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

Re: [softrock40] Using Softrock40/Rocky for 160m weak signal DX

Expand Messages
  • Guido
    Hi Steve and others, this was also my idea when, during a technical meeting three months ago, I was lucky to see Alberto, I2PHD, demonstrating his Winrad PC
    Message 1 of 13 , Jan 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Steve and others,
          this was also my idea when, during a technical meeting three months ago, I was lucky to see Alberto, I2PHD, demonstrating his Winrad PC software.
      Winrad is a SDR software developed for EME work but, like I said to Alberto, for me it was perfect also for 160m.
      He implemented tremendous algorithms for noise blanking, weak signals enhancing, noise reducing, etc.
      He told me that it was a beta version and that it would be ready to download soon from his site, but, actually, you can find there only the old SDRadio software :-(
      Alberto is subscribed to this list and I hope that my message (and yours...) would speed-up his Winrad software public releasing ;-)
      A 7.3728MHz crystal is ready for my SR40...
      Ciao
      Guido, ik2bcp
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 3:44 PM
      Subject: [softrock40] Using Softrock40/Rocky for 160m weak signal DX

      G'day

      I spent this evening using a VK6APH-modified Softrock V4.0 and Rocky 1.41
      for weak signal DXing on 1.8MHz CW - and, boy, what a revelation!

      Instead of continually tuning up and down 1800 to 1835KHz, I simply watched
      the DX section of the band on my PC (P4, 3.0ghz) screen and whenever a weak
      signal appeared, clicked on it, and, hey presto, quickly identified
      it.  The signals I was listening to were between S2 and S5 maximum and
      often in slow and heavy QSB - I found the latter made it easy to tune over
      the top of them with my usual Yaesu FT1000, but I could easily see them on
      Rocky's bandscope and couldn't miss them.

      Maybe I am getting carried away, but I think the Rocky/Softrock combination
      was about four times more effective than the FT1000 for this purpose, on
      the basis I found at least five stations (weak USA and JAs mainly) in the
      same time it took me to find one on the FT1000.

      In a totally perfect world, it would be nice if the bandscope was a little
      more sensitive - those most sought-after weak ones on 160m are often
      between S2 and S5 and if the bandscope could be configured to read a
      maximum of 60dB, that would make it much easier to spot these easily - and
      guess it would also help the VHF DXers.

      On the other hand, Rocky is light years ahead of any other bandscope I have
      ever seen built into/tacked onto a radio - Alex, you deserve a medal.  The
      polyphase filtering and the solid trace are masterstrokes.

      The direct conversion Softrock 40 - modified with a front-end bandpass
      filter designed by Phil VK6APH - was much easier on the ear than the
      FT1000.  Without the multiple IFs/mixers of the FT1000, the Softrock had
      that wonderful 'connected direct to ether' sound to it - and the 600Hz
      digital filter made CW much nicer to listen to than the dual 500Hz lattice
      crystal filters in my FT1000.

      The only flaw of the Softrock was that the A to D converter overloaded when
      I turned the gain flat out so that it was comparable to that of the
      FT1000.  After discussions with Phil, a small 10dB or so attenuator ahead
      of the A to D converter would give the Softrock more receive 'headroom' and
      fix this problem.  I should add that I was using a full-size 160m inverted
      vee dipole antenna about 90 feet (27 metres) above ground and had no
      problems with medium wave BC station breakthrough.

      Alex VE3NEA, Tony KB9YIG, Phil and the others on this reflector who worked
      on this project should take a large bow.  As far as I am concerned, the
      Rocky/Softrock SDR combo is in another league for weak signal DXing from my
      FT1000 (and R4C).

      Thanks a million, blokes.

      I have seen the light (finally) and it is digital!  Can't wait for a
      matching transmitter...

      Vy 73

      Steve, VK6VZ (203 DXCC countries confirmed on 160m using analog radios -
      and they are just about on the scrapheap)







       


      --
      No virus found in this outgoing message.
      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
      Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.12/220 - Release Date: 3/01/2006




       
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/

      <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
       

    • Tom Hall
      ... Alex VE3NEA, Tony KB9YIG, Phil and the others on this reflector who worked on this project should take a large bow. I ll join the chorus on this one. As of
      Message 2 of 13 , Jan 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, Steve Ireland <vk6vz@a...> wrote:
        Alex VE3NEA, Tony KB9YIG, Phil and the others on this reflector who
        worked
        on this project should take a large bow.

        I'll join the chorus on this one. As of late, I often wonder if there
        is a legal limit on how much fun a ham can have.

        Tom, AK2B
      • radiodoc43
        ... little ... and ... The ability to modify the range of the bandscope exists now for Flex- radio s SDR software as well as KgKsdr software. I agree that
        Message 3 of 13 , Jan 4, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, Steve Ireland <vk6vz@a...> wrote:
          > In a totally perfect world, it would be nice if the bandscope was a
          little
          > more sensitive - those most sought-after weak ones on 160m are often
          > between S2 and S5 and if the bandscope could be configured to read a
          > maximum of 60dB, that would make it much easier to spot these easily -
          and
          > guess it would also help the VHF DXers.
          >

          The ability to modify the range of the bandscope exists now for Flex-
          radio's SDR software as well as KgKsdr software.

          I agree that adding this feature to modify the bandscope range in Rocky
          would make an already exceptional display superlative.

          73 KC2LFI
          Craig
        • Bill Dumke
          Steve, Where did you find the schematic of the VK6APH modified SoftRock v4.0? I couldn t find it on the SoftRock 40 yahoo group. Bill
          Message 4 of 13 , Jan 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Steve,

            Where did you find the schematic of the VK6APH modified SoftRock v4.0?
            I couldn't find it on the SoftRock 40 yahoo group.

            Bill

            Steve Ireland wrote:

            > G'day
            >
            > I spent this evening using a VK6APH-modified Softrock V4.0 and Rocky 1.41
            > for weak signal DXing on 1.8MHz CW - and, boy, what a revelation!
            >
            > Instead of continually tuning up and down 1800 to 1835KHz, I simply
            > watched
            > the DX section of the band on my PC (P4, 3.0ghz) screen and whenever a
            > weak
            > signal appeared, clicked on it, and, hey presto, quickly identified
            > it. The signals I was listening to were between S2 and S5 maximum and
            > often in slow and heavy QSB - I found the latter made it easy to tune
            > over
            > the top of them with my usual Yaesu FT1000, but I could easily see
            > them on
            > Rocky's bandscope and couldn't miss them.
            >
            > Maybe I am getting carried away, but I think the Rocky/Softrock
            > combination
            > was about four times more effective than the FT1000 for this purpose, on
            > the basis I found at least five stations (weak USA and JAs mainly) in the
            > same time it took me to find one on the FT1000.
            >
            > In a totally perfect world, it would be nice if the bandscope was a
            > little
            > more sensitive - those most sought-after weak ones on 160m are often
            > between S2 and S5 and if the bandscope could be configured to read a
            > maximum of 60dB, that would make it much easier to spot these easily -
            > and
            > guess it would also help the VHF DXers.
            >
            > On the other hand, Rocky is light years ahead of any other bandscope I
            > have
            > ever seen built into/tacked onto a radio - Alex, you deserve a medal.
            > The
            > polyphase filtering and the solid trace are masterstrokes.
            >
            > The direct conversion Softrock 40 - modified with a front-end bandpass
            > filter designed by Phil VK6APH - was much easier on the ear than the
            > FT1000. Without the multiple IFs/mixers of the FT1000, the Softrock had
            > that wonderful 'connected direct to ether' sound to it - and the 600Hz
            > digital filter made CW much nicer to listen to than the dual 500Hz
            > lattice
            > crystal filters in my FT1000.
            >
            > The only flaw of the Softrock was that the A to D converter overloaded
            > when
            > I turned the gain flat out so that it was comparable to that of the
            > FT1000. After discussions with Phil, a small 10dB or so attenuator ahead
            > of the A to D converter would give the Softrock more receive
            > 'headroom' and
            > fix this problem. I should add that I was using a full-size 160m
            > inverted
            > vee dipole antenna about 90 feet (27 metres) above ground and had no
            > problems with medium wave BC station breakthrough.
            >
            > Alex VE3NEA, Tony KB9YIG, Phil and the others on this reflector who
            > worked
            > on this project should take a large bow. As far as I am concerned, the
            > Rocky/Softrock SDR combo is in another league for weak signal DXing
            > from my
            > FT1000 (and R4C).
            >
            > Thanks a million, blokes.
            >
            > I have seen the light (finally) and it is digital! Can't wait for a
            > matching transmitter...
            >
            > Vy 73
            >
            > Steve, VK6VZ (203 DXCC countries confirmed on 160m using analog radios -
            > and they are just about on the scrapheap)
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --
            > No virus found in this outgoing message.
            > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
            > Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.12/220 - Release Date: 3/01/2006
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
            >
            > * Visit your group "softrock40
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40>" on the web.
            >
            > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > <mailto:softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
            >
            > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            >
          • Steve Ireland
            Hi Guido Great to hear from you and very interesting about Alberto, I2PHD. I am sure I have seen postings from him on the Softrock 40 reflector. The
            Message 5 of 13 , Jan 5, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Guido

              Great to hear from you and very interesting about Alberto, I2PHD.  I am sure I have seen postings from him on the Softrock 40 reflector.  The Softrock/Rocky SDR package are so fun and cheap I hope some topbanders will try them - as you say, anything that is good for EME is good for 160m too!

              Ciao es HNY!

              Vy 73

              Steve, VK6VZ

              At 11:41 PM 4/01/2006, you wrote:

              Hi Steve and others,
                  this was also my idea when, during a technical meeting three months ago, I was lucky to see Alberto, I2PHD, demonstrating his Winrad PC software.
              Winrad is a SDR software developed for EME work but, like I said to Alberto, for me it was perfect also for 160m.
              He implemented tremendous algorithms for noise blanking, weak signals enhancing, noise reducing, etc.
              He told me that it was a beta version and that it would be ready to download soon from his site, but, actually, you can find there only the old SDRadio software :-(
              Alberto is subscribed to this list and I hope that my message (and yours...) would speed-up his Winrad software public releasing ;-)
              A 7.3728MHz crystal is ready for my SR40...
              Ciao
              Guido, ik2bcp
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: Steve Ireland
              To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
              Cc: alshovk@...
              Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 3:44 PM
              Subject: [softrock40] Using Softrock40/Rocky for 160m weak signal DX

              G'day

              I spent this evening using a VK6APH-modified Softrock V4.0 and Rocky 1.41
              for weak signal DXing on 1.8MHz CW - and, boy, what a revelation!

              Instead of continually tuning up and down 1800 to 1835KHz, I simply watched
              the DX section of the band on my PC (P4, 3.0ghz) screen and whenever a weak
              signal appeared, clicked on it, and, hey presto, quickly identified
              it.  The signals I was listening to were between S2 and S5 maximum and
              often in slow and heavy QSB - I found the latter made it easy to tune over
              the top of them with my usual Yaesu FT1000, but I could easily see them on
              Rocky's bandscope and couldn't miss them.

              Maybe I am getting carried away, but I think the Rocky/Softrock combination
              was about four times more effective than the FT1000 for this purpose, on
              the basis I found at least five stations (weak USA and JAs mainly) in the
              same time it took me to find one on the FT1000.

              In a totally perfect world, it would be nice if the bandscope was a little
              more sensitive - those most sought-after weak ones on 160m are often
              between S2 and S5 and if the bandscope could be configured to read a
              maximum of 60dB, that would make it much easier to spot these easily - and
              guess it would also help the VHF DXers.

              On the other hand, Rocky is light years ahead of any other bandscope I have
              ever seen built into/tacked onto a radio - Alex, you deserve a medal.  The
              polyphase filtering and the solid trace are masterstrokes.

              The direct conversion Softrock 40 - modified with a front-end bandpass
              filter designed by Phil VK6APH - was much easier on the ear than the
              FT1000.  Without the multiple IFs/mixers of the FT1000, the Softrock had
              that wonderful 'connected direct to ether' sound to it - and the 600Hz
              digital filter made CW much nicer to listen to than the dual 500Hz lattice
              crystal filters in my FT1000.

              The only flaw of the Softrock was that the A to D converter overloaded when
              I turned the gain flat out so that it was comparable to that of the
              FT1000.  After discussions with Phil, a small 10dB or so attenuator ahead
              of the A to D converter would give the Softrock more receive 'headroom' and
              fix this problem.  I should add that I was using a full-size 160m inverted
              vee dipole antenna about 90 feet (27 metres) above ground and had no
              problems with medium wave BC station breakthrough.

              Alex VE3NEA, Tony KB9YIG, Phil and the others on this reflector who worked
              on this project should take a large bow.  As far as I am concerned, the
              Rocky/Softrock SDR combo is in another league for weak signal DXing from my
              FT1000 (and R4C).

              Thanks a million, blokes.

              I have seen the light (finally) and it is digital!  Can't wait for a
              matching transmitter...

              Vy 73

              Steve, VK6VZ (203 DXCC countries confirmed on 160m using analog radios -
              and they are just about on the scrapheap)







               


              --
              No virus found in this outgoing message.
              Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
              Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.12/220 - Release Date: 3/01/2006




               
              Yahoo! Groups Links

              <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/

              <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
               



              SPONSORED LINKS
              Shortwave receivers Ham radio


              YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS





              No virus found in this incoming message.
              Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
              Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.14/222 - Release Date: 5/01/2006
            • Steve Ireland
              Hi Craig Thanks for that - much appreciated. Although the Flex Radio software and M0KGK s bandscopes are nice, I just love the simplicity of Rocky and it is
              Message 6 of 13 , Jan 5, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Craig

                Thanks for that - much appreciated.

                Although the Flex Radio software and M0KGK's bandscopes are nice, I just
                love the simplicity of Rocky and it is better on weak signals than the
                other two (although I am told it is possible to set up KGK just like Rocky
                - which is what I am going to try next.

                Vy 73

                Steve, VK6VZ

                At 05:14 AM 5/01/2006, you wrote:

                >--- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, Steve Ireland <vk6vz@a...> wrote:
                > > In a totally perfect world, it would be nice if the bandscope was a
                >little
                > > more sensitive - those most sought-after weak ones on 160m are often
                > > between S2 and S5 and if the bandscope could be configured to read a
                > > maximum of 60dB, that would make it much easier to spot these easily -
                > and
                > > guess it would also help the VHF DXers.
                > >
                >
                >The ability to modify the range of the bandscope exists now for Flex-
                >radio's SDR software as well as KgKsdr software.
                >
                >I agree that adding this feature to modify the bandscope range in Rocky
                >would make an already exceptional display superlative.
                >
                >73 KC2LFI
                >Craig
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >--
                >No virus found in this incoming message.
                >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                >Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.14/222 - Release Date: 5/01/2006


                --
                No virus found in this outgoing message.
                Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.14/222 - Release Date: 5/01/2006
              • KY1K
                Hey Steve, Read all your comments, and couldn t agree more. There are some who say the sound and feel or presence of the radio is crap. To them, I say,
                Message 7 of 13 , Jan 9, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hey Steve,

                  Read all your comments, and couldn't agree more. There are some who
                  say the 'sound' and 'feel' or 'presence' of the radio is crap. To
                  them, I say, good riddance. The softrock has a clean and pure sound,
                  much as any other direct conversion radio has....except the softrock
                  has opposite sideband rejection to boot and variable degrees of selectivity!

                  The original Heathkit panadapters of the 60's and 70's displayed the
                  band much the same way as the softrock does, so this concept of
                  looking at the entire band on and x-y readout in real time is not new
                  by any means.

                  I had occasion to see a 2 meter radio with a panadapter like readout
                  in action once (during a vhf contest). Two meter yagis are sharp,
                  many having no more than 10 degrees between the 6 db points, so
                  pointing the antenna in the right direction is terribly important as
                  you can imagine. But....with the receiver displaying a relatively
                  broad spectrum, the antennas are turned while watching the display.
                  As the antenna passes the azimuth of a dx station, a tiny blip
                  appears and goes away fairly promptly as the antenna continues to
                  past the azimuth of the dx station. By watching for the the blips,
                  the antennas are moved so the station peaks, then click once and the
                  station is worked in 10 seconds...and off you go to the next station.

                  I think MANY stations would have been missed without this capability.
                  When the randomness of the highly directional antenna is factored in
                  to the ability to see relatively wide spectrum in real time, one has
                  to really go out of their way to miss new stations and grids on vhf.

                  There is a problem of course..........when listening to a relatively
                  wide spectrum, the dynamic range of the soundcard can be used up. So,
                  the more picky the operator is about working the weaker stations, the
                  better the quality of the sound card has to be. This problem is no
                  different than the old panadapters had....with many strong signals in
                  the passband of the panadapter, the agc would limit the gain and
                  therefore the ability to hear weaker signals. So, there is ALWAYS a
                  trade off.....whether it's a softrock digital app or whether it's a
                  40 year old panadapter equipped radio.

                  GL to all.

                  Art


                  At 09:44 AM 1/4/2006, you wrote:

                  >G'day
                  >
                  >I spent this evening using a VK6APH-modified Softrock V4.0 and Rocky 1.41
                  >for weak signal DXing on 1.8MHz CW - and, boy, what a revelation!
                  >
                  >Instead of continually tuning up and down 1800 to 1835KHz, I simply watched
                  >the DX section of the band on my PC (P4, 3.0ghz) screen and whenever a weak
                  >signal appeared, clicked on it, and, hey presto, quickly identified
                  >it. The signals I was listening to were between S2 and S5 maximum and
                  >often in slow and heavy QSB - I found the latter made it easy to tune over
                  >the top of them with my usual Yaesu FT1000, but I could easily see them on
                  >Rocky's bandscope and couldn't miss them.
                  >
                  >Maybe I am getting carried away, but I think the Rocky/Softrock combination
                  >was about four times more effective than the FT1000 for this purpose, on
                  >the basis I found at least five stations (weak USA and JAs mainly) in the
                  >same time it took me to find one on the FT1000.
                  >
                  >In a totally perfect world, it would be nice if the bandscope was a little
                  >more sensitive - those most sought-after weak ones on 160m are often
                  >between S2 and S5 and if the bandscope could be configured to read a
                  >maximum of 60dB, that would make it much easier to spot these easily - and
                  >guess it would also help the VHF DXers.
                  >
                  >On the other hand, Rocky is light years ahead of any other bandscope I have
                  >ever seen built into/tacked onto a radio - Alex, you deserve a medal. The
                  >polyphase filtering and the solid trace are masterstrokes.
                  >
                  >The direct conversion Softrock 40 - modified with a front-end bandpass
                  >filter designed by Phil VK6APH - was much easier on the ear than the
                  >FT1000. Without the multiple IFs/mixers of the FT1000, the Softrock had
                  >that wonderful 'connected direct to ether' sound to it - and the 600Hz
                  >digital filter made CW much nicer to listen to than the dual 500Hz lattice
                  >crystal filters in my FT1000.
                  >
                  >The only flaw of the Softrock was that the A to D converter overloaded when
                  >I turned the gain flat out so that it was comparable to that of the
                  >FT1000. After discussions with Phil, a small 10dB or so attenuator ahead
                  >of the A to D converter would give the Softrock more receive 'headroom' and
                  >fix this problem. I should add that I was using a full-size 160m inverted
                  >vee dipole antenna about 90 feet (27 metres) above ground and had no
                  >problems with medium wave BC station breakthrough.
                  >
                  >Alex VE3NEA, Tony KB9YIG, Phil and the others on this reflector who worked
                  >on this project should take a large bow. As far as I am concerned, the
                  >Rocky/Softrock SDR combo is in another league for weak signal DXing from my
                  >FT1000 (and R4C).
                  >
                  >Thanks a million, blokes.
                  >
                  >I have seen the light (finally) and it is digital! Can't wait for a
                  >matching transmitter...
                  >
                  >Vy 73
                  >
                  >Steve, VK6VZ (203 DXCC countries confirmed on 160m using analog radios -
                  >and they are just about on the scrapheap)
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >--
                  >No virus found in this outgoing message.
                  >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                  >Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.12/220 - Release Date: 3/01/2006
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • Steve Ireland
                  Hi Art Great to hear from you and was fascinated about what you said about using panadaptors on VHF. As the saying goes, there is indeed seldom anything new
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jan 10, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Art

                    Great to hear from you and was fascinated about what you said about using
                    panadaptors on VHF. As the saying goes, there is indeed seldom anything
                    new under the sun.

                    The other band that I am most interested in apart from 160m is 6m - having
                    a Softrock up there would be magic. I like the idea of also telling
                    someone that I am using a DC receiver on six!!

                    Vy 73

                    Steve, VK6VZ




                    At 11:39 AM 10/01/2006, you wrote:

                    >Hey Steve,
                    >
                    >Read all your comments, and couldn't agree more. There are some who
                    >say the 'sound' and 'feel' or 'presence' of the radio is crap. To
                    >them, I say, good riddance. The softrock has a clean and pure sound,
                    >much as any other direct conversion radio has....except the softrock
                    >has opposite sideband rejection to boot and variable degrees of selectivity!
                    >
                    >The original Heathkit panadapters of the 60's and 70's displayed the
                    >band much the same way as the softrock does, so this concept of
                    >looking at the entire band on and x-y readout in real time is not new
                    >by any means.
                    >
                    >I had occasion to see a 2 meter radio with a panadapter like readout
                    >in action once (during a vhf contest). Two meter yagis are sharp,
                    >many having no more than 10 degrees between the 6 db points, so
                    >pointing the antenna in the right direction is terribly important as
                    >you can imagine. But....with the receiver displaying a relatively
                    >broad spectrum, the antennas are turned while watching the display.
                    >As the antenna passes the azimuth of a dx station, a tiny blip
                    >appears and goes away fairly promptly as the antenna continues to
                    >past the azimuth of the dx station. By watching for the the blips,
                    >the antennas are moved so the station peaks, then click once and the
                    >station is worked in 10 seconds...and off you go to the next station.
                    >
                    >I think MANY stations would have been missed without this capability.
                    >When the randomness of the highly directional antenna is factored in
                    >to the ability to see relatively wide spectrum in real time, one has
                    >to really go out of their way to miss new stations and grids on vhf.
                    >
                    >There is a problem of course..........when listening to a relatively
                    >wide spectrum, the dynamic range of the soundcard can be used up. So,
                    >the more picky the operator is about working the weaker stations, the
                    >better the quality of the sound card has to be. This problem is no
                    >different than the old panadapters had....with many strong signals in
                    >the passband of the panadapter, the agc would limit the gain and
                    >therefore the ability to hear weaker signals. So, there is ALWAYS a
                    >trade off.....whether it's a softrock digital app or whether it's a
                    >40 year old panadapter equipped radio.
                    >
                    >GL to all.
                    >
                    >Art
                    >
                    >
                    >At 09:44 AM 1/4/2006, you wrote:
                    >
                    > >G'day
                    > >
                    > >I spent this evening using a VK6APH-modified Softrock V4.0 and Rocky 1.41
                    > >for weak signal DXing on 1.8MHz CW - and, boy, what a revelation!
                    > >
                    > >Instead of continually tuning up and down 1800 to 1835KHz, I simply watched
                    > >the DX section of the band on my PC (P4, 3.0ghz) screen and whenever a weak
                    > >signal appeared, clicked on it, and, hey presto, quickly identified
                    > >it. The signals I was listening to were between S2 and S5 maximum and
                    > >often in slow and heavy QSB - I found the latter made it easy to tune over
                    > >the top of them with my usual Yaesu FT1000, but I could easily see them on
                    > >Rocky's bandscope and couldn't miss them.
                    > >
                    > >Maybe I am getting carried away, but I think the Rocky/Softrock combination
                    > >was about four times more effective than the FT1000 for this purpose, on
                    > >the basis I found at least five stations (weak USA and JAs mainly) in the
                    > >same time it took me to find one on the FT1000.
                    > >
                    > >In a totally perfect world, it would be nice if the bandscope was a little
                    > >more sensitive - those most sought-after weak ones on 160m are often
                    > >between S2 and S5 and if the bandscope could be configured to read a
                    > >maximum of 60dB, that would make it much easier to spot these easily - and
                    > >guess it would also help the VHF DXers.
                    > >
                    > >On the other hand, Rocky is light years ahead of any other bandscope I have
                    > >ever seen built into/tacked onto a radio - Alex, you deserve a medal. The
                    > >polyphase filtering and the solid trace are masterstrokes.
                    > >
                    > >The direct conversion Softrock 40 - modified with a front-end bandpass
                    > >filter designed by Phil VK6APH - was much easier on the ear than the
                    > >FT1000. Without the multiple IFs/mixers of the FT1000, the Softrock had
                    > >that wonderful 'connected direct to ether' sound to it - and the 600Hz
                    > >digital filter made CW much nicer to listen to than the dual 500Hz lattice
                    > >crystal filters in my FT1000.
                    > >
                    > >The only flaw of the Softrock was that the A to D converter overloaded when
                    > >I turned the gain flat out so that it was comparable to that of the
                    > >FT1000. After discussions with Phil, a small 10dB or so attenuator ahead
                    > >of the A to D converter would give the Softrock more receive 'headroom' and
                    > >fix this problem. I should add that I was using a full-size 160m inverted
                    > >vee dipole antenna about 90 feet (27 metres) above ground and had no
                    > >problems with medium wave BC station breakthrough.
                    > >
                    > >Alex VE3NEA, Tony KB9YIG, Phil and the others on this reflector who worked
                    > >on this project should take a large bow. As far as I am concerned, the
                    > >Rocky/Softrock SDR combo is in another league for weak signal DXing from my
                    > >FT1000 (and R4C).
                    > >
                    > >Thanks a million, blokes.
                    > >
                    > >I have seen the light (finally) and it is digital! Can't wait for a
                    > >matching transmitter...
                    > >
                    > >Vy 73
                    > >
                    > >Steve, VK6VZ (203 DXCC countries confirmed on 160m using analog radios -
                    > >and they are just about on the scrapheap)
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >--
                    > >No virus found in this outgoing message.
                    > >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                    > >Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.12/220 - Release Date: 3/01/2006
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >Yahoo! Groups Links
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >--
                    >No virus found in this incoming message.
                    >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                    >Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/226 - Release Date: 10/01/2006


                    --
                    No virus found in this outgoing message.
                    Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                    Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/226 - Release Date: 10/01/2006
                  • Leon Heller
                    ... From: Steve Ireland To: Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 5:39 AM Subject: Re: [softrock40] Using
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jan 11, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Steve Ireland" <vk6vz@...>
                      To: <softrock40@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 5:39 AM
                      Subject: Re: [softrock40] Using Softrock40/Rocky for 160m weak signal DX


                      > Hi Art
                      >
                      > Great to hear from you and was fascinated about what you said about using
                      > panadaptors on VHF. As the saying goes, there is indeed seldom anything
                      > new under the sun.
                      >
                      > The other band that I am most interested in apart from 160m is 6m - having
                      > a Softrock up there would be magic. I like the idea of also telling
                      > someone that I am using a DC receiver on six!!

                      I remember seeing a schematic for a 2m DC Rx in RadCom, many years ago.

                      73, Leon
                      --
                      Leon Heller, G1HSM
                      leon.heller@...
                      http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller
                    • KY1K
                      ... Conventional DC s work ok, but since there is no opposite sideband rejection, they give up 3 db in MDS. Most VHF ops would find this very unsatisfactory.
                      Message 10 of 13 , Jan 11, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        >
                        >I remember seeing a schematic for a 2m DC Rx in RadCom, many years ago.


                        Conventional DC's work ok, but since there is no opposite sideband
                        rejection, they give up 3 db in MDS. Most VHF ops would find this
                        very unsatisfactory. The ability to hear a weak signal on vhf is
                        EVERYTHING, because atmospheric noise is very low there.

                        With a 'computer assist' however, I think a phasing type receiver has
                        real potential though, for a no compromise receiver for 6 and 2
                        meters. I'm a little surprised no one has written an article on this,
                        since the software is already available, ready to run...

                        Hardware can't be that difficult, and the software would do the
                        conversion, opposite sideband rejection and would/could automatically
                        compensate for small phase shift errors (r/c based phase shifters) in
                        the hardware that would normally render a conventional phasing
                        receiver useless at vhf.

                        Regards,

                        Art
                      • KD5NWA
                        Let us not forget that there are other QSD techniques besides using FET switches that at current have a limited UHF capacity. You could use good old doubly
                        Message 11 of 13 , Jan 11, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Let us not forget that there are other QSD techniques besides using FET switches that at current have a limited UHF capacity. You could use good old doubly balance diode mixers ala Mini-Circuits, The inexpensive ones are good to 500MHz, they have slightly higher loss than a FET switch at HF, but then try that switch at 144MHz and see if it even works. With VHF, and UHF you will need a good pre-amp so it might as well make up for the couple of extra dB's of loss from a diode mixer.

                          Expanded Spectrum's Time Machine uses such a scheme at HF, below you can download a schematic and see that it's very simple. Their receiver has been around for a while and it uses QSD technology.

                          < http://www.expandedspectrumsystems.com/prod2.html >


                          At 09:36 AM 1/11/2006, you wrote:

                          >
                          >I remember seeing a schematic for a 2m DC Rx in RadCom, many years ago.


                          Conventional DC's work ok, but since there is no opposite sideband
                          rejection, they give up 3 db in MDS. Most VHF ops would find this
                          very unsatisfactory. The ability to hear a weak signal on vhf is
                          EVERYTHING, because atmospheric noise is very low there.

                          With a 'computer assist' however, I think a phasing type receiver has
                          real potential though, for a no compromise receiver for 6 and 2
                          meters. I'm a little surprised no one has written an article on this,
                          since the software is already available, ready to run...

                          Hardware can't be that difficult, and the software would do the
                          conversion, opposite sideband rejection and would/could automatically
                          compensate for small phase shift errors (r/c based phase shifters) in
                          the hardware that would normally render a conventional phasing
                          receiver useless at vhf.

                          Regards,

                          Art



                           
                          Yahoo! Groups Links

                          <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/

                          <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                          <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                           


                          Cecil Bayona
                          KD5NWA
                          www.qrpradio.com

                          I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't; only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...

                        • KD5NWA
                          By the way for experimenting, the ICS601 Osc/Multiplier chip would let you use a inexpensive DDS to generate the quadrature for 144MHz and 56MHz. ... Cecil
                          Message 12 of 13 , Jan 11, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            By the way for experimenting, the ICS601 Osc/Multiplier chip would let you use a inexpensive DDS to generate the quadrature for 144MHz and 56MHz.

                            At 09:36 AM 1/11/2006, you wrote:

                            >
                            >I remember seeing a schematic for a 2m DC Rx in RadCom, many years ago.


                            Conventional DC's work ok, but since there is no opposite sideband
                            rejection, they give up 3 db in MDS. Most VHF ops would find this
                            very unsatisfactory. The ability to hear a weak signal on vhf is
                            EVERYTHING, because atmospheric noise is very low there.

                            With a 'computer assist' however, I think a phasing type receiver has
                            real potential though, for a no compromise receiver for 6 and 2
                            meters. I'm a little surprised no one has written an article on this,
                            since the software is already available, ready to run...

                            Hardware can't be that difficult, and the software would do the
                            conversion, opposite sideband rejection and would/could automatically
                            compensate for small phase shift errors (r/c based phase shifters) in
                            the hardware that would normally render a conventional phasing
                            receiver useless at vhf.

                            Regards,

                            Art



                             
                            Yahoo! Groups Links

                            <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/

                            <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                            <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                             


                            Cecil Bayona
                            KD5NWA
                            www.qrpradio.com

                            I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't; only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ...

                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.