Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

fldigi makes Macbook fan run full time

Expand Messages
  • ke7adu
    First let me say that I am really enjoying using fldidi on my Macbook. Good HAM software for OS X is hard to find (especially for free). Second I am new to
    Message 1 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      First let me say that I am really enjoying using fldidi on my Macbook. Good HAM software for OS X is hard to find (especially for free). Second I am new to the Mac OS but I have been using Windows and playing with Linux for years.

      Now down to business.

      When fldigi is loaded the fan on my Macbook runs continuously. Normally it never runs. That is not a big deal except I figure that will lead to a short battery life if I decide to operate in the field.
      CocoaModem doesn't seem to make the fan run but for what I do I prefer fldigi.

      I plan to try fldidg on a Windows and Linux box and see if I have the same issue.

      Anyone else with this issue? Anyone have suggestions as to how to temper the CPU use when I am operating off battery?

      My equipment:
      Computer: Macbook Aluminum 2.0 GHz, 4 GB RAM
      Interface: SignaLink USB
      OS X ver: 10.5.7
      Radio: FT-897D

      Thanks,
      Anthony - KE7AUD
    • Dick Kriss
      ... Anthony, Go to your Applications/Utilities folder and open the Activity Monitor and you will be able to monitor and view CPU usage. You may want to monitor
      Message 2 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sunday8/2/09 1:15 PM, "ke7adu" <ke7adu@...> wrote:

        > Anyone else with this issue? Anyone have suggestions as to how to temper the
        > CPU use when I am operating off battery?
        >
        > My equipment:
        > Computer: Macbook Aluminum 2.0 GHz, 4 GB RAM
        > Interface: SignaLink USB
        > OS X ver: 10.5.7
        > Radio: FT-897D
        >
        > Thanks,
        > Anthony - KE7AUD
        >

        Anthony,

        Go to your Applications/Utilities folder and open the Activity Monitor
        and you will be able to monitor and view CPU usage.

        You may want to monitor and check to see what feature in fldigi is
        causing the causing the fans to run.

        See what it is doing then go to fldigi's Configuration UI/Misc/CPU
        and check the option for slow CPU and see if that help.

        You many also want to download and install iStat Pro widget
        that will show you what's hot in your Mac Book Pro. The Process
        section will show you the who's using the CPU in real time. Very
        cool free utility. Try it at....

        <http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/20364/istat-pro>

        iStat Pro is the ultimate System monitoring widget, consisting
        of 9 sections which can be minimized, expanded or closed. It
        features detailed information on CPU, memory, hard drives,
        IP and external IP, bandwidth, CPU temperature, battery,
        uptime, temperatures and fans. You'll know exactly what's
        going on inside your Mac!

        I have never had fldigi cause the fans to increase in this Intel iMac
        and I only have 3GB of RAM.

        Maybe some MacBook Pro owners will speak up.

        Dick AA5VU
      • Brian Lloyd
        ... I run Fldigi on a MacBook Pro (Intel) and the additional CPU usage does cause the fan to come on and temps to go up. I have stopped using CocoaModem
        Message 3 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Dick Kriss<aa5vu@...> wrote:
          > iStat Pro is the ultimate System monitoring widget, consisting
          > of 9 sections which can be minimized, expanded or closed. It
          > features detailed information on CPU, memory, hard drives,
          > IP and external IP, bandwidth, CPU temperature, battery,
          > uptime, temperatures and fans. You'll know exactly what's
          > going on inside your Mac!
          >
          > I have never had fldigi cause the fans to increase in this Intel iMac
          > and I only have 3GB of RAM.
          >
          > Maybe some MacBook Pro owners will speak up.

          I run Fldigi on a MacBook Pro (Intel) and the additional CPU usage
          does cause the fan to come on and temps to go up. I have stopped using
          CocoaModem because it does not support either Olivia or DominoEX so I
          can't comment on the relative efficiencies of the two programs. The
          same occurs when I reboot into WinXP in order to run PowerSDR. In the
          latter case my CPU utilization averages 25%.

          If anyone is really interested I will collect the data but the
          anecdotal result is, the computer does run a lot hotter with fldigi
          running.

          --
          73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
        • w1hkj
          ... You might be able to reduce cpu usage by judicious selection of the sound card interpolator. The Fast Interpolator might provide more than adequate
          Message 4 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Brian Lloyd wrote:
            On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Dick Kriss<aa5vu@...> wrote:
              
            iStat Pro is the ultimate System monitoring widget, consisting
            of 9 sections which can be minimized, expanded or closed. It
            features detailed information on CPU, memory, hard drives,
            IP and external IP, bandwidth, CPU temperature, battery,
            uptime, temperatures and fans. You'll know exactly what's
            going on inside your Mac!
            
            I have never had fldigi cause the fans to increase in this Intel iMac
            and I only have 3GB of RAM.
            
            Maybe some MacBook Pro owners will speak up.
                
            I run Fldigi on a MacBook Pro (Intel) and the additional CPU usage
            does cause the fan to come on and temps to go up. I have stopped using
            CocoaModem because it does not support either Olivia or DominoEX so I
            can't comment on the relative efficiencies of the two programs. The
            same occurs when I reboot into WinXP in order to run PowerSDR. In the
            latter case my CPU utilization averages 25%.
            
            If anyone is really interested I will collect the data but the
            anecdotal result is, the computer does run a lot hotter with fldigi
            running.
            
              
            You might be able to reduce cpu usage by judicious selection of the sound card interpolator.  The "Fast Interpolator" might provide more than adequate sample rate conversion at a much reduced cpu load.

            Dave
          • Brian Lloyd
            ... And if I didn t have to do sample-rate conversion, I wouldn t have to use the interpolator at all. What is the internal sample rate that you use in the
            Message 5 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:07 PM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:
              > You might be able to reduce cpu usage by judicious selection of the sound
              > card interpolator.  The "Fast Interpolator" might provide more than adequate
              > sample rate conversion at a much reduced cpu load.

              And if I didn't have to do sample-rate conversion, I wouldn't have to
              use the interpolator at all. What is the internal sample rate that you
              use in the software? I know that when I am using PowerSDR I can
              specifiy the sample rate on the audio channel going to/from fldigi. If
              I use the native rate used by fldigi then fldigi won't have to do any
              rate conversion. PowerSDR will already have done that. (In fact, I
              suspect that both PowerSDR and fldigi are already doing sample rate
              conversion on the same stream.) By default PowerSDR uses a sample rate
              of 48KHz but I believe it can generate any of the standards that are
              integer divisors of 44.1KHz and 48KHz, e.g. 8KHz, 11.025KHz, 12KHz,
              22.05KHz, 24KHz, etc.

              --
              73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
            • w1hkj
              ... 8000 and 11025 depending on mode. refer to the source code for each individual encoder / decoder. Dave
              Message 6 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Brian Lloyd wrote:
                On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:07 PM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:
                  
                You might be able to reduce cpu usage by judicious selection of the sound
                card interpolator.  The "Fast Interpolator" might provide more than adequate
                sample rate conversion at a much reduced cpu load.
                    
                And if I didn't have to do sample-rate conversion, I wouldn't have to
                use the interpolator at all. What is the internal sample rate that you
                use in the software? I know that when I am using PowerSDR I can
                specifiy the sample rate on the audio channel going to/from fldigi. If
                I use the native rate used by fldigi then fldigi won't have to do any
                rate conversion. PowerSDR will already have done that. (In fact, I
                suspect that both PowerSDR and fldigi are already doing sample rate
                conversion on the same stream.) By default PowerSDR uses a sample rate
                of 48KHz but I believe it can generate any of the standards that are
                integer divisors of 44.1KHz and 48KHz, e.g. 8KHz, 11.025KHz, 12KHz,
                22.05KHz, 24KHz, etc.
                
                  
                8000 and 11025 depending on mode.  refer to the source code for each individual encoder / decoder.

                Dave
              • Brian Lloyd
                ... Hmm, then clearly it makes no sense to send the bit stream at 48KHz. Why the difference? It seems to me that it would be simpler to make all the codecs run
                Message 7 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:11 PM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:

                  > 8000 and 11025 depending on mode.  refer to the source code for each
                  > individual encoder / decoder.

                  Hmm, then clearly it makes no sense to send the bit stream at 48KHz.
                  Why the difference? It seems to me that it would be simpler to make
                  all the codecs run at the same sample rate.

                  Is the code smart enough to know when sample-rate conversion is not
                  needed, i.e. that the actual sample rate and the desired sample rate
                  are the same?

                  --
                  73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                • Stelios Bounanos
                  ... You can set the capture & playback sample rates to Auto , and then fldigi will always try to open the audio device at the modem s sample rate (8000 or
                  Message 8 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    >>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 14:04:30 -0700, Brian Lloyd <brian-wb6rqn@...> said:

                    > On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:07 PM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:
                    >> You might be able to reduce cpu usage by judicious selection of the sound
                    >> card interpolator.  The "Fast Interpolator" might provide more than adequate
                    >> sample rate conversion at a much reduced cpu load.

                    > And if I didn't have to do sample-rate conversion, I wouldn't have to
                    > use the interpolator at all.

                    You can set the capture & playback sample rates to "Auto", and then
                    fldigi will always try to open the audio device at the modem's sample
                    rate (8000 or 11025 Hz). Of course, if your audio device does not
                    support these rates there will still be resampling, but this time it
                    will be done by CoreAudio. On OS X, IIRC, PortAudio sets things up so
                    that any such resampling is done at the maximum available quality,
                    probably equivalent to libsamplerate's Medium or Best Sinc.

                    BTW there is an interesting resampler comparison here:

                    http://src.infinitewave.ca/


                    --

                    73,
                    Stelios, M0GLD.
                  • Stelios Bounanos
                    ... This is what the Auto sample rate does, with a fall-back to Native if the modem s rate is not supported by the sound card. Auto used to be the default
                    Message 9 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 14:20:25 -0700, Brian Lloyd <brian-wb6rqn@...> said:

                      > On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:11 PM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:
                      >> 8000 and 11025 depending on mode.  refer to the source code for each
                      >> individual encoder / decoder.

                      > Hmm, then clearly it makes no sense to send the bit stream at 48KHz.
                      > Why the difference? It seems to me that it would be simpler to make
                      > all the codecs run at the same sample rate.

                      > Is the code smart enough to know when sample-rate conversion is not
                      > needed, i.e. that the actual sample rate and the desired sample rate
                      > are the same?

                      This is what the "Auto" sample rate does, with a fall-back to "Native"
                      if the modem's rate is not supported by the sound card. Auto used to be
                      the default option but we had to change it to Native because some
                      systems claim to support every standard sample rate... using really
                      crappy linear interpolation.


                      --

                      73,
                      Stelios, M0GLD.
                    • Brian Lloyd
                      ... -- 73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                      Message 10 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Stelios Bounanos<lham@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >>>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 14:20:25 -0700, Brian Lloyd
                        >>>>>> <brian-wb6rqn@...> said:
                        >
                        >> On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:11 PM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:
                        >>> 8000 and 11025 depending on mode.  refer to the source code for each
                        >>> individual encoder / decoder.
                        >
                        >> Hmm, then clearly it makes no sense to send the bit stream at 48KHz.
                        >> Why the difference? It seems to me that it would be simpler to make
                        >> all the codecs run at the same sample rate.
                        >
                        >> Is the code smart enough to know when sample-rate conversion is not
                        >> needed, i.e. that the actual sample rate and the desired sample rate
                        >> are the same?
                        >
                        > This is what the "Auto" sample rate does, with a fall-back to "Native"
                        > if the modem's rate is not supported by the sound card. Auto used to be
                        > the default option but we had to change it to Native because some
                        > systems claim to support every standard sample rate... using really
                        > crappy linear interpolation.
                        >
                        > --
                        >
                        > 73,
                        > Stelios, M0GLD.
                        >
                        >



                        --
                        73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                      • Brian Lloyd
                        ... Sounds like the goal is really to make sure fldigi doesn t have to resample. -- 73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                        Message 11 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Stelios Bounanos<lham@...> wrote:
                          >> Is the code smart enough to know when sample-rate conversion is not
                          >> needed, i.e. that the actual sample rate and the desired sample rate
                          >> are the same?
                          >
                          > This is what the "Auto" sample rate does, with a fall-back to "Native"
                          > if the modem's rate is not supported by the sound card. Auto used to be
                          > the default option but we had to change it to Native because some
                          > systems claim to support every standard sample rate... using really
                          > crappy linear interpolation.

                          Sounds like the goal is really to make sure fldigi doesn't have to resample.

                          --
                          73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                        • Brian Lloyd
                          ... Well the goal is to avoid resampling in fldigi. That implies to me that I need to make the source match fldigi rather than the other way around. I could go
                          Message 12 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Stelios Bounanos<lham@...> wrote:
                            >> And if I didn't have to do sample-rate conversion, I wouldn't have to
                            >> use the interpolator at all.
                            >
                            > You can set the capture & playback sample rates to "Auto", and then
                            > fldigi will always try to open the audio device at the modem's sample
                            > rate (8000 or 11025 Hz). Of course, if your audio device does not
                            > support these rates there will still be resampling, but this time it
                            > will be done by CoreAudio.

                            Well the goal is to avoid resampling in fldigi. That implies to me
                            that I need to make the source match fldigi rather than the other way
                            around.

                            I could go dig through the source code for fldigi to find the native
                            sample rates for the various modems. But given that I have never
                            looked at the source code, it would probably take awhile to figure out
                            where to look. I don't like asking people to do things for me but
                            given as you or Dave could probably tell me off the top of your heads
                            where to look (or cut an paste the relevant section of the constant
                            declarations) I am going to ask.

                            > On OS X, IIRC, PortAudio sets things up so
                            > that any such resampling is done at the maximum available quality,
                            > probably equivalent to libsamplerate's Medium or Best Sinc.
                            >
                            > BTW there is an interesting resampler comparison here:
                            >
                            > http://src.infinitewave.ca/

                            Interesting, to say the least. All resamplers are not created equal,
                            eh? I was heartened to see that the resampler in Apple's Coreaudio is
                            pretty darned good. How is resampling done in auto on Windows systems?


                            --
                            73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                          • w1hkj
                            ... As Stelios pointed out in a separate response that really is not necessary Brian. Use the auto and if your sound driver supports the request the modem
                            Message 13 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Brian Lloyd wrote:
                              On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Stelios Bounanos<lham@...> wrote:
                                
                              And if I didn't have to do sample-rate conversion, I wouldn't have to
                              use the interpolator at all.
                                    
                              You can set the capture & playback sample rates to "Auto", and then
                              fldigi will always try to open the audio device at the modem's sample
                              rate (8000 or 11025 Hz). Of course, if your audio device does not
                              support these rates there will still be resampling, but this time it
                              will be done by CoreAudio.
                                  
                              Well the goal is to avoid resampling in fldigi. That implies to me
                              that I need to make the source match fldigi rather than the other way
                              around.
                              
                              I could go dig through the source code for fldigi to find the native
                              sample rates for the various modems. But given that I have never
                              looked at the source code, it would probably take awhile to figure out
                              where to look. I don't like asking people to do things for me but
                              given as you or Dave could probably tell me off the top of your heads
                              where to look (or cut an paste the relevant section of the constant
                              declarations) I am going to ask.
                                
                              As Stelios pointed out in a separate response that really is not necessary Brian.  Use the "auto" and if your sound driver supports the request the modem native sample rate will be used.

                              For those systems that do not support such a response and lie about their capability (mostly MS systems) the resampling code in fldigi is far superior to what most outboard drivers provide.  It is then much better to operate the sound system in its sound card clock native mode.  That might be 44100, 48000, 96000, whatever.  The resamplers in fldigi are from the SecretRabbit site.  Take a look at the specs available on that web site.  Several types of resampling are provided so that fldigi can continue (even if degraded) on cpu starved systems.  fldigi measures you system performance on the initial start and selects the optimum resampler based on that measurement.

                              These are the sample rates you requested:

                              PSK (all baud rates)
                              8000
                              MFSK 4 / 8 / 16 / 31 / 32 / 64
                              8000
                              MFSK 11 / 22
                              11025
                              DOMINOEX 5 / 11 / 22
                              11025
                              DOMINOEX 4 / 8 / 16
                              8000
                              THOR 5 / 11 / 22
                              11025
                              DOMINOEX 4 / 8 / 16
                              8000
                              FELD
                              8000
                              MT63
                              8000
                              OLIVIA
                              8000
                              THROB
                              8000



                              Dave
                            • Brian Lloyd
                              ... I guess I wasn t being clear. I am running PowerSDR, the processing behind the Flex 5000. There is no sound card. The digital baseband stream (or low IF if
                              Message 14 of 20 , Aug 2, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 6:02 PM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:
                                > For those systems that do not support such a response and lie about their
                                > capability (mostly MS systems) the resampling code in fldigi is far superior
                                > to what most outboard drivers provide.  It is then much better to operate
                                > the sound system in its sound card clock native mode.  That might be 44100,
                                > 48000, 96000, whatever.

                                I guess I wasn't being clear. I am running PowerSDR, the processing
                                behind the Flex 5000. There is no sound card. The digital baseband
                                stream (or low IF if you prefer) is being fed to fldigi from PowerSDR
                                through VAC (Virtual Audio Cable). The "radio" (PowerSDR) provides a
                                digital stream. There is no A:D or D:A involved between PowerSDR and
                                fldigi. Also, PowerSDR has no "native" sample rate. PowerSDR is using
                                48KHz, 96KHz, or 192KHz depending on the sample rate I select for the
                                ADC in the front-end. PowerSDR then allows me to specify the sample
                                rate to send to the digital mode program via VAC. Therefore the
                                resampling takes place in PowerSDR. (And you have me wondering just
                                how good it is.)

                                Since I normally run the radio at 96KHz PowerSDR is going to resample
                                for me no matter what because 48KHz (the default value) is the highest
                                sample rate that VAC supports. Since I must resample anyway, by
                                telling PowerSDR to resample down to 8KHz or 11.025KHz I avoid the
                                need to have fldigi resample a second time.

                                > The resamplers in fldigi are from the SecretRabbit
                                > site.  Take a look at the specs available on that web site.  Several types
                                > of resampling are provided so that fldigi can continue (even if degraded) on
                                > cpu starved systems.  fldigi measures you system performance on the initial
                                > start and selects the optimum resampler based on that measurement.

                                I understand but since PowerSDR is resampling for me anyway (and
                                generating whatever artifacts it is going to generate :-) it seems to
                                me that resampling a second time in fldigi is not going to improve
                                things.

                                > These are the sample rates you requested:

                                Thank you. Perfect. I am going to experiment with having PowerSDR
                                resample down to either 8KHz or 11.025KHz to see if it improves
                                performance any. I will also see if it reduces CPU utilization.

                                Too bad there is no communication between the two programs as it seems
                                to me that the best solution is for them to cooperate to resample only
                                once and then to have the CODECs communicate the optimum sample rate
                                back to the source, i.e. PowerSDR. In the mean time, I can do it
                                manually. Knowing the native sample rates for the CODECs will let me
                                select the correct one at PowerSDR so that fldigi doesn't need to
                                resample.

                                >
                                > PSK (all baud rates)
                                > 8000
                                > MFSK 4 / 8 / 16 / 31 / 32 / 64
                                > 8000
                                > MFSK 11 / 22
                                > 11025
                                > DOMINOEX 5 / 11 / 22
                                > 11025
                                > DOMINOEX 4 / 8 / 16
                                > 8000
                                > THOR 5 / 11 / 22
                                > 11025
                                > DOMINOEX 4 / 8 / 16
                                > 8000
                                > FELD
                                > 8000
                                > MT63
                                > 8000
                                > OLIVIA
                                > 8000
                                > THROB
                                > 8000

                                --
                                73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                              • w1hkj
                                ... I would be very interested in learning the results of your tests Brian. Dave
                                Message 15 of 20 , Aug 3, 2009
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Brian Lloyd wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Thank you. Perfect. I am going to experiment with having PowerSDR
                                  > resample down to either 8KHz or 11.025KHz to see if it improves
                                  > performance any. I will also see if it reduces CPU utilization.

                                  I would be very interested in learning the results of your tests Brian.

                                  Dave
                                • Brian Lloyd
                                  ... Certainly. You are doing much more work on this than I. Anything I can do to make your work more effective I will. -- 73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                                  Message 16 of 20 , Aug 3, 2009
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:19 AM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Brian Lloyd wrote:
                                    >>
                                    >> Thank you. Perfect. I am going to experiment with having PowerSDR
                                    >> resample down to either 8KHz or 11.025KHz to see if it improves
                                    >> performance any. I will also see if it reduces CPU utilization.
                                    >
                                    > I would be very interested in learning the results of your tests Brian.

                                    Certainly. You are doing much more work on this than I. Anything I can
                                    do to make your work more effective I will.

                                    --
                                    73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                                  • Dick Kriss
                                    After reading the recent comments on sampling rates, I recalled a note from Dec 2008 where Chen W7AY changed the default sampling rate setting for his
                                    Message 17 of 20 , Aug 3, 2009
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      After reading the recent comments on sampling rates, I
                                      recalled a note from Dec 2008 where Chen W7AY changed
                                      the default sampling rate setting for his cocoaModem to
                                      16000 samples per second due to some technical issues
                                      between the Burr-Brown PCM2902 codec chipset and the
                                      Mac OS X Core Audio.

                                      The Burr-Brown chipset is used in sound cards such as as the
                                      microHAM digiKeyer, the Edirol UA-1X and the SignaLink USB.

                                      The topic is discussed in W7AY's "What has changed in v0.62" at

                                      <http://homepage.mac.com/chen/w7ay/cocoaModem/Whats%20New/index.html>

                                      The bottom line was W7AY recommend users avoid using 11025
                                      and 44100 samples per sec and he changed the default Rx in his
                                      cocoaModem to 16000 samples per sec.

                                      At the time I really did not understand the technical issue but
                                      changing to his recommend 16000 samples per second for Rx
                                      helped cocoaModem decoding.

                                      When I changed from cocoaModem to fldigi, I set the
                                      Sound Card/Audio/Settings to Capture at 16000 samples/sec
                                      (vs. the native 32000) and I left Playback at the native 32000
                                      samples/sec. I did not understand the "Converter" so set it
                                      to Medium.

                                      To see what would happen I just changed my fldigi Capture
                                      setting back to the native 32000 samples per second and
                                      fldigi seems to work fine. Maybe Apple has changed the OS X
                                      Core Audio since W7AY's note that was posted in Dec 2008.

                                      I wonder what Capture/Converter settings other fldigi Mac OS X
                                      and SignaLink US/users are using?

                                      73 Dick AA5VU
                                    • ke7adu
                                      OK, I have been playing around with the Sample Rate and Converter settings. My install was set to Native I set to Auto did not notice any change in CPU use.
                                      Message 18 of 20 , Aug 3, 2009
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        OK,

                                        I have been playing around with the Sample Rate and Converter settings. My install was set to Native I set to Auto did not notice any change in CPU use. Changing the Converter settings from Medium Sync to Linear drops CPU use by a few percent.

                                        CocoaModem runs about 6% CPU use while fldigi runs between 16% and 25% CPU. However, the Cocoa Modem table view is only decoding two to three signals while fldigi is decoding six to eight signals in the PSK Browser so I can see why it would use more CPU.

                                        Anthony - KE7ADU

                                        --- In linuxham@yahoogroups.com, "ke7adu" <ke7adu@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > First let me say that I am really enjoying using fldidi on my Macbook. Good HAM software for OS X is hard to find (especially for free). Second I am new to the Mac OS but I have been using Windows and playing with Linux for years.
                                        >
                                        > Now down to business.
                                        >
                                        > When fldigi is loaded the fan on my Macbook runs continuously. Normally it never runs. That is not a big deal except I figure that will lead to a short battery life if I decide to operate in the field.
                                        > CocoaModem doesn't seem to make the fan run but for what I do I prefer fldigi.
                                        >
                                        > I plan to try fldidg on a Windows and Linux box and see if I have the same issue.
                                        >
                                        > Anyone else with this issue? Anyone have suggestions as to how to temper the CPU use when I am operating off battery?
                                        >
                                        > My equipment:
                                        > Computer: Macbook Aluminum 2.0 GHz, 4 GB RAM
                                        > Interface: SignaLink USB
                                        > OS X ver: 10.5.7
                                        > Radio: FT-897D
                                        >
                                        > Thanks,
                                        > Anthony - KE7AUD
                                        >
                                      • w1hkj
                                        ... BINGO ! If you were decoding 20 the cpu usage might be more yet. cpu usage will also be a function of the modem and baud rate that is being used. Don t
                                        Message 19 of 20 , Aug 3, 2009
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          ke7adu wrote:
                                          > OK,
                                          >
                                          > I have been playing around with the Sample Rate and Converter settings. My install was set to Native I set to Auto did not notice any change in CPU use. Changing the Converter settings from Medium Sync to Linear drops CPU use by a few percent.
                                          >
                                          > CocoaModem runs about 6% CPU use while fldigi runs between 16% and 25% CPU. However, the Cocoa Modem table view is only decoding two to three signals while fldigi is decoding six to eight signals in the PSK Browser so I can see why it would use more CPU.
                                          >
                                          BINGO ! If you were decoding 20 the cpu usage might be more yet. cpu
                                          usage will also be a function of the modem and baud rate that is being used.

                                          Don't recommend Linear ... your OS X box should be more that fast enough
                                          to support the Medium or Fast Sync converter.

                                          Dave
                                        • Brian Lloyd
                                          ... I ran some tests last night, qualitative rather than quantitative, i.e. the results were subjective rather than objective -- no measurements. Before I get
                                          Message 20 of 20 , Aug 4, 2009
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:19 AM, w1hkj<w1hkj@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Brian Lloyd wrote:
                                            >>
                                            >> Thank you. Perfect. I am going to experiment with having PowerSDR
                                            >> resample down to either 8KHz or 11.025KHz to see if it improves
                                            >> performance any. I will also see if it reduces CPU utilization.
                                            >
                                            > I would be very interested in learning the results of your tests Brian.

                                            I ran some tests last night, qualitative rather than quantitative,
                                            i.e. the results were subjective rather than objective -- no
                                            measurements. Before I get into it I thought I would explain my setup
                                            just so everyone understands why what I am doing is a bit different.

                                            I am running a Flex 5000a software-defined radio. Unlike most
                                            digital-mode setups there is no sound-card involved since the radio
                                            software provides data to fldigi in digital form. No analog to digital
                                            or digital to analog conversion before fldigi. Most rigs have the
                                            following signal processing chain:

                                            antenna>1st mixer>roofing filter>2nd
                                            mixer>A:D>DSP>D:A>cables>A:D(soundcard)>fldigi

                                            In my setup I have the following signal processing chain:

                                            antenna>1st mixer>A:D>DSP>fldigi

                                            As you can see it is much simpler and once the signal has been
                                            converted from analog to digital right after the mixer it is never
                                            converted back to analog. It is pure digital all the way through to
                                            the digital mode program. (Note, this works for any digital mode
                                            program including DM780, not just fldigi.) The potential is for much
                                            higher quality since intermediate conversions have been eliminated.
                                            Performance is not dependent on eliminating ground loops, eliminating
                                            RF pick-up, sound-card quality/sample rate/bit depth, etc.

                                            The "DSP" software really is the radio. It is called PowerSDR and
                                            implements all the functions for the Flex 5000. There are no controls
                                            on the radio hardware itself. Everything is handled by the software.
                                            The analog-to-digital conversion takes place in the RF hardware using
                                            a very high performance A:D converter with a bit-depth of 24 bits and
                                            a sample rate of 48KHz, 96KHz, or 192KHz. (I normally run at 96KHz.)
                                            Once the radio hardware has performed this conversion the signal is
                                            never converted back into analog form. It remains in digital form all
                                            the way through to the digital mode program. (I normally run fldigi or
                                            DM780.)

                                            (The only difference to this is the case of audio modes, e.g. CW or
                                            SSB where the signal is converted back to analog in order to drive the
                                            speaker and/or headphones.)

                                            As you recall from a couple of days ago, I was asking about native
                                            sample rates for the CODECs (COders/DECoders). The reason is, it
                                            seemed to me that it would be a waste to do sample rate conversion
                                            twice, once in PowerSDR and a second time in fldigi. By default
                                            PowerSDR provides its digital "audio" (I prefer the term "baseband" or
                                            "low IF" because it is not the final output signal -- that is the text
                                            on the screen) signal at a sample rate of 48000 Hz. Fldigi then does a
                                            second sample rate conversion to either 8000 Hz or 11025 Hz depending
                                            on the CODEC chosen by the operator. Since PowerSDR is already doing
                                            the sample rate conversion from 96 KHz to 48 KHz it seemed a waste to
                                            me to then have fldigi go through the sample rate conversion process
                                            yet again. It seemed better to just let PowerSDR do the sample rate
                                            conversion directly to 8000 Hz or 11025 Hz and eliminate a step.

                                            I spent some time last night monitoring PSK31 and Olivia signals
                                            letting PowerSDR perform the sample rate conversion to 8000 Hz.
                                            Subjectively I could discern no obvious improvement or degradation
                                            over the double-rate-conversion that was going on previously. What I
                                            did notice is that the waterfall was showing substantial aliasing
                                            products in the passband. It appears that PowerSDR is *NOT* doing
                                            sufficient anti-aliasing at the lower sample rate. Given that the Flex
                                            5000 can produce substantial power 48KHz from the LO injection
                                            frequency (at a 96KHz sample rate) it stands to reason that there
                                            needs to be a brick wall filter for all power above the Nyquist
                                            frequency at the intermediate rate of the CODEC, i.e. one half the
                                            sample rate or 4 KHz in the case of 8 KHz sampling. This does not
                                            appear to be the case.

                                            So, until the downsampling in PowerSDR gets improved anti-aliasing
                                            filtering, it seems to me that it is better to continue sending a 48
                                            KHz data stream to fldigi and allow fldigi to do the downsampling to
                                            the 8000 Hz or 11025 Hz sample rate expected by the CODECs.

                                            I guess I need to go bug the guys over at Flex now. ;-)

                                            --
                                            73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.