I received and installed the two Triad SP-70 isolation transformers that I
ordered from Gopher, and ran I/Q balance adjustments in both Rocky and CW
Skimmer.

I was surprised to see that both the gain and phase results show a
substantial difference between the two channels.  The phase difference is
7-8 degrees, while the gain of one channel is only .65 to .66 of the
other.  There is also a fairly substantial scattering of the data points,
though this is a phenomenon I've grown to expect as the software collects
real-world signals over time.  The image suppression is working well, however.

What I'm wondering is whether such differences are common?  Are they a
function of normal, to-be-expected variations in transformer manufacturing,
or possibly differences in the two sound card channels?  Or is it possible
that I have a wiring error in my 8.3 receiver.  I realize the gain
imbalance is only ~2 dB, but I'm still wondering...


73, Pete N4ZR

That is the way it works in PowerSDR when you setup appropriately the
keyer in DSP tab.
It is confirmed.

73
Christos SV1EIA
--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, "Jack Colson" <jcolson7@...> wrote:
>
> Makes sense but have you tried it?
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Jerry Flanders
>   To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 9:12 AM
>   Subject: Re: [softrock40] RxTx v 6.1 cw keying schematic
>
>
>   After PTT is asserted, the CW signal can be generated as an audio
>   tone, processed into the I and Q signals, and sent to the RxTx via
>   the sound card's "line out", where it is converted to the HF signal.
>   You key the _audio_tone_ on/off. At least that is what I understand
>   happens in an SDR rig.
>
>   Jerry W4UK
>
>   At 07:44 AM 6/29/2008, you wrote:
>   >I have reviewed documents provided by M0KGK and JA9MAT re
configuration
>   >and thus far am not convinced they will work with v6.1 board.
>   >
>   >Is there a schematic of how one would configure this board to operate
>   >on CW? I can imagine one keying the PTT line but that seems a bit
>   >basic.
>   >
>   >Thank you,
>   >73 Jack, W3TMZ
>   >
>   >
>   >------------------------------------
>   >
>   >Yahoo! Groups Links
>   >
>   >
>   >
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>   No virus found in this incoming message.
>   Checked by AVG.
>   Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.2/1523 - Release Date:
6/28/2008 7:00 AM
>

At 07:00 PM 6/28/2008, you wrote:
>Anybody ever tried using a 6 meter transverter with a softrock?  I ran
>across this site http://www.k8iqy.com/qrprigs/2n26/2n26page.htm and it
>got me to thinking.  Looks pretty easy to build, and a watt or two
>would be QRP, but still fun.  As the sunspots pick up, it will get better.
>
>Bruce
>WB8OGK
>

Jim makes some wonderful radios using mostly 2N2222's, they  work
rather well so I would have no qualms about making a copy it will
work. Look at his construction pictures, he is a master at building
Manhattan style.



Cecil
K5NWA
www.softrockradio.org  www.qrpradio.com

"Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light."

Have you tried spapping the channels to see it the variation follows
the transformers. Mine will appear on Monday so I can't try yet?

Jeff
W2UA

--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:
>
> I received and installed the two Triad SP-70 isolation transformers
that I
> ordered from Gopher, and ran I/Q balance adjustments in both Rocky
and CW
> Skimmer.
>
> I was surprised to see that both the gain and phase results show a
> substantial difference between the two channels.  The phase
difference is
> 7-8 degrees, while the gain of one channel is only .65 to .66 of
the
> other.  There is also a fairly substantial scattering of the data
points,
> though this is a phenomenon I've grown to expect as the software
collects
> real-world signals over time.  The image suppression is working
well, however.
>
> What I'm wondering is whether such differences are common?  Are
they a
> function of normal, to-be-expected variations in transformer
manufacturing,
> or possibly differences in the two sound card channels?  Or is it
possible
> that I have a wiring error in my 8.3 receiver.  I realize the gain
> imbalance is only ~2 dB, but I'm still wondering...
>
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
>

I did try swapping, and it did follow.  Not sure that tells me anything,
though hi

73, Pete

At 11:48 AM 6/29/2008, you wrote:
>Have you tried spapping the channels to see it the variation follows
>the transformers. Mine will appear on Monday so I can't try yet?
>
>Jeff
>W2UA
>
>--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:
> >
> > I received and installed the two Triad SP-70 isolation transformers
>that I
> > ordered from Gopher, and ran I/Q balance adjustments in both Rocky
>and CW
> > Skimmer.
> >
> > I was surprised to see that both the gain and phase results show a
> > substantial difference between the two channels.  The phase
>difference is
> > 7-8 degrees, while the gain of one channel is only .65 to .66 of
>the
> > other.  There is also a fairly substantial scattering of the data
>points,
> > though this is a phenomenon I've grown to expect as the software
>collects
> > real-world signals over time.  The image suppression is working
>well, however.
> >
> > What I'm wondering is whether such differences are common?  Are
>they a
> > function of normal, to-be-expected variations in transformer
>manufacturing,
> > or possibly differences in the two sound card channels?  Or is it
>possible
> > that I have a wiring error in my 8.3 receiver.  I realize the gain
> > imbalance is only ~2 dB, but I'm still wondering...
> >
> >
> > 73, Pete N4ZR
> >
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Pete:

Although the transformers are spec'ed at 600:600, in fact there is a
small difference in the number of turns between the primary and
secondary windings.

Did you set the two transformers up with the same pin numbers on the
Softrock side for both channels?

I'll make a measurement or two later today, but you are not seeing
normal operation, I believe.

Jack

Pete Smith wrote:
>
> I did try swapping, and it did follow. Not sure that tells me anything,
> though hi
>
> 73, Pete
>
> At 11:48 AM 6/29/2008, you wrote:
> >Have you tried spapping the channels to see it the variation follows
> >the transformers. Mine will appear on Monday so I can't try yet?
> >
> >Jeff
> >W2UA
> >
> >--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:softrock40%40yahoogroups.com>, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > I received and installed the two Triad SP-70 isolation transformers
> >that I
> > > ordered from Gopher, and ran I/Q balance adjustments in both Rocky
> >and CW
> > > Skimmer.
> > >
> > > I was surprised to see that both the gain and phase results show a
> > > substantial difference between the two channels. The phase
> >difference is
> > > 7-8 degrees, while the gain of one channel is only .65 to .66 of
> >the
> > > other. There is also a fairly substantial scattering of the data
> >points,
> > > though this is a phenomenon I've grown to expect as the software
> >collects
> > > real-world signals over time. The image suppression is working
> >well, however.
> > >
> > > What I'm wondering is whether such differences are common? Are
> >they a
> > > function of normal, to-be-expected variations in transformer
> >manufacturing,
> > > or possibly differences in the two sound card channels? Or is it
> >possible
> > > that I have a wiring error in my 8.3 receiver. I realize the gain
> > > imbalance is only ~2 dB, but I'm still wondering...
> > >
> > >
> > > 73, Pete N4ZR
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>

I ran quick check and see no evidence of serious phase or amplitude
differences.

I used the 8192 KHz Softrock Lite board with SP70 transformers on both
channels. Operating without a terminating resistor into the x10 probes
of a Tektronix TDS430 digital oscilloscope. Set a signal generator on
the input and swept from -100 KHz to +100 KHz of the 8192 KHz center
frequency. Set the TDS430 to compute and display phase difference
between the two channels as well as to compute and display the cycle RMS
for each channel for amplitude differences.

Stepped in 20 KHz increments from -100 to +100 KHz. Over this range, the
amplitude difference between the two channels was around 1 or 2 percent
except at the -100 KHz extreme where it was 5% or so. Phase shift over
the entire 200 KHz range was less than 4 degrees. That is, at 0 KHz
offset (centered) the phase shift was 90 degrees as close as I can
measure it with the digital oscilloscope. At -100 KHz, it was -92
degrees. At +100 KHz it was -88 degrees. This is actually the same phase
shift of 2 degrees, but it shows up with an inverted sign depending on
which way you are with respect to zero center frequency. I'll call it 4
degrees phase error, but it might be more accurate to say it's 2 degrees
error.

So, at least with the setup I have the SP70 transformers seem to work well.

Jack


Pete Smith wrote:
>
> I did try swapping, and it did follow. Not sure that tells me anything,
> though hi
>
> 73, Pete
>
> At 11:48 AM 6/29/2008, you wrote:
> >Have you tried spapping the channels to see it the variation follows
> >the transformers. Mine will appear on Monday so I can't try yet?
> >
> >Jeff
> >W2UA
> >
> >--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:softrock40%40yahoogroups.com>, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > I received and installed the two Triad SP-70 isolation transformers
> >that I
> > > ordered from Gopher, and ran I/Q balance adjustments in both Rocky
> >and CW
> > > Skimmer.
> > >
> > > I was surprised to see that both the gain and phase results show a
> > > substantial difference between the two channels. The phase
> >difference is
> > > 7-8 degrees, while the gain of one channel is only .65 to .66 of
> >the
> > > other. There is also a fairly substantial scattering of the data
> >points,
> > > though this is a phenomenon I've grown to expect as the software
> >collects
> > > real-world signals over time. The image suppression is working
> >well, however.
> > >
> > > What I'm wondering is whether such differences are common? Are
> >they a
> > > function of normal, to-be-expected variations in transformer
> >manufacturing,
> > > or possibly differences in the two sound card channels? Or is it
> >possible
> > > that I have a wiring error in my 8.3 receiver. I realize the gain
> > > imbalance is only ~2 dB, but I'm still wondering...
> > >
> > >
> > > 73, Pete N4ZR
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Yes, I did, Jack - I was very careful to make sure that the top of the
windings (pins 1 and 3) went to the signal lines from the SoftRock and to
the sound card, and that the bottoms (2 and 4) went to the common lead on
their respective side of the transformer.  I will double-check, because I
have a history of this sort of mistake, but I don't think so.

I did notice that the DC resistance of the primary and secondary are quite
different - 72 vs 92 ohms.

I am also seeing about the same dead-zone as with the radio-shack
transformers - maybe slightly narrower - around the LO frequency.

73, Pete N4ZR

At 12:23 PM 6/29/2008, you wrote:
>Pete:
>
>Although the transformers are spec'ed at 600:600, in fact there is a
>small difference in the number of turns between the primary and
>secondary windings.
>
>Did you set the two transformers up with the same pin numbers on the
>Softrock side for both channels?
>
>I'll make a measurement or two later today, but you are not seeing
>normal operation, I believe.
>
>Jack
>
>Pete Smith wrote:
> >
> > I did try swapping, and it did follow. Not sure that tells me anything,
> > though hi
> >
> > 73, Pete
> >
> > At 11:48 AM 6/29/2008, you wrote:
> > >Have you tried spapping the channels to see it the variation follows
> > >the transformers. Mine will appear on Monday so I can't try yet?
> > >
> > >Jeff
> > >W2UA
> > >
> > >--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:softrock40%40yahoogroups.com>, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I received and installed the two Triad SP-70 isolation transformers
> > >that I
> > > > ordered from Gopher, and ran I/Q balance adjustments in both Rocky
> > >and CW
> > > > Skimmer.
> > > >
> > > > I was surprised to see that both the gain and phase results show a
> > > > substantial difference between the two channels. The phase
> > >difference is
> > > > 7-8 degrees, while the gain of one channel is only .65 to .66 of
> > >the
> > > > other. There is also a fairly substantial scattering of the data
> > >points,
> > > > though this is a phenomenon I've grown to expect as the software
> > >collects
> > > > real-world signals over time. The image suppression is working
> > >well, however.
> > > >
> > > > What I'm wondering is whether such differences are common? Are
> > >they a
> > > > function of normal, to-be-expected variations in transformer
> > >manufacturing,
> > > > or possibly differences in the two sound card channels? Or is it
> > >possible
> > > > that I have a wiring error in my 8.3 receiver. I realize the gain
> > > > imbalance is only ~2 dB, but I'm still wondering...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 73, Pete N4ZR
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >------------------------------------
> > >
> > >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

OK, so I guess my next step is to take them out of the circuit and see what
happens to the numbers.  Thanks, Jack!

73, Pete

At 02:21 PM 6/29/2008, Jack Smith wrote:
>I ran quick check and see no evidence of serious phase or amplitude
>differences.
>
>I used the 8192 KHz Softrock Lite board with SP70 transformers on both
>channels. Operating without a terminating resistor into the x10 probes
>of a Tektronix TDS430 digital oscilloscope. Set a signal generator on
>the input and swept from -100 KHz to +100 KHz of the 8192 KHz center
>frequency. Set the TDS430 to compute and display phase difference
>between the two channels as well as to compute and display the cycle RMS
>for each channel for amplitude differences.
>
>Stepped in 20 KHz increments from -100 to +100 KHz. Over this range, the
>amplitude difference between the two channels was around 1 or 2 percent
>except at the -100 KHz extreme where it was 5% or so. Phase shift over
>the entire 200 KHz range was less than 4 degrees. That is, at 0 KHz
>offset (centered) the phase shift was 90 degrees as close as I can
>measure it with the digital oscilloscope. At -100 KHz, it was -92
>degrees. At +100 KHz it was -88 degrees. This is actually the same phase
>shift of 2 degrees, but it shows up with an inverted sign depending on
>which way you are with respect to zero center frequency. I'll call it 4
>degrees phase error, but it might be more accurate to say it's 2 degrees
>error.
>
>So, at least with the setup I have the SP70 transformers seem to work well.
>
>Jack
>
>
>Pete Smith wrote:
> >
> > I did try swapping, and it did follow. Not sure that tells me anything,
> > though hi
> >
> > 73, Pete
> >
> > At 11:48 AM 6/29/2008, you wrote:
> > >Have you tried spapping the channels to see it the variation follows
> > >the transformers. Mine will appear on Monday so I can't try yet?
> > >
> > >Jeff
> > >W2UA
> > >
> > >--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:softrock40%40yahoogroups.com>, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I received and installed the two Triad SP-70 isolation transformers
> > >that I
> > > > ordered from Gopher, and ran I/Q balance adjustments in both Rocky
> > >and CW
> > > > Skimmer.
> > > >
> > > > I was surprised to see that both the gain and phase results show a
> > > > substantial difference between the two channels. The phase
> > >difference is
> > > > 7-8 degrees, while the gain of one channel is only .65 to .66 of
> > >the
> > > > other. There is also a fairly substantial scattering of the data
> > >points,
> > > > though this is a phenomenon I've grown to expect as the software
> > >collects
> > > > real-world signals over time. The image suppression is working
> > >well, however.
> > > >
> > > > What I'm wondering is whether such differences are common? Are
> > >they a
> > > > function of normal, to-be-expected variations in transformer
> > >manufacturing,
> > > > or possibly differences in the two sound card channels? Or is it
> > >possible
> > > > that I have a wiring error in my 8.3 receiver. I realize the gain
> > > > imbalance is only ~2 dB, but I'm still wondering...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 73, Pete N4ZR
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >------------------------------------
> > >
> > >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

There's an argument that as long as the software corrects for the phase
and amplitude differences, then forget about fixing it.

Jack


Pete Smith wrote:
>
> OK, so I guess my next step is to take them out of the circuit and see
> what
> happens to the numbers. Thanks, Jack!
>
> 73, Pete
>
> At 02:21 PM 6/29/2008, Jack Smith wrote:
> >I ran quick check and see no evidence of serious phase or amplitude
> >differences.
> >
> >I used the 8192 KHz Softrock Lite board with SP70 transformers on both
> >channels. Operating without a terminating resistor into the x10 probes
> >of a Tektronix TDS430 digital oscilloscope. Set a signal generator on
> >the input and swept from -100 KHz to +100 KHz of the 8192 KHz center
> >frequency. Set the TDS430 to compute and display phase difference
> >between the two channels as well as to compute and display the cycle RMS
> >for each channel for amplitude differences.
> >
> >Stepped in 20 KHz increments from -100 to +100 KHz. Over this range, the
> >amplitude difference between the two channels was around 1 or 2 percent
> >except at the -100 KHz extreme where it was 5% or so. Phase shift over
> >the entire 200 KHz range was less than 4 degrees. That is, at 0 KHz
> >offset (centered) the phase shift was 90 degrees as close as I can
> >measure it with the digital oscilloscope. At -100 KHz, it was -92
> >degrees. At +100 KHz it was -88 degrees. This is actually the same phase
> >shift of 2 degrees, but it shows up with an inverted sign depending on
> >which way you are with respect to zero center frequency. I'll call it 4
> >degrees phase error, but it might be more accurate to say it's 2 degrees
> >error.
> >
> >So, at least with the setup I have the SP70 transformers seem to work
> well.
> >
> >Jack
> >
> >
> >Pete Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > I did try swapping, and it did follow. Not sure that tells me
> anything,
> > > though hi
> > >
> > > 73, Pete
> > >
> > > At 11:48 AM 6/29/2008, you wrote:
> > > >Have you tried spapping the channels to see it the variation follows
> > > >the transformers. Mine will appear on Monday so I can't try yet?
> > > >
> > > >Jeff
> > > >W2UA
> > > >
> > > >--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:softrock40%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:softrock40%40yahoogroups.com>, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I received and installed the two Triad SP-70 isolation
> transformers
> > > >that I
> > > > > ordered from Gopher, and ran I/Q balance adjustments in both Rocky
> > > >and CW
> > > > > Skimmer.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was surprised to see that both the gain and phase results show a
> > > > > substantial difference between the two channels. The phase
> > > >difference is
> > > > > 7-8 degrees, while the gain of one channel is only .65 to .66 of
> > > >the
> > > > > other. There is also a fairly substantial scattering of the data
> > > >points,
> > > > > though this is a phenomenon I've grown to expect as the software
> > > >collects
> > > > > real-world signals over time. The image suppression is working
> > > >well, however.
> > > > >
> > > > > What I'm wondering is whether such differences are common? Are
> > > >they a
> > > > > function of normal, to-be-expected variations in transformer
> > > >manufacturing,
> > > > > or possibly differences in the two sound card channels? Or is it
> > > >possible
> > > > > that I have a wiring error in my 8.3 receiver. I realize the gain
> > > > > imbalance is only ~2 dB, but I'm still wondering...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 73, Pete N4ZR
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>

At 02:21 PM 6/29/2008, Jack Smith wrote:
>I ran quick check and see no evidence of serious phase or amplitude
>differences.

OK, I removed the transformers from the circuit temporarily - which I
should have done before I started this thread - and both the phase and
amplitude difference curves remained about the same, which confirms Jack's
measurements.  So then I switched to a different sound card (again, I
should've done this before) and again, the phase and amplitude numbers are
broadly comparable.  So unless someone points out something I've
misunderstood, it appears that both the level and phase differences are in
the output of the SoftRock 8.3.  That is, the phase difference is 7-8
degrees and one channel's gain seems to be about .65 of the other.

Any idea if what sort of assembly error or component failure could be
responsible?  The radio otherwise seems to operate very well on all bands
80-10 meters.  Or is this possibly just due to component variations in a
correctly wired receiver?  Since the I/Q balance circuitry seems to have no
problem managing it, maybe I should just leave it alone?

73, Pete N4ZR

Pete:

That seems odd to me. My experience is with only the Softrock Lite 6.2
boards, but that won't stop me from making comments ...

At least with the Lite boards, the I and Q channels have identical
component values and circuit design. Hence, the response (amplitude and
phase) should track rather closely, certainly within the component
tolerances. Your values are way outside normal component tolerances. For
this purpose, the op amp can be considered a perfect device; it's
performance is governed by the external RC parts in the feedback
network, absent a faulty op amp.

Hence, I would take a look around the op-amp output stages and see if
perhaps you put a wrong resistor in one side or accidentally swapped two
similar appearing resistors. Or, capacitors. Another possibility would
be a bad mixer switching IC, where one of  the channels has greater
resistance than the other channels.

And, as I said before, as long as the software automatically compensates
for it, whether this gets fixed or ignored depends on how interested you
are in troubleshooting and whether you have the necessary test gear to
sort it out. Something like the "Click and Clack" automobile experts
policy for the "check engine" light. Cover it up with black tape if it
gets too distracting.

Jack

Pete Smith wrote:
>
> At 02:21 PM 6/29/2008, Jack Smith wrote:
> >I ran quick check and see no evidence of serious phase or amplitude
> >differences.
>
> OK, I removed the transformers from the circuit temporarily - which I
> should have done before I started this thread - and both the phase and
> amplitude difference curves remained about the same, which confirms
> Jack's
> measurements. So then I switched to a different sound card (again, I
> should've done this before) and again, the phase and amplitude numbers
> are
> broadly comparable. So unless someone points out something I've
> misunderstood, it appears that both the level and phase differences
> are in
> the output of the SoftRock 8.3. That is, the phase difference is 7-8
> degrees and one channel's gain seems to be about .65 of the other.
>
> Any idea if what sort of assembly error or component failure could be
> responsible? The radio otherwise seems to operate very well on all bands
> 80-10 meters. Or is this possibly just due to component variations in a
> correctly wired receiver? Since the I/Q balance circuitry seems to
> have no
> problem managing it, maybe I should just leave it alone?
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
>
>

At 12:36 PM 6/29/2008, Pete Smith wrote:

>Yes, I did, Jack - I was very careful to make sure that the top of the
>windings (pins 1 and 3) went to the signal lines from the SoftRock and to
>the sound card, and that the bottoms (2 and 4) went to the common lead on
>their respective side of the transformer. I will double-check, because I
>have a history of this sort of mistake, but I don't think so.
>
>I did notice that the DC resistance of the primary and secondary are quite
>different - 72 vs 92 ohms. <snip>

Hello, Pete and the group--

I'm not surprised that he resistance windings are different. The
primary winding goes on closest to the core, and the secondary winding
gets applied next. However, the length of turn increases because the
secondary is physically further away from the core. Thus, the
primary might require 100 feet of wire while the secondary requires
140 feet for the same number of turns.

The manufacturer can use a larger-diameter wire for the secondary
winding, but the larger wire takes up more space and makes
it more difficult to get the required number of turns onto the core.

73--

Brad  AA1IP

> Update on the use of Virtual audio Cable with Rocky:
>
> I just installed a copy of the  full version of VAC (not demo version)
> on my XP system and the previously mentioned periodic noise bursts
> have ceased. They were a function of the trial version
> cripple-function they added to make it unusable for anything serious.
> I'll get it installed on the Vista system this evening and if all goes
> according to plan Rocky should be running under Vista.

Hi Ray.

Would you please give me more detail on how you are using Rocky with
VAC? I have the same problem as you with Windows Vista. The only
application working with my SoftRock RXTX 6.2 on Vista with the on
board sound card is WinRad. Rocky does not work with the driver. G0KMK
crashes on start and PowerSDR works somehow, but with huge amount of
drop outs.

Thanks, Vojtech OK1IAK, AB2ZA

Hi,

I just finished this week end ( and spent all time playing with it )
to build my Lite Xtall + RX V8.3 radio.

I am quite impressed of this radio, it works really well and it makes
me wish to experiment quite a bit of stuff with it.

I spent a bit of time trying to study it in the beginning I wasn't
well able to understand "what they done here ? Why the IQ signals ?"
then a bit at time I started to figure out things.

I think the trickiest of all the parts to understand is the mixer I
am still not totally sure about it, I think it's a "further
variation" on the "Image Rejection Mixer" thing.

I'd have a number of various question ( to whoever can answer me ), I
really do LOVE this small radio ( small only in size ) and I'd love
to experiment a few things with it.

So here my questions, hoping not to look a bit "intrusive" in
starting my first post here with a set of questions.

1. I think the VCO can generate a very large range of freqencies so
basically the radio should be able to tune in a quite wide range.

One thing me and my mate we noted is that the current choice of bands
( and filters ) exclude some bands where is possible to listen to
commercial broadcast of radio stations or such.

Do you think it would be possible to re-program the PIC ( or, I could
even program one myself I see the PIC only supplies data for the VCO
to set the frequency ) and create some new set of "bands" to listen
to commercial radios ?

Me and my mate we love to listen to "mad radio stations".

2. Anyone knows how the BPF been computed and how would be possible
to compute them for other bands ( related to 1. )

3. Anyone knowing some "good documentation/tutorials" about "what you
can do with I/Q signals ?"

I've done in the past something about signal processing but very few,
however I know how to write programs to get audio data in and do
some "experiments" with it, I'd love to "mess a little" with this
data trying a few things ( demodulation of some simplest digital
modes ).

4. We tried this "mad idea" but it did not work super well, the idea
was to have a PC with the radio attached and "rebroadcast" via LAN
the IQ stream so us with other PCs we'd be able to grab it and use
individual copies of our SWs ( i.e. more people, same radio, but
tuning/listening to different things ).

We did not find ( yet ) anything capable to re-stream some data using
no compression at all but "as is", we tried with some programs, play
it back into VAC and such but did not work very well.

I think it's enough for now, apologizes if I maybe asked stuff
already asked by people.

Any help will be appreciated, this radio really rocks :) !

----- Original Message -----

From: kb9yig

To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 4:33 PM

Subject: [softrock40] CMOS Si570 orders

Good Afternoon All,

One hundred pieces of the CMOS Si570 were received this noon. This
afternoon fifty Si570 open orders were packed, addressed and made ready
to mail on Monday, June 30. Later in the weekend additional devices
will be packed to fill other open orders. All one hundred pieces will
probably be mailed out on Monday.

I will post on Monday what date was on open orders I was able to get to
before running out of the current supply of CMOS Si570 devices. An
additional one hundred pieces of the device went on order earlier this
week and these devices will be more than enough to cover all open
orders.

Thanks and 73,
Tony KB9YIG

Vojtech-

First you need the full version of VAC (the demo version is worthless
for SDR applications).


On my system ( a HP  Pavilion m8034n running Vista Ultimate) I
configured VAC as follows:

VAC Audio Repeater 1:
Wave in:  Line In
Wave out: Line 1 (Virtual Audio Cable)

VAC Audio Repeater 2:
Wave in:  Line 2 (Virtual Audio Cable)
Wave out: Speakers

Then you setup Rocky to utilize Line 1 as the I/Q input device and
Line 2 as the Audio Output Device.

This seems to work just fine for receive applications.

I haven't tried to set up for transmit yet as I haven't built my 6.2
transceiver yet (too busy building a PicaStar)but I would configure a
3rd VAC repeater with Line 3 as input and the output to another sound
card. Then I would set Rocky to use Line 3 as the I/Q Output Device.
As I mentioned, I haven't tried the TX connections yet so it may
require some experimentation.

I also confirmed the VAC  setup also works with PowerSDR on receive.

-Ray
WB6TPU


--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, "Vojtech Bubnik" <bubnikv@...> wrote:
>
> > Update on the use of Virtual audio Cable with Rocky:
> >
> > I just installed a copy of the  full version of VAC (not demo version)
> > on my XP system and the previously mentioned periodic noise bursts
> > have ceased. They were a function of the trial version
> > cripple-function they added to make it unusable for anything serious.
> > I'll get it installed on the Vista system this evening and if all goes
> > according to plan Rocky should be running under Vista.
>
> Hi Ray.
>
> Would you please give me more detail on how you are using Rocky with
> VAC? I have the same problem as you with Windows Vista. The only
> application working with my SoftRock RXTX 6.2 on Vista with the on
> board sound card is WinRad. Rocky does not work with the driver. G0KMK
> crashes on start and PowerSDR works somehow, but with huge amount of
> drop outs.
>
> Thanks, Vojtech OK1IAK, AB2ZA
>

Folks:

Just FYI.  The "noise burst" is actually a female voice that repeats
the phrase "Trial Version".  Took me  several hours of troubleshooting
to determine this. Sure would have been nice if the author mentioned
this somewhere in the docs.  Yes, to me, it makes the trial version
quite useless.  The method that the author uses to allow upgrades is,
shall we say "unique".

However, the software does indeed work.  I use it every day with my
SDR-1000, Delta 66 audio card and digital modes.  IMHO a little
pricey, but then, I am a typical ultra-cheap Ham and confirmed
dumpster diver.

Brian K7RE

--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, "Ray" <N0FY@...> wrote:
>
> Makes me wonder why they even bothered with a demo version.  That noise
> burst turned me off immediately and because of it I decided to
abandon VAC.
> Seems like a strange way to encourage sales.
>
>
>
> 73,  Ray,  N0FY  SKCC 3704  FH 997
>
>
>
> As senseless as the world may seem to you,  never forget that you
contribute
> a fair share to this senselessness by what you do as well as by what you
> don't do.
>
> Arthur Schnitzler (1867 - 1931)
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: softrock40@yahoogroups.com [mailto:softrock40@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of WB6TPU
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 2:36 PM
> To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [softrock40] Re: Rocky with USB Soundcard & Vista ?
>
>
>
>
> Update on the use of Virtual audio Cable with Rocky:
>
> I just installed a copy of the full version of VAC (not demo version)
> on my XP system and the previously mentioned periodic noise bursts
> have ceased. They were a function of the trial version
> cripple-function they added to make it unusable for anything serious.
> I'll get it installed on the Vista system this evening and if all goes
> according to plan Rocky should be running under Vista.
>
> -Ray
> WB6TPU
>
> --- In softrock40@yahoogro <mailto:softrock40%40yahoogroups.com>
ups.com,
> "WB6TPU" <ray.anderson@> wrote:
> >
> > Spurred by your mention of using the Virtual Audio Cable s/w I
> > installed the demo version (Ver. 4.09) on my Vista system last night.
> > Rocky was finally able to see the output from my on-board sound card.
> > The number of spurs and close in audio noise on this particular audio
> > card (in a HP Pavilion) isn't spectacular but is much better than a
> > lot of other I've seen.
> >
> > I noticed one artifact that may be a function of the Demo version VAC
> > code I was using: periodically their is a large burst of noise across
> > the band shortly after the demo s/w inserts its spoken "trial" audio
> > into the stream. I just install VAC on a XP system and noticed the
> > same noise bursts following the 'trial' audio. So it seems that this
> > may be related to the VAC (trial) s/w and is not peculiar to Vista.
> >
> > -Ray
> > WB6TPU
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In softrock40@yahoogro <mailto:softrock40%40yahoogroups.com>
ups.com,
> "m0fmt" <m0fmt@> wrote:
> > >
> > > HI
> > >
> > > You are right Rocky doesn't recognise the sound card when installed
> > > on VISTA (The DEVILS OS).
> > >
> > > It does however recognise my Virtual Audio Cable SW. I have yet to
> > > make a connection between the VAC and the sound card though.
> > >
> > > I too would like to know the the answer.
> > >
> > > I would also like to know how to run any SDR software on Vista with
> > > out issues. So far none have worked for me.
> > >
> > > Good luck all with Vista, the operating system that will live on in
> > > infamy among the Amateur Radio fratenity.
> > >
> > > vy 73 petefmt.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

I have setup a small parts store at the link below;

<  http://www.softrockradio.org/catalog  >

This is an effort to make it easier for me while being able to
deliver parts faster, most operations are automatically handled.
There are 68 parts in there, all of it is in stock except the cores
which will be purchased soon. Over the next few days I will be adding
additional parts. All parts unless noted are factory fresh bought
from Mouser, Digi-Key, or Newark.

It's an experiment right now so prices are subject to change, fees
are subject to change as I spot problems. Part of the experiment is
the pricing schedule, small orders pay more for the parts since the
overhead is high, the more parts you buy the cheaper they are. I set
it up with 4 categories of price breaks many have   discounts at Qty
3, 5, 10 some are at Qty 5, 10, 25, and a couple are at 10, 25, 100
mostly resistors and cheap bypass capacitors.

If you have a login at the site, login first then go to the catalog
otherwise it will create a new account. If you would like other parts
and here is the key "that other people would be interested  in" send
me and email and I will look into it.

Thanks for shopping at Walmart.



Cecil
K5NWA
www.softrockradio.org  www.qrpradio.com

"Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light."

Hi all
Is any picture that I can see all the SMT caps on the board ?
Thanks, shalom 4Z4UT

----- Original Message -----

From: shalom65b

To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 10:41 AM

Subject: [softrock40] softrock lite+xtall v8.3

Hi all
Is any picture that I can see all the SMT caps on the board ?
Thanks, shalom 4Z4UT

try wb5rvz's excellent step-by-step instructions
http://www.golddredgervideo.com/wb5rvz/Home.htm

73, Pete N4ZR

At 10:41 AM 6/30/2008, you wrote:
>Hi all
>Is any picture that I can see all the SMT caps on the board ?
>Thanks, shalom 4Z4UT
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

If it were just the voice repeatedly saying "trial" it would be easy
enough to evaluate if the VAC program was functioning well in ones
application. What I found was that shortly after each time the word
"trial" was voiced there was a burst of wideband noise that just tore
up the audio. When you first hear the effect it seems as if the
buffers are overflowing or something else is going on that makes the
audio stream discontinuous. As mentioned previously, all the noise is
an artifact of how they chose to insert the "trial" audio. Fortunately
the full version seems to work just as one would hope.

-Ray
WB6TPU

--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, "c6alk" <bkassel@...> wrote:
>
> Folks:
>
> Just FYI.  The "noise burst" is actually a female voice that repeats
> the phrase "Trial Version".  Took me  several hours of troubleshooting
> to determine this. Sure would have been nice if the author mentioned
> this somewhere in the docs.  Yes, to me, it makes the trial version
> quite useless.  The method that the author uses to allow upgrades is,
> shall we say "unique".
>
> However, the software does indeed work.  I use it every day with my
> SDR-1000, Delta 66 audio card and digital modes.  IMHO a little
> pricey, but then, I am a typical ultra-cheap Ham and confirmed
> dumpster diver.
>
> Brian K7RE
>

Good Afternoon All,

I have two built 40m SoftRock Lite receivers for sale at $25 per unit.
Each receiver has an a short length of RG174 attached for the antenna
connection, DC power leads and a three foot long audio cable.  The
price includes US/Canada postage and I would need to ask for $26 per
unit to include DX postage costs.

E-mail me if you have an interest in having one of the built 40m
SoftRock Lite receivers.

Thanks and 73,
Tony KB9YIG

Tony-

I just sent you e-mail as requested, but I'll register my interest
here as well. If one of the receivers is available I am interested.

-Ray
WB6TPU


--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, "kb9yig" <raparks@...> wrote:
>
> Good Afternoon All,
>
> I have two built 40m SoftRock Lite receivers for sale at $25 per unit.
> Each receiver has an a short length of RG174 attached for the antenna
> connection, DC power leads and a three foot long audio cable.  The
> price includes US/Canada postage and I would need to ask for $26 per
> unit to include DX postage costs.
>
> E-mail me if you have an interest in having one of the built 40m
> SoftRock Lite receivers.
>
> Thanks and 73,
> Tony KB9YIG
>

--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, "shalom65b" <shalom65b@...> wrote:
>
> Hi all
> Is any picture that I can see all the SMT caps on the board ?
> Thanks, shalom 4Z4UT
>
1.  Picture of caps installed is near the bottom of this page:
http://golddredgervideo.com/wb5rvz/sr_lite/Softrock%20Lite%
20V6_VI_Mixer.htm

2.  Picture of annotated board bottom (showing caps and ICs and their
designations and locations) is at:
http://golddredgervideo.com/wb5rvz/BoardBottom.htm

73
DE robby wb5rvz