                         to
>
>                     WIN10 and watch the "real"
>
>                         fun begin.
>
>                         Other than that, there's not much wrong with the
>                         current crop of SDR
>                         radios...
>
>                         73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>                         (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
>
>
>                         -----Original Message-----
>                         From: TenTec
>                         [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com
>                         <mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com>] On
>                         Behalf Of Kim
>                         Elmore
>                         Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 2:40 AM
>
>                         There's absolutely nothing wrong with SDR; I
>                         don't fully understand
>                         why so many people complain about it
>
>
>                         -------
>
>                         _______________________________________________
>                         TenTec mailing list
>                         TenTec@contesting.com
<mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
>                         
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>                     _______________________________________________
>                     TenTec mailing list
>                     TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
>                     
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>                     _______________________________________________
>                     TenTec mailing list
>                     TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
>                     
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 TenTec mailing list
>                 TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
>                 http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 TenTec mailing list
>                 TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
>                 http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         TenTec mailing list
>         TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
>         http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     TenTec mailing list
>     TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
>     http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>