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

Re: [softrock40] Newbie Test Software

Expand Messages
  • Alan
    ... Subject: Re: [softrock40] Newbie Test Software SDR# (sdrsharp.com) is a nice, simple SDR receiver program that works well for most people who have Windows
    Message 1 of 11 , Jan 24, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      Subject: Re: [softrock40] Newbie Test Software


      SDR# (sdrsharp.com) is a nice, simple SDR receiver program that works well
      for most people who have Windows computers.

      Details and links here https://sites.google.com/site/g4zfqradio/connecting-soundcard-sdr-to-computer

      73 Alan G4ZFQ
    • R. R. (Robby) Robson
      http://www.wb5rvz.org/common/softwareinstallation Try SDR # Another easy one is HDSDR I used to me high on Rocky, but it has issues with later versions of
      Message 2 of 11 , Jan 25, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Try SDR #
        Another easy one is HDSDR
        I used to me high on Rocky, but it has issues with later versions of Windows


        On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:06 AM, Bob <macklinbob@...> wrote:
         

        What software should a NEWBIE use to test a softrock receiver?

        I am a highly skilled retired EE and a skilled ham. I Just have never tried one of these simple receivers.

        Bob Macklin
        K5MYJ
        Seattle, Wa.




        --
        Cheers,
        Robby
         
        Richard R. (Robby) Robson
        LTC USA (RET)
      • Shirley Márquez Dúlcey
        Rocky is still a good choice for getting started with transmit on the RXTX despite the problems with recent versions of Windows, but mostly because there
        Message 3 of 11 , Jan 25, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Rocky is still a good choice for getting started with transmit on the RXTX despite the problems with recent versions of Windows, but mostly because there aren't a lot of programs that do it. I'd love to have a program that sets up as painlessly as SDR# but can also transmit!

        • R. R. (Robby) Robson
          Wouldn t it be wonderful if Alex and Youssef collaborated on putting Rocky s great array of functions into SDR#s ease of use/installation and ability to play
          Message 4 of 11 , Jan 25, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Wouldn't it be wonderful if Alex and Youssef collaborated on putting Rocky's great array of functions into SDR#s ease of use/installation and ability to "play nice" with Windows' sound infrastructure.

            On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Shirley Márquez Dúlcey <mark@...> wrote:
             

            Rocky is still a good choice for getting started with transmit on the RXTX despite the problems with recent versions of Windows, but mostly because there aren't a lot of programs that do it. I'd love to have a program that sets up as painlessly as SDR# but can also transmit!





            --
            Cheers,
            Robby
             
            Richard R. (Robby) Robson
            LTC USA (RET)
          • Kenneth Hardy
            On this theme - My wish for 2013 - a freshened up Rocky sdr with no malfunctions in W7 (for my Ensemble) And Omni-Rig capability incorporated (for use with my
            Message 5 of 11 , Jan 25, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              On this theme -
              My wish for 2013 - a freshened up Rocky sdr with no malfunctions in W7 (for my Ensemble)
              And Omni-Rig capability incorporated (for use with my KX3)
               
              Oh then I would be a happy chappie indeed.
              Ken M0XBK 

              From: R. R. (Robby) Robson <rrrobson@...>
              To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 7:27 PM
              Subject: Re: [softrock40] Newbie Test Software
               
              Wouldn't it be wonderful if Alex and Youssef collaborated on putting Rocky's great array of functions into SDR#s ease of use/installation and ability to "play nice" with Windows' sound infrastructure.

              On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Shirley Márquez Dúlcey <mark@...> wrote:
               
              Rocky is still a good choice for getting started with transmit on the RXTX despite the problems with recent versions of Windows, but mostly because there aren't a lot of programs that do it. I'd love to have a program that sets up as painlessly as SDR# but can also transmit!


              --
              Cheers,
              Robby
               
              Richard R. (Robby) Robson
              LTC USA (RET)
            • rifkum
              My vote goes to HDSDR. I tried SDR# and found it too simplistic. I recently finished my RX ensemble II and love it as a gen. coverage reciever. Took a little
              Message 6 of 11 , Jan 25, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                My vote goes to HDSDR.

                I tried SDR# and found it too simplistic.

                I recently finished my RX ensemble II and love it as a gen. coverage reciever. Took a little bit to set it up and then to tweak the software settings to eliminate the mirror imaging. (under options and channel skew calibration) read the tips found there... find a strong signal that shows mirroring and then slowly tune the sliders back and forth between Phase and Amplitude to reduce the image.

                Also need to tune to a known frequency (like one of the WWV's) and then adjust for frequency calibration.

                amazing RX for $70!!

                dwight
                N7KBC



                --- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, "Bob" wrote:
                >
                > What software should a NEWBIE use to test a softrock receiver?
                >
                > I am a highly skilled retired EE and a skilled ham. I Just have never tried one of these simple receivers.
                >
                > Bob Macklin
                > K5MYJ
                > Seattle, Wa.
                >
              • Gordon JC Pearce
                ... It s fine for receiving. What exactly do you mean by too simplistic ? If you compare it to most other Windows SDR software, it s a nice, clean and
                Message 7 of 11 , Jan 26, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 26/01/13 06:52, rifkum wrote:
                  > My vote goes to HDSDR.
                  >
                  > I tried SDR# and found it too simplistic.

                  It's fine for receiving. What exactly do you mean by "too simplistic"?
                  If you compare it to most other Windows SDR software, it's a nice,
                  clean and uncluttered interface that performs well.

                  I know the author of SDR# hangs about in here, and would welcome any
                  suggestions or comments.

                  --
                  Gordonjcp MM0YEQ
                • rifkum
                  Hey Gordon, Well after your question I had to go back and take a look at SDR# again. I think I preferred the waterfall interface on HDSDR more and some of the
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jan 26, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hey Gordon,

                    Well after your question I had to go back and take a look at SDR# again.

                    I think I preferred the waterfall interface on HDSDR more and some of the frequency adjustment capabilities. I also liked the secondary spectrum display of the specific bandwith that is currently tuned. And the ability to use multiple notch filters to eliminate interference. But that is probably a subjective evaluation. I really did not spend a lot of time with SDR#.

                    I think what one should do is try them all and see which one you like. Not really wanting to throw rocks at SDR#... just had better luck with HDSDR.

                    Dwight

                    --- In softrock40@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
                    >
                    > On 26/01/13 06:52, rifkum wrote:
                    > > My vote goes to HDSDR.
                    > >
                    > > I tried SDR# and found it too simplistic.
                    >
                    > It's fine for receiving. What exactly do you mean by "too simplistic"?
                    > If you compare it to most other Windows SDR software, it's a nice,
                    > clean and uncluttered interface that performs well.
                    >
                    > I know the author of SDR# hangs about in here, and would welcome any
                    > suggestions or comments.
                    >
                    > --
                    > Gordonjcp MM0YEQ
                    >
                  • Gordon JC Pearce
                    ... Give it another go. I haven t tried HDSDR because I don t have Windows and I don t particularly want to have to go and buy a whole new PC just to try one
                    Message 9 of 11 , Jan 27, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On 27/01/13 05:22, rifkum wrote:
                      > Hey Gordon,
                      >
                      > Well after your question I had to go back and take a look at SDR#
                      > again.
                      >
                      > I think I preferred the waterfall interface on HDSDR more and some of
                      > the frequency adjustment capabilities. I also liked the secondary
                      > spectrum display of the specific bandwith that is currently tuned.
                      > And the ability to use multiple notch filters to eliminate
                      > interference. But that is probably a subjective evaluation. I
                      > really did not spend a lot of time with SDR#.

                      Give it another go. I haven't tried HDSDR because I don't have Windows
                      and I don't particularly want to have to go and buy a whole new PC just
                      to try one program, but it looks a hell of a lot better than most of the
                      SDR software out there. I'm not keen on the "graphicy" buttons and
                      unlabelled sliders, and it still looks a bit cluttered, but it's much
                      better than say PowerSDR which just looks like someone threw a bucket of
                      widgets at the screen and some of them stuck.

                      > I think what one should do is try them all and see which one you
                      > like. Not really wanting to throw rocks at SDR#... just had better
                      > luck with HDSDR.

                      I tried various SDRs and didn't like any of them, so I wrote my own.
                      It looks like this:
                      http://www.gjcp.net/~gordonjcp/lysdr.jpg
                      and it works pretty well, although the window is still a bit too
                      cluttered and widget-heavy for my taste.

                      --
                      Gordonjcp MM0YEQ
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.