That's not what the latency does. You don't miss the guy coming back at
all. You hear him 170 msec later, in full. Nothing gets chopped. He
just thinks you are slightly slow on the trigger.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
58 Hogwood Rd
Louisburg, NC 27549
www.n4py.com
On 12/8/2015 1:49 PM, Barry N1EU wrote:
I can't imagine that this wouldn't bug the heck out of K9CT but perhaps he
had beta software/firmware with lower latency filtering.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Barry N1EU<barry.n1eu@gmail.com> wrote:
Good testimonial to what the issue is and is not Duane!
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Duane Calvin<ac5aa1@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, I don't claim to be a "real contester" as I don't sit in a chair for
48 hours or run at 45 wpm (then again, not many contesters run at this
speed either.) I enjoy CW and RTTY contesting in small doses, and
typically do S&P, and small runs since low power and poor antenna usually
mean I get run off the frequency. What I've found on CW is that, running
between 30 and 35 wpm when I make a call, often, if the other station is
quick on the trigger, I hear "tC5AA" for my call (loss of the first dit in
the leading A). At first, I thought they were getting my call wrong, then
I realized it was the turnaround latency. No big deal, I just went from
there. Now, if I were "running" instead of S&P, and the person at the
other end sent his call once and was quick on his reply, then I might not
get the first element of the first letter of his call. I've been running
narrower filters than I usually do, and if I had realized this might be
hurting the turnaround time, I would have de
faulted back to my normal 1000 Hz with the APF engaged.
Now on RTTY, it shows up a little more obviously because the baud rate is
faster. Here, I was decoding "_c5AA" a lot of the time on the first pass
of receiving my call. Not a real problem because most RTTY contesters
include the call both at the beginning and end of the exchange because of
similar turnaround problems with other gear.
So, yes, for a contester who runs extremely high rates, this could impact
them. Then again, due to their abilities, it might not. I can tell you
that I'm as pleased with my FLEX-6500 in contests as I ever was with my
Omni VI+ or my Orion, and that I enjoy using it just as much as I did
either of them.
Duane Calvin, AC5AA
Austin, Texas
ac5aa@ac5aa.com
-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Nathan
Moreschi via TenTec
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2015 12:09 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment; rick@dj0ip.de; 'Discussion of
Ten-Tec Equipment'
Cc: Nathan Moreschi
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Flex Radio for Contesting
CW
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:43 PM, rick@dj0ip.de<Rick@dj0ip.de> wrote:
Was that in SSB or CW, Nate?
73
Rick, DJ0IP
-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Nathan
Moreschi via TenTec
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 3:38 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Cc: Nathan Moreschi
Subject: [TenTec] Flex Radio for Contesting
I'm not sure about the differences in latency between the Flex 6500 and
Flex 6700 (if any) but I wouldn't rule them out for serious contesting.
Here's a post from K9CT during last week's ARRL 160 Contest:
3830 Show Score
| |
| | | | | |
| 3830 Show ScoreGoal was to beat last year's effort. Not as many QSOs
|but had more mults. Thefirst few hours are the best and most
|important. If you miss any part of that,you can't make it up. | |
|View on 3830scores.com | Preview by Yahoo | |
| |
73,
Nate/N4YDU From: Barry N1EU<barry.n1eu@gmail.com>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment<tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2015 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 156, Issue 4
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
_______________________________________________
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
|