[TenTec] Flex Radio for Contesting

Steve Berg wa9jml at frontier.com
Tue Dec 8 14:25:18 EST 2015 

Wouldn't this lengthy discussion of a competitor's radios be a lot more 
appropriate on the Flex reflector?

Steve WA9JML

On 12/8/2015 1:15 PM, Carl Moreschi wrote:
> The slow turn around between transmit and receive would be caused by 
> running semi-breakin with a delay of 300 msec or so before you go back 
> to receive.  This would cause you to miss the first elements of 
> characters often.
>
> Carl Moreschi N4PY
> 58 Hogwood Rd
> Louisburg, NC 27549
> www.n4py.com
>
> On 12/8/2015 2:09 PM, Duane Calvin wrote:
>> So, if that's true, what is the effect I was hearing?  I hadn't 
>> related it
>> to the latency question until this discussion started.  The receive 
>> audio is
>> running on a delay from "real time" all the time, while transmit 
>> sidetone is
>> in real time.  Is this a recovery problem then?
>>
>>     73, Duane
>>
>> Duane Calvin, AC5AA
>> Austin, Texas
>> ac5aa at ac5aa.com
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl
>> Moreschi
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2015 12:55 PM
>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Flex Radio for Contesting
>>
>> 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 at 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 at 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 at ac5aa.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>>>>> Nathan Moreschi via TenTec
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2015 12:09 PM
>>>>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment; rick at 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 at dj0ip.de<Rick at dj0ip.de>   wrote:
>>>>>    Was that in SSB or CW, Nate?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73
>>>>> Rick, DJ0IP
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces at 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 at gmail.com>
>>>>>    To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment<tentec at 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 at 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 at dj0ip.de<Rick at 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 at 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 at dj0ip.de<Rick at 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 at 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 at dj0ip.de<Rick at 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 at 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 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

More information about the TenTec mailing list