开云体育

For comparison, here are plots of the responses of the various versions of the Hilbert filters. Here's the version that is currently in the code (FIR_Hilbert_coeffs_45,FIR_Hilbert_coeffs_neg_45):

Thanks.? Great program, though it doesn't totally work in my version of Octave.? I made some edits to get it mostly working.? That explains one thing.? It looks like the narrow response cuts off

I posted the Octave .m files, the three sideband suppression curves, the coefficients for the 199 tap plus delay and the Hilbert design files.? They are at

Thank you very much Oliver. I have the latest boards and have ordered the updated IC’s for it. Dave, W0DF Sent from my iPhone.

If you have the latest set of boards from Bill, you'll see that the clock divider circuitry is no longer present on the board -- all that's left are two jumpers and four zero-ohm resistors:

It's available on the internet archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20171110201922/http://iowahills.com/8DownloadPage.html. The GitHub repository is only for a few of the programs and doesn't include

I calculated the passbands for the Hilbert filter coefficients currently in the V066-9 code (FIR_Hilbert_coeffs_45 and FIR_Hilbert_coeffs_neg_45). Their passbands don't have the same cutoff frequency:

Here's my new transmit chain with the v66-9 Hilbert coefficients. Close in, I can see what Bob has found, but there are two spurs that aren't there with the older Hilbert coefficients.? Here they are

Hmm, that doesn't seem consistent with what I post about yesterday, but I was looking at the whole chain.? Perhaps I'll see something better circling back to the v66-9 Hilbert filter coefficients

Here is the result of my new DSP transmit chain, it's an improvement over the improved one I posted yesterday, perhaps a tad less than half the bandwidth used. Because of the big improvement in the

No, the v50 Hilbert pair from fir.cpp has barely 50 dB opposite sideband rejection, and that is only from 200 to 2300 Hz (at 12ksps).? Above that it is not good at all and so would need serious

I just downloaded Oliver's very latest code. Trying it out now. So far, I have one glowing report. Sounds good on a monitor receiver too. - Jerry, KF6VB

*** Indeed. QMX auto-calibrates. It takes a *long* time, but it's totally unattended. Unfortunately, Hans' code is also closed-source. And encrypted! The only open source EER I know of is the

Try using the +/- 45 100-tap FIRs from v50.? You should see better results.

Picking up on Greg's suggestion to look at the DSP transmit chain with a " swept tone into the T41 microphone input ", I ran the chain through my network analyzer.? I excluded the Hilbert transform

Relative to the +/-45 vs 0/90 arrangement of the Hilbert, last night I did an Octave look at two cases: A - The +/- 45 100-tap FIRs from the current KI3P Github. B - An 199 tap 90 degree plus delay

Understood. I'm not planning to shell out >$5K for one when it becomes available either. Thus the "for what its worth". My point was that EER has now broken though to commercial ham equipment. And

Hi Al, what was the PEP when you recorded the two-tone measurement?? I made the same measurement recently, but that's a sample of one.? I was hoping someone else would duplicate the test. -- 73 Greg

Can anyone tell me if the changes made regarding the MF frequencies are documented anywhere?? Were changes made in the BOMs or assembly manuals for the affected boards?? I have been unable to find

*** Since Flex's stuff is totally closed source, it really doesn't matter to me what they do. I just read Hans' article. Amazing! I was thinking - how to use this technique with higher power? The part