Audio level is reduced on slice A even when slice B is muted

Asher - K0AU

Scenario: Slice A - RX enabled and TX disabled Slice B - frequency offset for split. RX muted and TX enabled After closing slice B, audio level increases on slice A. Bug appears to be that a muted slice affects audio level. Feature request: On closing the TX slice B, enable TX on slice A.

Eric-KE5DTO

We made the design decision to treat even a muted slice as "contributing" to the slice gain formula. If this is a big operational issue, we can revisit this decision.

Greg

This would be a good reconsideration. I can see the contribution to the gain formula if the slice is not muted....but when muted it seems the gain should not be effected by the muted slice. Was there a particular scenario that led to the current design? Please also consider automatically assigning TX to slice A when another slice is closed IF the closed slice was the TX slice. Thanks E. 73 Greg AB7R

Steve-N5AC

On the auto TX assignment, Greg: We discussed this and felt like on startup, setting the first slice to transmit makes sense. We decided that after this, we wanted the operator to use "positive control" to set the transmitter. So if you close the transmit slice, you have to pick where you will transmit next. This places you in control of what happens and doesn't have us picking where you will transmit next. This could be revisited, but this is our thinking.

Ken - NM9P

Steve, I prefer it as you have stated it. It prevents accidental transmission on the wrong frequency. I would, however, suggest a larger warning popup in center screen when transmission is attempted without a slice selected. It should disappear a couple of seconds after the PTT has been lifted. The current method can build a stack of smaller warning flags along the right side of the pan display that only slowly disappear one by one. I think a single larger one would be sufficient.

Greg

Oh no please....don't flash something in the middle of the screen that may cover something you are concentrating on. Waaaay too distracting. Steve - How about if there is only ONE slice active to make that the TX slice by default. IOW...If I have 4 slices open and slice C is set for TX, and then slices B through D are closed the TX should automatically be assigned to the last remaining slice. ???? Tnx Greg

Asher - K0AU

Steve, Understand the ""only do what the user has commanded" principle. I'd suggest running some clinics watching user interaction. For example; to work CW split I have to: 1) tune the station on his transmit frequency 2) write down the station's transmit frequency in case I **** up step 4) 3) click "+RX" to get another slice 4) work out which slice is the new one, and slide it above the first one with the mouse For some reason the focus defaults to the new slice 5) read out the transmit frequency and use the mouse wheel to tune in to +1KHz 6) change the mode on the new slice to CW and select an appropriate filter width 7) click on TX for the new slice 6) adjust audio levels and use the pan + the second slice audio to try and find what frequency the station is answering 7) mute the audio on the new slice 8) transmit to work the station 9) close the new slice 10) adjust audio levels again 11) select TX for the old pan Let's be clear: these are first world problems. But it's a poor interaction design. More broadly, a slice has a bunch of modes. It can be tunable (with a yellow line). It can be TX. It can be audio muted. If it's tunable I can move it with a double click. If it's TX then I can transmit. If no slice is TX then any TX action triggers an error that also leave the TX hardware lines in an indeterminate state. I can have a slice that's contributing audio that's off screen in a pan that I can't gather into the current view with a double click. I can have a slice that's transmitting that's off screen. There are so many states the interface can feel sullen rather than eager. I'd recommend an interface that tries to anticipate what the user wants, and assumes that user input has intent. Just ignoring a user command is generally unwarranted. But the best approach is to watch some experienced DXers or contesters to see what they do. If 100% of them are using DDUTIL, then integrate the functions into the core interface.

EMIL-DL8JJ

I need all this function and free opportunities of the radio. Why? Because we have the chance to use up to 8 slices & panadapters and all they combinations. The radio do not know what I have in my mind and what I want to do next. I will have all chances to decide by myself and put the setting depend on my wish and conditions. SPLIT operation sense: Perhaps will be nice to have a button “SPLIT”. If you push the button, automatically should come additional RX into the slice up or down for some KHz, switch the TX to the new one and go ahead for DX-ing. After pushing again the “SPLIT” Button shoul be nice to go back in the main states again: Close the ne RX and set the first on TX. Simply and intuitive, I think. Audio level: NO automatically change of any audio levels, independent of the slices number etc. On that point is “persistence” of setting most important think. Please put the “persistence” Feature for all settings in the next version. HW? Cu, de DL8JJ

Eric-KE5DTO

As requested the changes to not include muted slices in the gain calculation have been implemented in DE1490 and will be included with the next release. Thanks for your input on this.