TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4
From: Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 08:23:28 -0500
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
I will personally measure the latency of the Flex 6500 and get back to
you.  I'm not believing 350msec at this point.

73, Barry N1EU

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 7:59 AM, rick@dj0ip.de <Rick@dj0ip.de> wrote:

> Sorry Barry, latency measured on the Anan does not necessarily apply to the
> FLEX 6000.
>
> Less than a year ago it was 350mS on the 6xxx, as measured by Rob Sherwood.
>
> We've had this discussion before and Rob jumped in and confirmed the 350
> number.
> I'm not sure which reflector it was on.  Might have been here, might have
> been on the Eagle or OM7 reflector.
>
> As I said, it may have changed but not long ago it was at 350.
> Until someone steps up and states that (s)he has measured it and found it
> better, that's the number I'm sticking with for the Flex 6xxx radios.
>
> FB on the Anon latency numbers.
>
> At 25mS you can still hear in between dits at 40 wpm but just barely.
> When you go above that, you no longer hear between dits.
>
> After about 40 or 50ms latency, you (or rather I and a few friends) can no
> longer transmit clean CW by listening to the real time signal.  In that
> case
> we have to mute the radio and listen to the sidetone of the keyer because
> the delay is annoying and confuses the OP.
>
> Delay is still an issue but it has gotten a lot better.
>
> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
> (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Barry
> N1EU
> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 1:49 PM
> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4
>
> Ha, I love a good tussle  ;-)
>
> I measured it on an ANAN-100D about a year ago.  I've seen numbers for the
> Flex 6K that are similar.  Latency of about 100-150msec for cw receive and
> ssb receive and transmit.  CW transmit latency in the ANAN and Flex is very
> low (on the order of tens of msec) because they both optimize it in the
> FPGA.
>
> 73, Barry N1EU
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 5:45 AM, rick@dj0ip.de <Rick@dj0ip.de> wrote:
>
> > Yes, it used to be much worse.
> > It is now 350 mS unless there has been some VERY recent change.
> >
> > Barry, if you say it's better, please specify who measured it and
> > approximately when.
> > Otherwise I strongly disagree.
> >
> > I am quoting recent measurements by Rob Sherwood.
> > Somewhere buried in 10,000 emails I have a recent email from Rob
> > confirming this.
> > It was while running one of the big contests earlier this year.
> >
> > I'm not talking about old 5000 rigs, I mean the new flagship line, 6xxx.
> >
> > 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
> > (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Barry
> > N1EU
> > Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 11:29 AM
> > To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> > Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4
> >
> > Rick, the latency on the latest SDR offerings has come WAY down,
> > especially on the Flex 6000 series.  They ARE contest capable.
> >
> > I agree on the knobs.  I applaud the Flex Maestro interface panel - I
> > think it's a harbinger of products to come in the future, where many
> > vendors can offer various front panels that can be interfaced to many
> > different SDR types.  Or someone could write the code to use an Orion
> > front panel to control an SDR, etc.
> >
> > For me, the draw of the direct sampling SDR radios (ANAN, Flex 6K) is
> > that their receivers simply sound better than the best superhet/dsp i.f.
> radios.
> >
> > With the introduction of the not-overly-impressive IC-7300, perhaps
> > we'll be seeing several direct sampling (DDC/DUC) bundled in a fully
> > knobbed self-contained box in the next 1-3 years.
> >
> > 73, Barry N1EU
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 7:24 AM, rick@dj0ip.de <Rick@dj0ip.de> wrote:
> >
> > > EXCEPT . . .  for latency and lack of affordable knobs.
> > >
> > > Last reviews I saw still had turnaround latency between TX and RX at
> > > 350 mS.
> > > If both ops are running SDR, and trying to run full QSK, that's 0.7
> > > seconds.
> > > It's gonna sound like "Chop Phooey" on the air!
> > >
> > > The set of knobs (Maestro) for the lowest cost $2000 Flex Radio (in
> > > the class that interests most of us) is $1200 or so.  OR...the big
> > > single knob from Flex will set you back $200 if you are willing to
> > > wait long enough to get one.
> > >
> > > A decent 3rd party set of knobs, such as the Wood Box Radio T-MATE-2
> > > probably has enough knobs for most of us, but it will set you back
> > > $300 AND Flex software won't support it.  You need a 3rd party
> > > software (i.e. N4PY Radio Control Software) to use it with your Flex.
> > > Get it all set up and working with your WIN7 computer, then upgrade
> > > to
> > WIN10 and watch the "real"
> > > fun begin.
> > >
> > > Other than that, there's not much wrong with the current crop of SDR
> > > radios...
> > >
> > > 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
> > > (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Kim
> > > Elmore
> > > Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 2:40 AM
> > >
> > > There's absolutely nothing wrong with SDR; I don't fully understand
> > > why so many people complain about it
> > >
> > >
> > > -------
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TenTec mailing list
> > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>