I just measured 170msec latency on the 6500 in cw receive. It's a lot (too
much for serious contesting IMHO) but it's not 350msec.
My methodology was to transmit a single dit using another rig and used a
microphone/soundcard to record the tx sidetone of rig 1 and then the
received dit on rig 2.
For comparison, my Orion II measured 45msec and my ANAN-100D SDR 70msec for
cw rx latency.
73, Barry N1EU
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
|