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

Re: WSPR not be decoded

Expand Messages
  • g8voip
    Hi Hide, I am still using the VAC v4.09 here, registered version. When I updated and tried v4.10, I found it operated intermittently with PSDR, some drop outs.
    Message 1 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Hide,

      I am still using the VAC v4.09 here, registered version.

      When I updated and tried v4.10, I found it operated intermittently with PSDR, some drop outs.

      There was something published on the FlexRadio forum that there were problems using the latest version however I do know someone who got it running properly by changing the driver selected on the PSDR VAC tab. Sorry but I cannot remember which he ended up using.

      I doubt very much whether the 'trial' announcements would cause too much problem for WSPR reception as they occur infrequently and the narrow WSPR filters would probably remove most of the 'audio'. At worst you might get the odd corrupted spot, but I would expect you to still get many good decodes.

      I am still running WSPR v2.0 for my main transceive operation, but running v2.1 in I/Q mode on my second PC / SDR set up with my SoftRock v9.0 RX. If you are using any of the USB controlled Si570 hardware there is no need to set any frequency offset, all is automatically taken care of by the WSPR program.

      73, Bob G8VOI



      --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "Hide" <qrper72@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Bob,
      >
      > I'm using VAC 4.1 with free version so sometimes announce "trial".
      > Is this announcement is bad for decoding?
      > Are you using VAC with trial or registered?
      >
      > ja9mat hidehiko.
      >
      > > I cannot really think of any reason why it should not work, no different to any other digi mode program using VAC to pass the 'audio' streams.
      >
    • FRED
      I seem to recall having this sort of problem - Just for kicks, try selecting DIGU instead of USB in PSDR. I have been using the trial version of VAC, it does
      Message 2 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        I seem to recall having this sort of problem - Just for kicks, try selecting DIGU instead of USB in PSDR.

        I have been using the trial version of VAC, it does have an audio announcement in it every now and then but that doesn't seem to bother anything. I do plan on buying the supported version soon as I believe that is the proper thing to do.

        I also have started using WSPR 2.1 - no need for any other SDR receiver software (Rocky or PSDR), IQ goes directly into WSPR via sound card selection in WSPR 2.1 and setting CAT control to Softrock.
        Note: WSPR 2.1 is still in testing stage, contact K1JT to test it.

        BTW - don't underestimate Rocky for WSPR RX, works like a charm. I also have been using it exclusively for CW for the last 2 years with my 6.3.

        Good Luck
        Fred
        WA8PGE

        --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "g8voip" <g8voi.reeves59@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Hide,
        >
        > I am still using the VAC v4.09 here, registered version.
        >
        > When I updated and tried v4.10, I found it operated intermittently with PSDR, some drop outs.
        >
        > There was something published on the FlexRadio forum that there were problems using the latest version however I do know someone who got it running properly by changing the driver selected on the PSDR VAC tab. Sorry but I cannot remember which he ended up using.
        >
        > I doubt very much whether the 'trial' announcements would cause too much problem for WSPR reception as they occur infrequently and the narrow WSPR filters would probably remove most of the 'audio'. At worst you might get the odd corrupted spot, but I would expect you to still get many good decodes.
        >
        > I am still running WSPR v2.0 for my main transceive operation, but running v2.1 in I/Q mode on my second PC / SDR set up with my SoftRock v9.0 RX. If you are using any of the USB controlled Si570 hardware there is no need to set any frequency offset, all is automatically taken care of by the WSPR program.
        >
        > 73, Bob G8VOI
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "Hide" <qrper72@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Hi Bob,
        > >
        > > I'm using VAC 4.1 with free version so sometimes announce "trial".
        > > Is this announcement is bad for decoding?
        > > Are you using VAC with trial or registered?
        > >
        > > ja9mat hidehiko.
        > >
        > > > I cannot really think of any reason why it should not work, no different to any other digi mode program using VAC to pass the 'audio' streams.
        > >
        >
      • g8voip
        Hi Fred, I have to admit I had just naturally assumed that anyone running PSDR using VAC v4.xx to stream the audio to and from an external program would have
        Message 3 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Fred,

          I have to admit I had just naturally assumed that anyone running PSDR using VAC v4.xx to stream the audio to and from an external program would have been using the DIGU mode in order to have full control of the 'audio' levels both on transmit and receive.

          Joe K1JT's WSPR v2.1 can be downloaded without having to contact him, that was only applicable in the very early days before he made it freely available.

          73, Bob G8VOI


          --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "FRED" <flsaas@...> wrote:
          >
          > I seem to recall having this sort of problem - Just for kicks, try selecting DIGU instead of USB in PSDR.
          >
          > I have been using the trial version of VAC, it does have an audio announcement in it every now and then but that doesn't seem to bother anything. I do plan on buying the supported version soon as I believe that is the proper thing to do.
          >
          > I also have started using WSPR 2.1 - no need for any other SDR receiver software (Rocky or PSDR), IQ goes directly into WSPR via sound card selection in WSPR 2.1 and setting CAT control to Softrock.
          > Note: WSPR 2.1 is still in testing stage, contact K1JT to test it.
          >
          > BTW - don't underestimate Rocky for WSPR RX, works like a charm. I also have been using it exclusively for CW for the last 2 years with my 6.3.
          >
          > Good Luck
          > Fred
          > WA8PGE
          >
          > --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "g8voip" <g8voi.reeves59@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Hi Hide,
          > >
          > > I am still using the VAC v4.09 here, registered version.
          > >
          > > When I updated and tried v4.10, I found it operated intermittently with PSDR, some drop outs.
          > >
          > > There was something published on the FlexRadio forum that there were problems using the latest version however I do know someone who got it running properly by changing the driver selected on the PSDR VAC tab. Sorry but I cannot remember which he ended up using.
          > >
          > > I doubt very much whether the 'trial' announcements would cause too much problem for WSPR reception as they occur infrequently and the narrow WSPR filters would probably remove most of the 'audio'. At worst you might get the odd corrupted spot, but I would expect you to still get many good decodes.
          > >
          > > I am still running WSPR v2.0 for my main transceive operation, but running v2.1 in I/Q mode on my second PC / SDR set up with my SoftRock v9.0 RX. If you are using any of the USB controlled Si570 hardware there is no need to set any frequency offset, all is automatically taken care of by the WSPR program.
          > >
          > > 73, Bob G8VOI
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "Hide" <qrper72@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Hi Bob,
          > > >
          > > > I'm using VAC 4.1 with free version so sometimes announce "trial".
          > > > Is this announcement is bad for decoding?
          > > > Are you using VAC with trial or registered?
          > > >
          > > > ja9mat hidehiko.
          > > >
          > > > > I cannot really think of any reason why it should not work, no different to any other digi mode program using VAC to pass the 'audio' streams.
          > > >
          > >
          >
        • Alan
          ... From: g8voip Subject: [powersdr-iq] Re: WSPR not be decoded ... Has anyone else done a direct RX comparison with WSPR 2.1r 2210 in IQ mode and
          Message 4 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "g8voip"
            Subject: [powersdr-iq] Re: WSPR not be decoded



            >
            > I am still running WSPR v2.0 for my main transceive operation, but running
            > v2.1 in I/Q mode on my second PC / SDR set up with my SoftRock v9.0 RX.


            Has anyone else done a direct RX comparison with WSPR 2.1r 2210 in IQ mode
            and simultaneously with a PDSR/VAC/WSPR setup?
            I have done many checks and find WSPR IQ to be consistently receiving far
            fewer spots, eg 85% on an extended period.
            No-one else seems to have done this, Joe thinks it's my setup or...

            I find PDSR/WSPR/WSPR at least that much better than a conventional RX, eg
            7030. Two SDR setups need to be compared.

            73 Alan G4ZFQ
          • Hide
            Hi Bob, You are right. Now I changed the VAC v4.10 to the older version of v4.09. It works!! Some US stations has decoded well! Maybe the latest version is bad
            Message 5 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Bob,

              You are right.
              Now I changed the VAC v4.10 to the older version of v4.09.
              It works!! Some US stations has decoded well!
              Maybe the latest version is bad for WSPR decoding,but "TX" is OK.

              At the first I try v4.09 with trial version.
              "Announcement" appears about every 10 second but it works 4of US
              stations decoded with -15 to -25 dB.
              I use WSPR v2.0 with Psdr-iq+VAC4.09.
              Now I've just bought the VAC and now no announcement appears.
              And I expect more sensitive decoding...Hi

              BTW

              I also using WSPR v2.10 r2210 and the problem is that the
              RX NOISE level is LOW,it's only around -20dB so I add the
              audio amplifier between the Softrock and the Delta-44.
              How is your RX level?

              Thanks again your support.

              ja9mat Hidehiko.

              > I am still using the VAC v4.09 here, registered version.
              >
              > When I updated and tried v4.10, I found it operated intermittently with PSDR, some drop outs.
            • g8voip
              Hi Hide, Good to hear that changing to the older version of VAC has resolved the problem. It is worth looking at the FlexRadio forum to see if anyone has found
              Message 6 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Hide,

                Good to hear that changing to the older version of VAC has resolved the problem. It is worth looking at the FlexRadio forum to see if anyone has found the solution. I decided that as VAC v4.09 was doing everything I wanted, no point in changing.

                I have found that the input level for WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode is still very low, the only time it ever reaches 0dB or higher is for my own transmissions. This happens for both my PC's, one has a Delta 44, the other a SoundBlaster Live 24 card.

                I did comment to Joe K1JT about this and he did make a change, but I still think it needs more gain on the sound card input to achieve the ideal 0dB level.

                I have not had the time yet to compare the results from WSPR v2.0 using PSDR and VAC and WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode. Too many things to do and not enough time :)

                73, Bob G8VOI




                --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "Hide" <qrper72@...> wrote:
                >
                > Hi Bob,
                >
                > You are right.
                > Now I changed the VAC v4.10 to the older version of v4.09.
                > It works!! Some US stations has decoded well!
                > Maybe the latest version is bad for WSPR decoding,but "TX" is OK.
                >
                > At the first I try v4.09 with trial version.
                > "Announcement" appears about every 10 second but it works 4of US
                > stations decoded with -15 to -25 dB.
                > I use WSPR v2.0 with Psdr-iq+VAC4.09.
                > Now I've just bought the VAC and now no announcement appears.
                > And I expect more sensitive decoding...Hi
                >
                > BTW
                >
                > I also using WSPR v2.10 r2210 and the problem is that the
                > RX NOISE level is LOW,it's only around -20dB so I add the
                > audio amplifier between the Softrock and the Delta-44.
                > How is your RX level?
                >
                > Thanks again your support.
                >
                > ja9mat Hidehiko.
                >
                > > I am still using the VAC v4.09 here, registered version.
                > >
                > > When I updated and tried v4.10, I found it operated intermittently with PSDR, some drop outs.
                >
              • Alan
                ... From: g8voip Subject: [powersdr-iq] Re: WSPR not be decoded ... If anyone does have the ability and the time to make a comparison I think it may confirm
                Message 7 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "g8voip" Subject: [powersdr-iq] Re: WSPR not be decoded



                  >
                  > I have not had the time yet to compare the results from WSPR v2.0 using
                  > PSDR and VAC and WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode. Too many things to do and not
                  > enough time :)
                  >


                  If anyone does have the ability and the time to make a comparison I think it
                  may confirm that there is a fault in WSPR 2.1.
                  I have done the simultaneous test on two computers. If I am right it is not
                  worth running WSPR 2.1 If you want to spot as much as possible.
                  So far no-one else in the WSPR 2.1 "test" group has done this.

                  73 Alan G4ZFQ
                • g8voip
                  Hi Alan, My casual impression is that currently my PSDR-IQ / WSPR v2.0 system is working considerably better than the WSPR v2.1 I/Q one. I find it most
                  Message 8 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Alan,

                    My casual impression is that currently my PSDR-IQ / WSPR v2.0 system is working considerably better than the WSPR v2.1 I/Q one. I find it most disconcerting at the lack of audio input displayed and do seriously wonder if that is actually causing a problem.

                    I will hookup both PCs and receivers to the same aerial tomorrow using a 3dB splitter (not forgetting to disable the v6.3 TX first) and leave them running all day to get a better idea and compare the number of receive spots each system produces.

                    I have not managed to get any I/Q drive on transmit yet from v2.1v in I/Q mode, hence still running my original set up. I would like to free up my better PC to use with my v6.3 / v4.3 mobo set up and run WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode on the older, less powerful PC. Ought to get around to fitting one of the Delta 44 cards to that one as well to make life a lot easier.

                    73, Bob G8VOI


                    --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "Alan" <alan4alan@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    > From: "g8voip" Subject: [powersdr-iq] Re: WSPR not be decoded
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > >
                    > > I have not had the time yet to compare the results from WSPR v2.0 using
                    > > PSDR and VAC and WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode. Too many things to do and not
                    > > enough time :)
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    > If anyone does have the ability and the time to make a comparison I think it
                    > may confirm that there is a fault in WSPR 2.1.
                    > I have done the simultaneous test on two computers. If I am right it is not
                    > worth running WSPR 2.1 If you want to spot as much as possible.
                    > So far no-one else in the WSPR 2.1 "test" group has done this.
                    >
                    > 73 Alan G4ZFQ
                    >
                  • Hide
                    OK Thanks Bob, I also needs RX gain. But I can decode some strong stations yesterday evening on 20m without the AF amplifier. I will wait for the next version.
                    Message 9 of 19 , Oct 16, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      OK Thanks Bob,

                      I also needs RX gain.
                      But I can decode some strong stations yesterday evening on 20m
                      without the AF amplifier.
                      I will wait for the next version.

                      73, ja9mat Hidehiko.

                      > I have found that the input level for WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode is still very low, the only time it ever reaches 0dB or higher is for my own transmissions. This happens for both my PC's, one has a Delta 44, the other a SoundBlaster Live 24 card.
                      >
                      > I did comment to Joe K1JT about this and he did make a change, but I still think it needs more gain on the sound card input to achieve the ideal 0dB level.
                    • Hide
                      Hi Bob, I put a photo into the Photos Folder on this group named WSPR Standalone Operation. Here WSPR v2.1r2210 works stand alone operation well today. But
                      Message 10 of 19 , Oct 17, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Bob,

                        I put a photo into the Photos Folder on this group named WSPR
                        Standalone Operation.

                        Here WSPR v2.1r2210 works stand alone operation well today.
                        But still RX level is -20dB at peak....hi

                        It's just for your information.

                        73,ja9mat Hidehiko.


                        > I have found that the input level for WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode is still very low, the only time it ever reaches 0dB or higher is for my own transmissions. This happens for both my PC's, one has a Delta 44, the other a SoundBlaster Live 24 card.
                      • g8voip
                        Hi Hide and Alan, Following your comments yesterday regarding finding WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode appearing to perform poorly when compared to running WSPR v2.0 with
                        Message 11 of 19 , Oct 17, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Hi Hide and Alan,

                          Following your comments yesterday regarding finding WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode appearing to perform poorly when compared to running WSPR v2.0 with PowerSDR, I set up both my SDR systems this morning to make direct comparisons. My findings confirm your experience and my initial suspicions.

                          For completeness, here is exactly what I used for the comparison.

                          SDR system 1: PC - Win2000, 2.6GHz P4, SoundBlaster Live 24, SoftRock v9.0, WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode.

                          SDR system 2: PC - WinXP, 2.8GHz dual core, Delta 44, SoftRock v6.3 RXTX, PowerSDR-IQ v1.19.3.14, WSPR v2.0, VAC 4.09

                          The 132 foot, offset centre fed dipole was connected to the two SDR
                          receivers using a wideband Mini-Circuits ZFSC-2-2 3dB splitter. Tests were carried out on both 20 and 30m.

                          Audio levels shown on both versions of WSPR averaged 0dB.

                          The results shown on WSPR v2.1 I/Q were between 7 - 12dB worse than
                          displayed on the PSDR / WSPR v2.0 for the same station, therefore any signal seen on the WSPR / PSDR set-up below around -18 to -20dB, was not seen or decoded by the WSPR 2.0 I/Q version which would explain the difference in number of stations spotted.

                          In order to rule out any difference in SDR hardware performance the two SDR receivers were swapped over and the results obtained were consistent with the previous, i.e. WSPR 2.01 I/Q was still between 7 - 12dB worse for the same signals.

                          As a final test I swapped over ports on the 3dB splitter in
                          order to confirm that was not the cause, again WSPR v2.01 I/Q was 7 - 12dB worse.

                          Even looking at the general 'noise' and signals displayed on the waterfall in the WSPR software you can 'see' the results using PSDR / WSPR v2.0 are more 'lively' for the want of a better description.

                          The only test I have not done would be to compare the PSDR / WSPR system against a conventional transceiver, however I had previously done this using my Icom IC-735 and found them to be broadly comparable with only a couple of dB difference, with the SDR system having the edge.

                          I have created a folder 'G8VOI' in the Photo's section and put two sample screen grabs that clearly show the difference between the two SDR system results for the same signals.

                          73, Bob G8VOI


                          --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "Hide" <qrper72@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Hi Bob,
                          >
                          > I put a photo into the Photos Folder on this group named WSPR
                          > Standalone Operation.
                          >
                          > Here WSPR v2.1r2210 works stand alone operation well today.
                          > But still RX level is -20dB at peak....hi
                          >
                          > It's just for your information.
                          >
                          > 73,ja9mat Hidehiko.
                          >
                          >
                          > > I have found that the input level for WSPR v2.1 in I/Q mode is still very low, the only time it ever reaches 0dB or higher is for my own transmissions. This happens for both my PC's, one has a Delta 44, the other a SoundBlaster Live 24 card.
                          >
                        • Hide
                          Hi Bob, Thanks for your experiment it s very interesting and I vw got the same result here.I use WSPR v2.0+FT920 and it s SNR is 2 or 3dB better than the
                          Message 12 of 19 , Oct 17, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi Bob,

                            Thanks for your experiment it's very interesting and I'vw got the
                            same result here.I use WSPR v2.0+FT920 and it's SNR is 2 or 3dB
                            better than the Softrock v6.3+Psdr-iq+WSPR v2.0.
                            And WSPR v2.10 stand alone is worst SNR about 8 or 10dB less than
                            FT920+WSPR v2.0 here.

                            Anyway I'd like to operate WSPR Beacon with stand alone using
                            softrock I/Q signals.So I'll wait the version up of v2.1.

                            73, ja9mat Hidehiko.

                            > The results shown on WSPR v2.1 I/Q were between 7 - 12dB worse than
                            > displayed on the PSDR / WSPR v2.0 for the same station, therefore any signal seen on the WSPR / PSDR set-up below around -18 to -20dB, was not seen or decoded by the WSPR 2.0 I/Q version which would explain the difference in number of stations spotted.
                          • sv1eia
                            Hi Bob, Hide, It seems to me that the engine thats hidden under the hood of PSDR does make a difference, the DttSP. I think, us in SDR community, that we owe a
                            Message 13 of 19 , Oct 19, 2010
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hi Bob, Hide,

                              It seems to me that the engine thats hidden under the hood of PSDR does make a difference, the DttSP.

                              I think, us in SDR community, that we owe a great deal to DttSP creators, Dr.Frank Brickle AB2KT and Dr. Robert McGwier N4HY.

                              73,
                              Christos SV1EIA



                              --- In powersdr-iq@yahoogroups.com, "Hide" <qrper72@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Hi Bob,
                              >
                              > Thanks for your experiment it's very interesting and I'vw got the
                              > same result here.I use WSPR v2.0+FT920 and it's SNR is 2 or 3dB
                              > better than the Softrock v6.3+Psdr-iq+WSPR v2.0.
                              > And WSPR v2.10 stand alone is worst SNR about 8 or 10dB less than
                              > FT920+WSPR v2.0 here.
                              >
                              > Anyway I'd like to operate WSPR Beacon with stand alone using
                              > softrock I/Q signals.So I'll wait the version up of v2.1.
                              >
                              > 73, ja9mat Hidehiko.
                              >
                              > > The results shown on WSPR v2.1 I/Q were between 7 - 12dB worse than
                              > > displayed on the PSDR / WSPR v2.0 for the same station, therefore any signal seen on the WSPR / PSDR set-up below around -18 to -20dB, was not seen or decoded by the WSPR 2.0 I/Q version which would explain the difference in number of stations spotted.
                              >
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.