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

RXTX V6.2 versus V6.3

Expand Messages
  • Chris Wilson
    08/11/2012 13:27 Bought an unbuilt RXTX 160 meters 6.2 kit off Ebay, I believe the V6.2 is xtal controlled, is it a worthwhile build these days, or should I
    Message 1 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      08/11/2012 13:27

      Bought an unbuilt RXTX 160 meters 6.2 kit off Ebay, I believe the V6.2
      is xtal controlled, is it a worthwhile build these days, or should I
      move it on to a pal who fancies trying SDR for the first time? Thanks.
      I already have a working high band V6.3 RXTX Ensemble, fancied having
      Top Band capability as well.

      --
      Best Regards,
      Chris Wilson. 2E0ILY
      mailto: chris@...
    • John Greusel
      Chris, We just had the build it or not debate a few days ago and I think the consensus was if the narrow bandwidth (of the crystal Softrock) works for you
      Message 2 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Chris,

        We just had the "build it or not" debate a few days ago and I think the consensus was if the narrow bandwidth (of the crystal Softrock) works for you then by all means build it.

        John
        KC9OJV
         



        From: Chris Wilson <chris@...>
        To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2012 7:29 AM
        Subject: [softrock40] RXTX V6.2 versus V6.3



          08/11/2012 13:27

        Bought an unbuilt RXTX 160 meters 6.2 kit off Ebay, I believe the V6.2
        is xtal controlled, is it a worthwhile build these days, or should I
        move it on to a pal who fancies trying SDR for the first time? Thanks.
        I already have a working high band V6.3 RXTX Ensemble, fancied having
        Top Band capability as well.

        --
              Best Regards,
                          Chris Wilson.  2E0ILY
        mailto: chris@...



        ------------------------------------

        Yahoo! Groups Links

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

        <*> Your email settings:
            Individual Email | Traditional

        <*> To change settings online go to:
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/join
            (Yahoo! ID required)

        <*> To change settings via email:
            softrock40-digest@yahoogroups.com
            softrock40-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

        <*> 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/



      • John Williams
        From the QRP2000 page - http://sdr-kits.net/QRP2000_Description.html / Full Band or Multi Band coverage of Softrock RXTX V6.1 and V6.2 transceivers (use Kit 1
        Message 3 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          From the QRP2000 page - http://sdr-kits.net/QRP2000_Description.html

          Full Band or Multi Band coverage of Softrock RXTX V6.1 and V6.2 transceivers (use Kit 1 CMOS version)


          Build it and add the QRP2000 for variable VFO... I am sure you can find some info on how to accomplish this in the archives.

          John - ke5ssh

          On 11/8/2012 9:11 AM, John Greusel wrote:
           
          Chris,

          We just had the "build it or not" debate a few days ago and I think the consensus was if the narrow bandwidth (of the crystal Softrock) works for you then by all means build it.

          John
          KC9OJV
           



          From: Chris Wilson <chris@...>
          To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2012 7:29 AM
          Subject: [softrock40] RXTX V6.2 versus V6.3



            08/11/2012 13:27

          Bought an unbuilt RXTX 160 meters 6.2 kit off Ebay, I believe the V6.2
          is xtal controlled, is it a worthwhile build these days, or should I
          move it on to a pal who fancies trying SDR for the first time? Thanks.
          I already have a working high band V6.3 RXTX Ensemble, fancied having
          Top Band capability as well.

          --
                Best Regards,
                            Chris Wilson.  2E0ILY
          mailto: chris@...



          ------------------------------------

          Yahoo! Groups Links

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

          <*> Your email settings:
              Individual Email | Traditional

          <*> To change settings online go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/join
              (Yahoo! ID required)

          <*> To change settings via email:
              softrock40-digest@yahoogroups.com
              softrock40-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

          <*> 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/




          -- 
          
          John Williams
          
          KE5SSH - ham since 2007
          WQKA523 - GMRS for family use on the farm
          
        • Chris Wilson
          ... 08/11/2012 16:21 Just had a quick look at the web site, thanks for that. I couldn t see any earlier posts re the V6.1 or 6.2, but only had a quick scan
          Message 4 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            >
            > From the QRP2000 page - http://sdr-kits.net/QRP2000_Description.html

            > Full Band or Multi Band coverage of Softrock RXTX V6.1 and V6.2
            > transceivers (use Kit 1 CMOS version)

            > Build it and add the QRP2000 for variable VFO... I am sure you can
            > find some info on how to accomplish this in the archives.

            > John - ke5ssh

            > On 11/8/2012 9:11 AM, John Greusel wrote:
            >
            > Chris,

            > We just had the "build it or not" debate a few days ago and I think
            > the consensus was if the narrow bandwidth (of the crystal Softrock)
            > works for you then by all means build it.

            > John
            > KC9OJV

            08/11/2012 16:21

            Just had a quick look at the web site, thanks for that. I couldn't see
            any earlier posts re the V6.1 or 6.2, but only had a quick scan
            through the messages, sorry.

            I have a question. This kit en route to me was advertised as a 160
            meter kit, which is the band I want to have a play with. On the web
            page for the QRP2000 kit I see the following:


            "Frequency Range Kit 1: 3.5 MHz to 210 MHz for Kit 1 (10-160 Mhz
            specified by Silabs) and Kit 2: 3.5 MHz up to 280 MHz (10-280 MHz)
            specified by SiLab for C-grade LVDS device supplied) New!! New!!
            Si570BBB Device up to 945 MHz (810 MHz specified by Silabs)
            available!"

            Does this mean the kit won't work down to 1.8 MHz?


            Thanks!



            --
            Best Regards,
            Chris Wilson. 2E0ILY
          • Alan
            ... Subject: Re: [softrock40] RXTX V6.2 versus V6.3 ... Chris, That is the Si570 frequency, not /4 frequency. It is probably best to fit the Softrock ATTiny 85
            Message 5 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- Original Message -----
              Subject: Re: [softrock40] RXTX V6.2 versus V6.3


              >
              >
              > "Frequency Range Kit 1: 3.5 MHz to 210 MHz for Kit 1 (10-160 Mhz
              > specified by Silabs) and Kit 2: 3.5 MHz up to 280 MHz (10-280 MHz)
              > specified by SiLab for C-grade LVDS device supplied) New!! New!!
              > Si570BBB Device up to 945 MHz (810 MHz specified by Silabs)
              > available!"
              >
              > Does this mean the kit won't work down to 1.8 MHz?
              >

              Chris,

              That is the Si570 frequency, not /4 frequency.
              It is probably best to fit the Softrock ATTiny 85 to this kit so you get all the later functions.

              73 Alan G4ZFQ
            • John Williams
              Page 21 of the pdf are the interface info. I do not know if the board will support the new attny 85, but that would be a good enhancement...
              Message 6 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Page 21 of the pdf are the interface info. I do not know if the board
                will support the new attny 85, but that would be a good enhancement...

                http://www.sdr-kits.net/V203build.pdf

                John - ke5ssh


                On 11/8/2012 10:25 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
                > Just had a quick look at the web site, thanks for that. I couldn't see
                > any earlier posts re the V6.1 or 6.2, but only had a quick scan
                > through the messages, sorry.

                --

                John Williams

                KE5SSH - ham since 2007
                WQKA523 - GMRS for family use on the farm
              • cbayona
                It will work fine with the QRP2000 board, version 15.15 has a few improvements and corrections.. ... -- Cecil - k5nwa http://www.softrockradio.org/
                Message 7 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  It will work fine with the QRP2000 board, version 15.15 has a few
                  improvements and corrections..

                  At 11:46 AM 11/8/2012, you wrote:
                  >Page 21 of the pdf are the interface info. I do not know if the board
                  >will support the new attny 85, but that would be a good enhancement...
                  >
                  >http://www.sdr-kits.net/V203build.pdf
                  >
                  >John - ke5ssh
                  >
                  >
                  >On 11/8/2012 10:25 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
                  > > Just had a quick look at the web site, thanks for that. I couldn't see
                  > > any earlier posts re the V6.1 or 6.2, but only had a quick scan
                  > > through the messages, sorry.
                  >
                  >--
                  >
                  >John Williams
                  >
                  >KE5SSH - ham since 2007
                  >WQKA523 - GMRS for family use on the farm
                  >

                  --
                  Cecil - k5nwa
                  http://www.softrockradio.org/ http://thepartsplace.k5nwa.com/

                  Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
                • Chris Wilson
                  ... Thanks John, page 3 of the pdf says ATTiny 45 or ATTiny 85, so should be OK :) Are there any other major performance differences, once the Xtal control is
                  Message 8 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    >
                    > Page 21 of the pdf are the interface info. I do not know if the board
                    > will support the new attny 85, but that would be a good enhancement...

                    > http://www.sdr-kits.net/V203build.pdf

                    > John - ke5ssh


                    Thanks John, page 3 of the pdf says ATTiny 45 or ATTiny 85, so should
                    be OK :) Are there any other major performance differences, once the
                    Xtal control is bypassed, between V6.2 and V6.3? Thanks to you, Alan
                    and cbayona for the info.



                    08/11/2012 21:43



                    --
                    Best Regards,
                    Chris Wilson. 2E0ILY
                  • Alan
                    ... Subject: Re: [softrock40] RXTX V6.2 versus V6.3 ... page 3 of the pdf says ATTiny 45 or ATTiny 85, so should ... It really needs to be an 85 with Fred s
                    Message 9 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Subject: Re: [softrock40] RXTX V6.2 versus V6.3


                      >
                      page 3 of the pdf says ATTiny 45 or ATTiny 85, so should
                      > be OK :)

                      It really needs to be an 85 with Fred's firmware. He made several significant improvements.

                      >Are there any other major performance differences, once the
                      > Xtal control is bypassed, between V6.2 and V6.3?

                      None, they are all the same as the current Ensemble.

                      73 Alan G4ZFQ
                    • Chris Wilson
                      ... 08/11/2012 22:39 Excellent, looking forward to building it. This may be the push I need to try programming the two or three blank ATTiny 85 s I got a while
                      Message 10 of 10 , Nov 8, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        >

                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > Subject: Re: [softrock40] RXTX V6.2 versus V6.3

                        >>
                        > page 3 of the pdf says ATTiny 45 or ATTiny 85, so should
                        >> be OK

                        > It really needs to be an 85 with Fred's firmware. He made several significant improvements.

                        >>Are there any other major performance differences, once the
                        >> Xtal control is bypassed, between V6.2 and V6.3?

                        > None, they are all the same as the current Ensemble.

                        > 73 Alan G4ZFQ



                        08/11/2012 22:39

                        Excellent, looking forward to building it. This may be the push I need
                        to try programming the two or three blank ATTiny 85's I got a while
                        back. I'll wait for the V6.2 kit to land and then order the
                        synthesizer kit. These things are addictive! Cheers Alan.



                        --
                        Best Regards,
                        Chris Wilson. 2E0ILY
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.