开云体育

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io
  1. Softrock40
  2. Messages
Expanded Topics Messages Polls
Date
Re: Comparison Ensemble II VHF/2M

 

开云体育

After I made my last post, I realized that I really should put a preamp on the SDR-14. ?I really don’t know what my concern is. ?I just found it interesting to look at the two SDRs and compare them. ?The Ensemble II VHF is obviously the more sensitive of the two.

Well, it was a fun discussion. ?Let’s call it a day and go on with life ?:-) ?Thanks for your observations.

Dave

On Jul 14, 2017, at 4:29 PM, Alan alanzfq@... [softrock40] <softrock40@...> wrote:


> What I am looking for is a way to adjust the overall gain of the unit.?
> I don’t think there are any selectable attenuators in the hardware of?
> the Ensemble II VHF.

Dave,

There is not. The Ensemble is a simple RX with no adjustments. If you?
need to alter the gain you may add attenuators or preamp. You could?
adjust circuit components if you desired.
Do you use the latest HDSDR? If not the calibration is elsewhere but it?
is only calibration to set displayed signal levels correctly.
I'm not sure why you feel you have to adjust the best receiver to match?
the worst. I'd be wondering if I needed a preamp on the SDR-14, or maybe?
more likely a good BPF?

73 Alan G4ZFQ

>What I am looking for is a way to adjust the overall gain of the unit.?
I don’t think there are any selectable attenuators in the hardware of?
the Ensemble II VHF. I really have no reason to do this, other than to?
match the gain of the SDR-14. As it stands, feeding both units with the?
same level (simultaneously, BTW) results in a signal level measurement?
that is 20 dB stronger on the Ensemble II. The s/n ratio indicated on?
the Softrock is 15 dB better, which means the MDS of the Softrock will?
be 15 dB better.
Re: Comparison Ensemble II VHF/2M

Alan
 

What I am looking for is a way to adjust the overall gain of the unit. I don’t think there are any selectable attenuators in the hardware of the Ensemble II VHF.
Dave,

There is not. The Ensemble is a simple RX with no adjustments. If you need to alter the gain you may add attenuators or preamp. You could adjust circuit components if you desired.
Do you use the latest HDSDR? If not the calibration is elsewhere but it is only calibration to set displayed signal levels correctly.
I'm not sure why you feel you have to adjust the best receiver to match the worst. I'd be wondering if I needed a preamp on the SDR-14, or maybe more likely a good BPF?

73 Alan G4ZFQ


What I am looking for is a way to adjust the overall gain of the unit.
I don’t think there are any selectable attenuators in the hardware of the Ensemble II VHF. I really have no reason to do this, other than to match the gain of the SDR-14. As it stands, feeding both units with the same level (simultaneously, BTW) results in a signal level measurement that is 20 dB stronger on the Ensemble II. The s/n ratio indicated on the Softrock is 15 dB better, which means the MDS of the Softrock will be 15 dB better.
Re: Comparison Ensemble II VHF/2M

 

开云体育

Hello Zack,

?The SDR-14 has two inputs. ?One is for 0-30 MHz and the other for 0-288 MHz. ?I am using the wider frequency input.

Now — Alan … ?I looked for a calibration feature on HDSDR. ?The only thing I found was called input channel calibration and it adjusts the image rejection by fine tuning the amplitude and phase of the two channels on the input. ?I have done that cal and the image rejection is outstanding.

What I am looking for is a way to adjust the overall gain of the unit. ?I don’t think there are any selectable attenuators in the hardware of the Ensemble II VHF. ?I really have no reason to do this, other than to match the gain of the SDR-14. ?As it stands, feeding both units with the same level (simultaneously, BTW) ?results in a signal level measurement that is 20 dB stronger on the Ensemble II. The s/n ratio indicated on the Softrock is 15 dB better, which means the MDS of the Softrock will be 15 dB better. ?

This may mean that I haven’t learned to run the SDR-14 and Spectraview as well I need to. ?As I said before. ?I’m not lodging any complaints. ?I am trying to educate myself.

I appreciate your help to the folks on this list. ?I read your comments in hope of learning something new.

73,

Dave, K4TO ?

On Jul 14, 2017, at 3:22 PM, Zack Widup w9sz.zack@... [softrock40] <softrock40@...> wrote:


It appears the SDR-14 by RFSpace is discontinued and has been superseded by the NetSDR. What little I could find out about it indicates it is a 0 to 30 MHz unit. Dave, is this correct? Do I have the correct unit in mind? If so, how did you use it at 144 MHz?

The NetSDR+ does cover 144 MHz.

73, Zack W9SZ?


On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Alan?alanzfq@...?[softrock40]?<softrock40@...>?wrote:
?



On 14/07/2017 13:43, Dave Sublette?k4to@...?[softrock40] wrote:
> Good morning,
>
> I have both the SDR-14 and the Softrock Ensemble II VHF(2M) operating simultaneously, fed with the IF signal from my 902 transverter, through a 3 dB splitter.
>
> The observation I have made is the base band level of each SDR is different, 7 dB different. This can be attributed (in my mind) to the base level of the sound card used with the Ensemble compared to the base level of the SDR-14. Fair Enough. Both devices track level changes equally accurately. When I change the signal generator level up and down in ten dB steps, both devices show very accurate and identical change in levels measured.
>
Dave,

I do not know the SDR-14, whether it is a soundcard SDR or if it?
entirely different with it's own ADC but it seems to me the only way to?
compare and calibrate two different systems is to feed a known signal?
into each system.
HDSDR has calibration, Options - Calibration settings. I think that's?
what you want?

73 Alan G4ZFQ



Virus-free.?
Re: Comparison Ensemble II VHF/2M

 

It appears the SDR-14 by RFSpace is discontinued and has been superseded by the NetSDR. What little I could find out about it indicates it is a 0 to 30 MHz unit. Dave, is this correct? Do I have the correct unit in mind? If so, how did you use it at 144 MHz?

The NetSDR+ does cover 144 MHz.

73, Zack W9SZ


On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Alan alanzfq@... [softrock40] <softrock40@...> wrote:
?



On 14/07/2017 13:43, Dave Sublette k4to@... [softrock40] wrote:
> Good morning,
>
> I have both the SDR-14 and the Softrock Ensemble II VHF(2M) operating simultaneously, fed with the IF signal from my 902 transverter, through a 3 dB splitter.
>
 > The observation I have made is the base band level of each SDR is different, 7 dB different. This can be attributed (in my mind) to the base level of the sound card used with the Ensemble compared to the base level of the SDR-14. Fair Enough. Both devices track level changes equally accurately. When I change the signal generator level up and down in ten dB steps, both devices show very accurate and identical change in levels measured.
>
 Dave,

I do not know the SDR-14, whether it is a soundcard SDR or if it
entirely different with it's own ADC but it seems to me the only way to
compare and calibrate two different systems is to feed a known signal
into each system.
HDSDR has calibration, Options - Calibration settings. I think that's
what you want?

73 Alan G4ZFQ



Virus-free.

Re: Comparison Ensemble II VHF/2M

 

开云体育

Alan,

As I described in my email, I am feeding the same signal to both. ?But your answer has alerted me to the HDSDR calibration features. ?I will go study those options and see what I can learn. ?

The SDR-14 operates solely from the USB port, no external sound card needed.

Thanks & 73,

Dave, K4TO

On Jul 14, 2017, at 1:33 PM, Alan alanzfq@... [softrock40] <softrock40@...> wrote:



On 14/07/2017 13:43, Dave Sublette?k4to@...?[softrock40] wrote:
> Good morning,
>
> I have both the SDR-14 and the Softrock Ensemble II VHF(2M) operating simultaneously, fed with the IF signal from my 902 transverter, through a 3 dB splitter.
>
> The observation I have made is the base band level of each SDR is different, 7 dB different. This can be attributed (in my mind) to the base level of the sound card used with the Ensemble compared to the base level of the SDR-14. Fair Enough. Both devices track level changes equally accurately. When I change the signal generator level up and down in ten dB steps, both devices show very accurate and identical change in levels measured.
>
Dave,

I do not know the SDR-14, whether it is a soundcard SDR or if it?
entirely different with it's own ADC but it seems to me the only way to?
compare and calibrate two different systems is to feed a known signal?
into each system.
HDSDR has calibration, Options - Calibration settings. I think that's?
what you want?

73 Alan G4ZFQ
Re: Comparison Ensemble II VHF/2M

Alan
 

On 14/07/2017 13:43, Dave Sublette k4to@... [softrock40] wrote:
Good morning,

I have both the SDR-14 and the Softrock Ensemble II VHF(2M) operating simultaneously, fed with the IF signal from my 902 transverter, through a 3 dB splitter.

The observation I have made is the base band level of each SDR is different, 7 dB different. This can be attributed (in my mind) to the base level of the sound card used with the Ensemble compared to the base level of the SDR-14. Fair Enough. Both devices track level changes equally accurately. When I change the signal generator level up and down in ten dB steps, both devices show very accurate and identical change in levels measured.
Dave,

I do not know the SDR-14, whether it is a soundcard SDR or if it entirely different with it's own ADC but it seems to me the only way to compare and calibrate two different systems is to feed a known signal into each system.
HDSDR has calibration, Options - Calibration settings. I think that's what you want?

73 Alan G4ZFQ
Comparison Ensemble II VHF/2M

 

Good morning,

I have both the SDR-14 and the Softrock Ensemble II VHF(2M) operating simultaneously, fed with the IF signal from my 902 transverter, through a 3 dB splitter.

I have a signal generator in my shop with a 1/4” stub antenna sticking out of the output connector and the generator tuned to 902.1 MHz. I can adjust the generator amplitude as needed.

Outside, about 40 feet away from the generator/source, I have a reference dipole mounted at 10 feet above ground. It is rotatable.

My intent is to measure gain and f/b on my 902 loop yagi. I realize the setup of an antenna range is critical and this posting is NOT about range issues.

The observation I have made is the base band level of each SDR is different, 7 dB different. This can be attributed (in my mind) to the base level of the sound card used with the Ensemble compared to the base level of the SDR-14. Fair Enough. Both devices track level changes equally accurately. When I change the signal generator level up and down in ten dB steps, both devices show very accurate and identical change in levels measured.

The difference I am seeing is in the absolute value of the levels measured. The Ensemble reading is 45 dB higher than that of the SDR-14. This I can attribute to the different system gain setup in each device. The SDR-14 is the lower of the two. The IF gain setting of the SDR-14 is +24 dB (maximum). The RF gain setting is 0 dB(maximum). I can’t get any more gain out of the SDR-14, as far as I can tell. I really don’t need any more gain from the SDR-14 as I know it is properly designed to match the A/D range. I haven’t found any way to change gain in the HDSDR program controlling the Ensemble. I don’t know if the higher gain is a problem with the ensemble.

Both devices handle a large range of signal levels without a problem. Both are excellent devices. I really don’t have any problem using either one.

I guess the point of this posting is just to note that level values are 45 dB different and that’s probably just the way it is. I would be interested to read opinions on the situation.

Thanks for your time & 73,

Dave, K4TO
Re: Eliminate latency with this easy-to-use DSP platform

 

Works as well in the TX path. Line level audio into the card delivers baseband IQ to SoftRock Ensemble LINEOUT, resulting in high-quality SSB. Again, very simple to program the DSP, as the board includes a low-pass filter ahead of the ADC and the SigmaStudio software includes a Hilbert transform block.
Eliminate latency with this easy-to-use DSP platform

 

Analog Devices sells the , an evaluation board for their ADAU1452 SigmaDSP. The board includes high-performance audio ADCs and DACs, so you can just connect the SoftRock LINEOUT to the board's stereo audio input and listen to the board's stereo audio output.

The best part is how simple it is to program the DSP with the free graphical user interface. Just drag'n'drop the functional blocks you need onto the workspace, et voila, you're demodulating!

After receiving my board and connecting it to my SoftRock, I was demodulating single-signal SSB and CW within 15 minutes. The board isn't cheap, but it's a great way to learn more about SDR and to develop a reasonable-cost, low-latency receiver.

I have no affiliation with Analog Devices.

Brian K1LI
Softrock Ensemble RXTX for sale

 

I have 2 Softrock Ensemble RXTX - one built and enclosed in the KM5H case (fully operational) and the other complete but unbuilt. Great way to check out SDR. The built one in the case is $90 and the unbuilt kit is $70. Prices include shipping to CONUS. 73, Robert VE7ZN (email: ve7zn at jasero dot com)
Re: usbsoftrock - versions and repositories

Sid Boyce
 

has both 1.0.1 and 1.0.2.
Version 1.0.2 includes changes by VK6JBL to support the Mobo project ( ) which was an extension for SR v6.3 and SR63ng.

Either is usable on a RXTX, etc.
73 ... Sid.

On 05/07/17 03:15, keith@... [softrock40] wrote:

I see I downloaded usbsoftrock from somewhere a while back. It is version 1.0.2. I hear there is a version 1.1 out there somewhere. Looked at github and seven different guys have "usbsoftrock" repositories there. They seem to be personal forks of 1.0.1 and maybe 1.0.2.

code.google.com is mentioned as a source, but a quick search there did not turn up code for usbsoftrock.


So what's the best source? I should mention that the 1.0.2 that I have (and that I don't know where it came from) appears to be working fine.


For fun, here's what I see for `usbsoftrock -v`


keith@athlon:~$ usbsoftrock -v
I2C Address = 55
fXtall = 114.285000
multiplier = 4.000000
startupFreq = 56.320000
usbsoftrock 1.0.2
usage: usbsoftrock [OPTION] COMMAND

OPTION is one or more of
-a Advanced firmware present
i.e. let the firmware calculate registers
-d Enter a mode that listens for commands via UDP.
-h PTT status by reading hardware port
Mobo only.
-i <address> I2C address in DECIMAL (DEFAULT = 85 (0x55))
-m <multiplier> Multiplication factor for frequency (DEFAULT = 4)
-p <port num> Port to listen for UDP datagrams (DEFAULT = 19004)
-s <startup frequency MHz> Factory programmed startup frequency (DEFAULT = 56.32)
-u <serial number> Serial Number of Device
-v Verbose output (fairly useful)
-vv Even more verbose output (debugging)
-x <calibrated xtall freq MHz> Corrected XTALL frequency of Si570 device calculated
through the use of the calibrate command immediately
after startup.
COMMAND is one of
calibrate (may require -s option)
getfreq
getregisters
interactive
getptt (-h option for Mobo only)
getkeys (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
gettone
ptt {on|off}
set bpf {on|off} (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
set bpf_addr <band> <filter> (PE0FKO >= 15.12+Mobo)
set bpf_point <crossover> <f in MHz> (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
set lpf {on|off} (TF3LJ+Mobo only)
set lpf_addr <band> <filter> "
set lpf_point <crossover> <f in MHz> "
set freq <frequency in MHz>
set si570_addr <i2c address in decimal>
set si570_multiplier [band] <decimal factor> (PE0FKO>=15.12+Mobo)
set startup <frequency in MHz> (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
set xtall <frequency in MHz> (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
status

where TF3LJ = Lofturs AtMega168 derivative
Mobo = Mobo 4.3 Project AT90USB162 Firmware

--
Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot
Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support
Senior Staff Specialist, Cricket Coach
Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks
usbsoftrock - versions and repositories

[email protected]
 

I see I downloaded usbsoftrock from somewhere a while back. It is version 1.0.2. I hear there is a version 1.1 out there somewhere. Looked at github and seven different guys have "usbsoftrock" repositories there. They seem to be personal forks of 1.0.1 and maybe 1.0.2.

code.google.com is mentioned as a source, but a quick search there did not turn up code for usbsoftrock.


So what's the best source? I should mention that the 1.0.2 that I have (and that I don't know where it came from) appears to be working fine.


For fun, here's what I see for `usbsoftrock -v`


keith@athlon:~$ usbsoftrock -v
I2C Address = 55
fXtall = 114.285000
multiplier = 4.000000
startupFreq = 56.320000
usbsoftrock 1.0.2
usage: usbsoftrock [OPTION] COMMAND

OPTION is one or more of
? -a???????????????????????????? Advanced firmware present
???????????????????????????????? i.e. let the firmware calculate registers
? -d???????????????????????????? Enter a mode that listens for commands via UDP.
? -h???????????????????????????? PTT status by reading hardware port
???????????????????????????????? Mobo only.
? -i <address>?????????????????? I2C address in DECIMAL (DEFAULT = 85 (0x55))
? -m <multiplier>??????????????? Multiplication factor for frequency (DEFAULT = 4)
? -p <port num>????????????????? Port to listen for UDP datagrams (DEFAULT = 19004)
? -s <startup frequency MHz>???? Factory programmed startup frequency (DEFAULT = 56.32)
? -u <serial number>???????????? Serial Number of Device
? -v???????????????????????????? Verbose output (fairly useful)
? -vv??????????????????????????? Even more verbose output (debugging)
? -x <calibrated xtall freq MHz> Corrected XTALL frequency of Si570 device calculated
???????????????????????????????? through the use of the calibrate command immediately
???????????????????????????????? after startup.
COMMAND is one of
? calibrate (may require -s option)
? getfreq
? getregisters
? interactive
? getptt???????????????????????????????? (-h option for Mobo only)
? getkeys??????????????????????????????? (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
? gettone
? ptt {on|off}
? set bpf {on|off}?????????????????????? (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
? set bpf_addr <band> <filter>?????????? (PE0FKO >= 15.12+Mobo)
? set bpf_point <crossover> <f in MHz>?? (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
? set lpf {on|off}?????????????????????? (TF3LJ+Mobo only)
? set lpf_addr <band> <filter>?????????????????? "????
? set lpf_point <crossover> <f in MHz>?????????? "????
? set freq <frequency in MHz>
? set si570_addr <i2c address in decimal>
? set si570_multiplier [band] <decimal factor>? (PE0FKO>=15.12+Mobo)
? set startup <frequency in MHz>???????? (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
? set xtall <frequency in MHz>?????????? (PE0FKO+TF3LJ+Mobo)
? status

? where TF3LJ = Lofturs AtMega168 derivative
??????? Mobo? = Mobo 4.3 Project AT90USB162 Firmware
Re: linux equivalent to cfgsr?

 

Hi Keith,

You can use Linrad:


There are more videos here:


73

Leif

Setting up a RXTX or 2. I do not run Windows. Is there a way to manage the si570 in a linux application?

Keith AB1FD
Re: Details needed: RX processing of IQ with offset LO

 

I think I found the answer I was looking for in the HDSDR FAQ:

Q: Why there are two different frequencies (LO / Tune) ?
A: The LO frequency represents the SDR hardware's oscillator frequency. ... The tune frequency represents the software oscillator (NCO - Numerically Controlled Oscillator), which is used to tune the signal one wants to hear.

This supports the idea that the offset does create a new IF that has to be downconverted to baseband by the "software oscillator."
Re: Details needed: RX processing of IQ with offset LO

Alan
 

I understand how the image is cancelled by a quadrature demodulator operating at the zero-frequency IF corresponding to zero LO offset. But, when the LO offset is not zero, I can hear the frequency offset in headphones and see it in Spectran. Does the LO offset constitute a "new IF" that has to be downconverted to zero frequency by a hardware or software signal processor before it can be demodulated?
Brian,

Are you referring to the "signal" right in the centre?
If you do not use a zero offset, (not normally used for receive.) then you will hear this "signal" at LO frequency if you use a small offset.
It is due to imbalance in the ADC and is often hidden by the SDR software. 10Khz offset is typically used for receive.

73 Alan G4ZFQ
Re: Band switching signal data ?

Alan
 

That is a great write up Alan. And your build is much much neater than the one I did.
No, it is thanks to you Dave. Without your code I could not have done it.

(Must get it boxed and an antenna up in the next few months...)

73 Alan G4ZFQ
Re: Details needed: RX processing of IQ with offset LO

MIKE DURKIN
 

开云体育

Its frequency shifted to what ever the offset is in software with what ever bandwidth is chosen (in software) ... the image rejection is done in software as well, thats why u hear the left / right audio switching in the headphones, there is no image rejection in the headphones

Get

From: softrock40@... on behalf of nekvtster@... [softrock40]
Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2017 10:24:00 AM
To: softrock40@...
Subject: [softrock40] Details needed: RX processing of IQ with offset LO
?
?

I understand how the image is cancelled by a quadrature demodulator operating at the zero-frequency IF corresponding to zero LO offset. But, when the LO offset is not zero, I can hear the frequency offset in headphones and see it in Spectran. Does the LO offset constitute a "new IF" that has to be downconverted to zero frequency by a hardware or software signal processor before it can be demodulated?

Thanks for any helpful insights,

Brian K1LI
Details needed: RX processing of IQ with offset LO

 

I understand how the image is cancelled by a quadrature demodulator operating at the zero-frequency IF corresponding to zero LO offset. But, when the LO offset is not zero, I can hear the frequency offset in headphones and see it in Spectran. Does the LO offset constitute a "new IF" that has to be downconverted to zero frequency by a hardware or software signal processor before it can be demodulated?

Thanks for any helpful insights,

Brian K1LI
Re: Band switching signal data ?

 

That is a great write up Alan.? And your?build?is much much neater than the one I did.? Well done


Thanks


Dave M0WID
Re: Band switching signal data ?

 

Hi Alan

Thanks for the info , I will make a small adapter pcb?with a 861.on. That should
do the job nicely.?

Many Thanks?

Alan
?
3161 - 3180 of 89293