[TenTec] V2.060b Release Comments

Wed Apr 25 15:58:54 EDT 2007

I assumed so Don but I can't say I'm certain.  I guess Carl can tell us.

Bob, 5B4AGN

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don Binkley" <n4zz at bellsouth.net>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] V2.060b Release Comments

> Bob,
>
> Was Carl listening with headphones on cw?
>>From what I am hearing it is horrible sounding with headphones on. 
>>However,
> with the speaker very pleasant with full qsk.
>
> Don n4zz
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bob Henderson" <bob at 5b4agn.net>
> To: "Carl Moreschi" <n4py at arrl.net>; "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment"
> <tentec at contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] V2.060b Release Comments
>
>
>> Carl
>>
>> I have nothing connected to any form of audio accessory socket, other 
>> than
>> headphones.
>>
>> I am an habitual QSK operator and have been for almost 40 years.  Any
>> extraneous T/R noise heard in the headphones when I send using QSK
>> directly
>> affects sidetone quality. Semantics? Possibly but in my view any sound
>> generated by Orion which I have to listen to by virtue of sending in QSK
>> is
>> de facto comprised within the sidetone, regardless of its cause.
>>
>> Your suggestion that I should disable QSK to avoid having to listen to 
>> the
>> T/R click made me chuckle.  It was a joke, wasn't it?
>>
>> Bob, 5B4AGN
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Carl Moreschi" <n4py at arrl.net>
>> To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 5:26 PM
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] V2.060b Release Comments
>>
>>
>>>I agree that the click at the end of the CW note is much more on 2.060b
>>>than
>>> it was on 2.059d.  But 2,059d had not QSK at all.  With 2.060b, you can
>>> at
>>> least get pretty good QSK.  And if the click bothers you, turn the CW
>>> delay
>>> to 3%.  You lose high speed QSK but that makes it clickless.  I just
>>> wouldn't call these things sidetone problems.  The sidetone is clean,
>>> it's
>>> just the smuck at the end of a keyed element that is bothersome.
>>>
>>> Carl Moreschi N4PY
>>> 121 Little Bell Drive
>>> Bell Mountain
>>> Hays, NC 28635
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Dick Green" <wc1m at msn.com>
>>> To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec at contesting.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 1:10 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] V2.060b Release Comments
>>>
>>>
>>>> I believe if you go back and forth between 2.059d and 2.060b, and 
>>>> listen
>>>> very carefully, you will find that Bob is correct about the tail-end
>>>> click
>>>> in the sidetone. Try it with different sidetone levels. It really 
>>>> stands
>>> out
>>>> with low or no sidetone volume. It's certainly not the worst I've heard
>>>> in
>>>> the various firmware releases, but it's there. I don't hear anything
>>>> resembling the harmonics Bob describes.
>>>>
>>>> I have to say that 2.059d is rather remarkable for the almost complete
>>> lack
>>>> of noise on QSK switching. Smooth as butter. However, it may be that
>>>> this
>>>> comes at the price of very poor QSK performance -- i.e., the complete
>>>> lack
>>>> of ability to hear between elements or characters in 2.059d. I'm
>>>> wondering
>>>> whether smoothing out the switching noise resulted in too long a delay
>>>> in
>>>> switching back to full receive. We may be looking at a tradeoff here.
>>>>
>>>> I agree that QSK performance in 2.060b is improved. I won't know if the
>>>> switching clicks are bearable until I've listened to 40+ hours of CQing
>>>> in
>>> a
>>>> contest. I do know that I missed decent QSK the last time I did a major
>>>> contest with 2.059d. If Ten-Tec can remove the click without affecting
>>>> QSK
>>>> performance, I'd certainly encourage them to do so.
>>>>
>>>> One other point regarding QSK noise. I was known on the beta test
>>> reflector
>>>> as being very sensitive to QSK switching noise, especially a loud click
>>>> in
>>>> the left headphone and somewhat softer matching click in the right
>>>> headphone. This was known as the "WC1M Lament", and is present in all
>>>> versions of the firmware, though the intensity tends to vary. It turns
>>>> out
>>>> this noise is caused by a hardware problem: the main T/R traces on the
>>>> CPU/Logic board run directly beneath the audio op amps used for
>>>> headphone
>>>> audio. Jack Burchfield set me up with a technician at the factory to
>>> explore
>>>> a fix, and I was able to implement a mod that completely eliminated the
>>> WC1M
>>>> Lament. However, it is not a mod for the faint-hearted. It involves
>>>> soldering/desoldering tiny SMD components, cutting traces and soldering
>>>> jumper wires. But it works. I would hope Ten-Tec makes this available 
>>>> as
>>>> a
>>>> factory mod. If Bob's Orion has the WC1M Lament, then it doesn't
>>>> surprise
>>> me
>>>> that he finds the louder QSK click in 2.060b annoying. Noise produced 
>>>> by
>>> the
>>>> hardware tends to interact with noise created by the firmware.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't had time to explore other aspects of 2.060b. On the surface,
>>>> it
>>>> seems very good. The QSK performance is better, and I agree that the
>>>> receiver may be a tad quieter than in 2.059d. I like the SPLIT and Band
>>>> register indicators, though I would rather have seen some work put into
>>>> a
>>>> one-button "quick split" feature (good designs have been suggested.)
>>>>
>>>> I should also report one other item. For quite some time I was a 
>>>> devotee
>>> of
>>>> version 1.373b5, and felt that despite numerous shortcomings it was
>>> superior
>>>> to any of the version 2 releases. I had used 1.373b5 in every major
>>> contest
>>>> in which I participated since it was released, including a winning
>>>> effort
>>> in
>>>> the 2006 CQ WPX CW effort from KT1V. But when this year's ARRL DX CW
>>> contest
>>>> rolled around, I happened to have 2.059d installed and began the 
>>>> contest
>>>> with it. That version was certainly the best of the version 2 releases,
>>> but
>>>> had some well-known DSP artifacts in the presence of strong signals (or
>>>> maybe just loud volume.) These were even worse in QSK operation. Also,
>>>> 2.059d's QSK performance was abysmal -- no better than VOX operation.
>>>>
>>>> During the Saturday morning runs, when signals from Europe on 20m were
>>> quite
>>>> loud and the band was very crowded, I decided that the DSP noise and
>>>> lousy
>>>> QSK performance were unacceptable and decided to download 1.373b5. I 
>>>> was
>>>> shocked at how awful 1.373b5 sounded compared with 2.059d! There was
>>>> considerably more receiver noise and the QSK switching noise was
>>>> downright
>>>> deafening, despite having fixed the WC1M Lament hardware problem. Also,
>>> the
>>>> screen contrast was quite inferior in 1.373b5, something I had never
>>> noticed
>>>> before. It was much harder to work with 1.373b5 than I could ever have
>>>> imagined (yes, I did a battery reset and master reset.) Within a few
>>> minutes
>>>> I went back to 2.059d. This was a completely boneheaded thing to do
>>>> during
>>>> the peak hours of a contest and probably pushed me down at least one
>>>> place
>>>> in the standings. But I learned that comparing versions under contest
>>> battle
>>>> conditions can yield significantly different results than comparing
>>> versions
>>>> under normal band conditions.
>>>>
>>>> YMMV, but that's my story.
>>>>
>>>> I should also point out that for casual operation and chasing DX, I
>>>> almost
>>>> always turn on my FT-1000D first. The user interface is much more
>>> intuitive,
>>>> and getting in/out of split is really easy. It takes too much thinking
>>> with
>>>> the Orion. However, when the DX is really weak, I switch over to the
>>> Orion.
>>>> The 1000D is no slouch, especially on the low bands, but in almost 
>>>> every
>>>> case, the Orion can pull signals out that the 1000D cannot. I always 
>>>> use
>>> the
>>>> Orion for running on crowded bands in big contests because the IMD
>>> immunity,
>>>> selectivity and sensitivity are superior to the 1000D, even though I
>>>> have
>>>> the INRAD roofing filter mod installed in the latter. The bottom line 
>>>> is
>>>> that, despite numerous firmware flaws, the Orion is still the best
>>>> contest
>>>> radio I've used.
>>>>
>>>> I'm delighted that Ten-Tec is still improving the Orion firmware.
>>>> There's
>>>> still lots of room for improvement, but it appears that 2.060b is a 
>>>> step
>>> in
>>>> the right direction.
>>>>
>>>> 73, Dick WC1M
>>>>
>>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>>> > From: Bob Henderson [mailto:bob at 5b4agn.net]
>>>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 6:16 AM
>>>> > To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
>>>> > Subject: Re: [TenTec] V2.060b Release Comments
>>>> >
>>>> > Impementation of band-stacking ID is a big plus.  Many thanks Ten Tec
>>>> >
>>>> > The benefit of adding the SPLIT designator is completely lost on me.
>>>> > Split
>>>> > already being indicated by both VFO A/B switch lights and also TRS
>>>> > designators above and below main frequency LSDigits.
>>>> >
>>>> > QSK speed improvement is much appreciated but the previously
>>>> > acceptable
>>>> > CW
>>>> > sidetone is now AWFUL.  High harmonic content with a loud tail-end
>>>> > click.  I
>>>> > do hope Ten Tec implement a fix for this quickly !
>>>> >
>>>> > If the sidetone wasn't screwed this would be a very worthwhile 
>>>> > release
>>>> > from
>>>> > my POV.
>>>> >
>>>> > Bob, 5B4AGN
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> TenTec mailing list
>>>> TenTec at contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TenTec mailing list
>>> TenTec at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/776 - Release Date: 4/25/2007
>> 12:19 PM
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> 