There's a big difference between 600 and 400. The steep skirts add a
lot of latency. Try 600 or 800.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
58 Hogwood Rd
Louisburg, NC 27549
www.n4py.com
On 12/8/2015 10:14 AM, Barry N1EU wrote:
400Hz in all cases was the receive bandwidth setting.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Carl Moreschi <n4py3@earthlink.net
<mailto:n4py3@earthlink.net>> wrote:
That's a function of the receive filter used. The narrower the
filter, the more latency. What receive filter were you using?
Carl Moreschi N4PY
58 Hogwood Rd
Louisburg, NC 27549
www.n4py.com <http://www.n4py.com>
On 12/8/2015 8:41 AM, Barry N1EU wrote:
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
<mailto: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
<mailto:rick@dj0ip.de><Rick@dj0ip.de
<mailto: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
<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
<mailto:rick@dj0ip.de><Rick@dj0ip.de
<mailto: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
<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
<mailto:rick@dj0ip.de><Rick@dj0ip.de
<mailto: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
<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 <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com <mailto:TenTec@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|