Apache Labs ANAN-200D a competitor?

Drax

How does this thing stack up to the Flex 6000 series?  A real competitor?  It uses the PowerSDR base though.

https://apache-labs.com/al-products/1034/ANAN-200D-HF---6M-100W-ALL-MODE-SDR-TRANSCEIVER.html

Walt

The only single source review I have seen for both the Anan and the Flex is by AB4OJ

http://www.ab4oj.com/test/reports.html

And I think you can try both sets of software in a 'Demo' mode so there should be enough info out there for you to decide what radio you will really like the best - or head to Dayton next month to try them both out on the floor.

Have fun - new radios are always fun.

Steve - KD8QWT

I actually considered the ANON-100 while I was researching a new SDR.  My first exposure to the ANON radio was at Hamvention last year.  I was underwhelmed with booth, especially after seeing the FRS booth.  Not that I make purchasing decisions based on one's booth, but it did reflect a stark difference in the level of excitement between the two.  I spent countless hours researching my options and lurking in forums and reading reviews.  In the end I decided to stop researching and pull the trigger on the the 6300.  There are a few technical reasons I decided on the 6300, but in the end I felt more comfortable with the history of Flex, their direction, and the level of  support they provide.  Although I've only had the 6300 for less than a week, I'm even more certain I made the right decision.

I'm sure there are others that can provide a detailed point by point technical comparison between the two.  For me, a radio is far more than it's technical specs.
 

Steve N4LQ

I'm a CW op. QSK is important to me and I understand that the Apache doesn't have it. That's a deal breaker for me. The rest is fluff.

Lee - N2LEE

I looked very seriously at the Anan and while PowerSDR has a lot of nice features, what caused me to go for the Flex was a number of issues.

1. Flex as a Company
When I looked at the two companies, I felt Flex was a better long term solution. Their involvement in Government and Commercial business told me a lot about the quality and stability of the products.

2. Hardware
The Anan hardware is very touching and no where near the build quality of the Flex 6000 hardware.
There are a number of reports of crosstalk, RFI and other issues.
In fact some users take the board and build them into a new case with better shielding.
I consider the Anan more a science project than a full developed, plug-in play radio.

There is nothing wrong with this but you need to be more of an experimenter thats all.

3. Software
Some might look at the open source as an advantage and while there is some pluses, in the long run I think Flexes approach of building a business around their software platform made more sense to me.

The Apache Labs model seems to be based on software they do not have any control over. 
This puts them in a precarious situation because as a hardware manufacturer they depend on development from the open source community.

Flex's approach of building their own software that can take advantage of current and future hardware gives them much more stability as a company and in my opinion as a product.

While some have complained about Flex's release cycle, the opposite is true for the Anan. It seems like they not only have patches and bug fixes every week but also firmware updates. I prefer to have a STABLE platform and when features are ready and tested they are released.

4. Development
Powersdr has been around a long time and so it is feature rich. There is no doubt it has a lot to offer and this is a big draw for some users. But, in the long run I believe the software Framework Flex is building will have a much longer lifespan. Even Flex admitted that PowerSDR was getting awkward because of the way features keep getting added and added over time. I also get a sense listening from to the Anan users that they are seeing the same thing.

If you listen to most Anan users the ONE feature they talk about over and over is Pure Signal. Frankly it's an obsession and you would think its the only feature that is important.

So the bottom line is after a lot of research I found the Flex platform to be a more stable long term solution for MY needs.

Dave - W6OVP

>In the end I decided to stop researching and pull the trigger on the the 6300.

Same here.

IW7DMH, Enzo

I preferred the new Flex Signature mostly because they can demodulate signals by itself; this really cut out any latency issues, like already said Steve. Virtually you don't need of a personal computer to get sound from these new rigs. You need only a thin client software like SSDR, and it doesn't need of powerful computers. Also new Flex uses open ethernet protocols so, in the next future, you will use a Flex rig with most of the new Operating Systems. Probably features like NB and NR aren't (in this moment) at the top performance, like in PowerSDR, but this is only a momentary gap.

'73

W3DCB

There is NO comparison between the two radios.  There is a reason why it is shown next to a coke can.  The Anan, while it is a nice radio, is more of a hobby grade radio.  Comparing it to Flex signature series is not fair to Anan.  Look at the relays; coil size, etc., of the Flex.  No expense was spared in the design and configuration of the Flex radio.  They are in different leagues...just my opinion.  de W3DCB

Walt - KZ1F

Well, of course, you are are choir members. The person to talk to about the 200D is the same guy that was berated, belittled, and run out of town on here, who owns a 200D now and was struggling about whether to sell his Flex. Yes, they do appear to talk a lot about the PureSignal, for awhile was big talk on here as well, except the 6000 doesn't have it..... However talking about PureSignal should be viewed sort of with the same lens as discussion about the "FLEX'able Advantage. One, however, is a feature, the other a state of bliss. Hopefully Ed will show up to discuss QSK.

Aside from that though, for those who worship at the alter of Sherwood, they are likely about the same. It is a small, almost irrelevant, distinction whether the computer is the radio or the computer is the control over the radio. By having the computer be the radio, faster chip, more memory, better radio. We already had the conversation about the benefit of having a defined ceiling on capacity.

@Lee, "I consider the Anan more a science project than a full developed, plug-in play radio". FRS has acknowledged 1.5 is their science project. Predistortion filter, it wasn't that long ago it was a theoretical paper with a small proof of concept, now it is part of the radio. Many people have acknowleged their purchase of the Flex was precisely for the science project aspect of it. By definition, just as PSDR was a work in progress (still is by the open source community) so is the 6000 engine. People bought the premise it isn't done growing up yet.  You bought a Mustang, I bought a Challenger. You won't win any arguments trying to say the Challenger sucks, simply say you like Fords and let it go. This shouldn't be a religious war.

KY6LA_Howard

DRAX

Before you make any decisions, I suggest you might want to read my presentation on SDR-101

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10740053/Modern%20Radio%20SDR-101%20V2.pdf

Basically the ANAN Product is a 2nd Generation **** Pipe SDR

The Flex 6000 Series is a 3rd Generation Thin Pipe SDR

In my professional opinion, you will likely see in the near future most 2nd Generation SDR products like the ANAN start to migrate to a 3rd Generation SDR Platform..  The difficulty they face for such as migration is that they will have to write software from scratch.. a daunting task as Flex has shown...

The ANAN is not a Direct Competitor for the 6000 series as it clearly serves a very different market.

If you want to save a lot of $ and have time an energy to do a science project yourself, then the ANAN might be what you want. 

Greg Johnson

I have to say, I have both in my shack. They both have ups and downs. The Apache qsk is the least of my issues and I operate cw 99%. If I was mandated to only own one, I would choose the one with best audio on weak signals. Both of these rigs are built well. its not quality. Both are unique.

Most flex only operators have been spoon fed misconceptions about the Anan. pure signal and slices are always big buzz words In this hobby. sell what you have. its business.

Greg kc8iir

Lee - N2LEE

Walt, maybe I should have said the hardware is more of a science project.

Also this is not a war, the key is defining how you plan to use a radio and apply the features need to your decision. I outlined my decision making process, that doesn't mean its right for everyone.

Walt - KZ1F

Lee, I did not mean to imply you were making it a religious war. There are those on this board that do that though. Someone who buys something else, someone who wants a hard, physical, through it in your suitcase remote head, are somehow misguided. I've seen in print on here Flex 6000 owners that didn't truly love their radios didn't deserve to have them. It is that righteous indignation on the part of some and the silent acquiescence by others that, very much, at times makes this sort of discussion a religious war.

Norm - W7CK

Too bad Powersdr couldn't be used with the 6000 while we were waiting for SmartSDR to be developed.  Not much of a reason to consider it now, but 2 years ago it would have been pretty nice....

Barry N1EU

Like Greg, I tend to consider the ANAN more of a worthy competitor.  Flex wins on lower latency, quality of construction, and support.  ANAN wins on current software state (e.g. PSDR features, Pure Signal, etc) and price, esp. for dual diversity receivers.  I don't buy the ****/thin pipe difference - OpenHPSDR is actively developing a thin pipe adaptation by inserting a low cost high performance single board dedicated computer (e.g. Jetson TK1) between SDR and PC.

Flex is a more "finished" product than ANAN, stemming from its experimental/open-source roots.  That being said, some folks actually prefer the experimental/open-source experience but most probably don't like that level of tinkering, esp. with computers.

Barry N1EU

Mark Gottlieb

The ANAN was very tempting to purchase when I was considering the upgrade from my FLEX 3000.  However, it became a practical decision for me.  For equipment this expensive, I wanted the customer service conncetion that FLEX offered in the USA.  I have had good experience with the folks in Texas whenever I did have a question.  I purchased the FLEX 6300 and have not been disappointed.  

KY6LA_Howard

@Barry You are just confirming what I said in that with theJetson board the Anan will be Evolving from a 2nd Gen SDR **** Pipe into a 3Rd gen Thin Pipe SDR. But clearly it is a work in progress.

Bill -VA3WTB

The thin client and thick client is very important. With thin client, in the future Flex will be able to take the Flex places that Anan simply can't follow with thick client. For this reason, and it seems clear Anan knows they are soon hitting a wall. That's why they also see thin client as important for their future. I think this is what may bother me about buying an Anan. In order for upgrades they have to keep building and installing parts, change out boards, make more cases to house things.

Bill -VA3WTB

( I've seen in print on here Flex 6000 owners that didn't truly love their radios didn't deserve to have them.)
That comment was made by a couple members and does not reflect the collective thoughts of most on this site.
Also keep in mind this is a place were Fexers come to discuss.To be sure as soon as people talk about their reasons for buying their Flex they would be called members of a Choir or fan boys. So be it than.

Walt - KZ1F

@Bill, there is nothing wrong with liking the Flex. I've never said I disliked it. I do, however, dislike the UI. Before I ordered the 6000 I was told by a FRS employee that the 6000 series, unlike the 1500, 3000, 5000, would not require Microsoft Windows to run. While that is, in a strict technical sense, a true stmt, as delivered by FRS it is patently false. SSDR for Windows strongly implies there will be a SSDR for Mac, or Linux, or Android. In order for that to happen someone will have to do a trademark violation to use SSDR in their product's name. I won't disclose how I know that, suffice it to say I know that. As it happens, I can mitigate the UI problem. Again, some people like Chevy's, some people like Fords. As for the thick client/thin client debate. If you ask a software person, SSDR is also a thick client, just smaller footprint than PSDR. RHR is a thin client. Within the next year, I will put out a thin client for the Flex 6000. Right now I am focusing on a highly portable SSDR. Of course, nothing is more highly portable than a web app that runs in a browser, be it Firefox, Chrome, or even IE.

My point was this. If someone says, I purchased my Flex because:
1) it requires a smaller computational footprint than the prior FRS products.
2) it has a much more robust filter system than the competition.
3) It is made in the USA
4) it has a more sensitive receiver than the competition.
5) It reflects the state of the art for radio technology.
6) It has virtually unlimited potential for a third party UI

those and more like those are all valid technical reasons. If, however, the rationale looks like this:
1) the competition sucks.
2) my flex radio is dreamy
3) I have a distinct advantage dxing because of  Flex perfection
4) I imagine the Flex code has to be beautifully elegant <- I actually heard that on 40 mtrs
5) The employees of FRS are the smartest people ever.

well, I'd expect to hear those comments and rationale from a .... And that is choir-speak. One can't have a rationale conversation with people ascribing to that justification.

You said, "That comment was made by a couple members and does not reflect the collective thoughts of most on this site". I might agree except, as I said, "It is that righteous indignation on the part of some and the silent acquiescence by others that, very much, at times makes this sort of discussion a religious war".

I would very much like to see others challenge the rhetoric and derisiveness of those that engage in that discourse.

Walt - KZ1F

@Bill, "With thin client, in the future Flex will be able to take the Flex places that Anan simply can't follow with thick client. For this reason, and it seems clear Anan knows they are soon hitting a wall". Why do you say that? That's a sincere question. I ask because I believe it is just the opposite. If the computer is the radio, the user can add more memory, buy a faster computer with more memory and that provides for expansion for growth and new features. When the memory is in the radio chassis and the software is in the radio chassis, that caps what can be done in the radio chassis. Adding UI changes does not add features to the radio's base functionality.

This is a good thing actually because for FRS to have long term survivability they have to sell more product than release upgrades. Simply put, there needs to be a "7000 series" in their future. I suspect we all want FRS to be healthy and survive, I know I do..

W7NGA

This allegiance to a radio and manufacturer is sophomoric. My Flex 6300 has a beautiful receiver, but I find the transmitter problematic in several areas. Listening on the bands and on several nets, I sometimes cringe when I hear such poorly sounding Flex 6000 series transmitters on AM. Listen to the 20-meter Flex net objectively and be really critical. Yes, there are setup requirements that ameliorate problems, but my listening and comparisons exemplify that the ANAN modulation sounds better .. generally.

I am far more interested in the receiving section and user-interface and therefore made the decision as I did.

dan  W7NGA
San Juan Island, Wa.

Bill -VA3WTB

I say that's because of the direction Flex wants to go in the future and I don't know what all the plans are. The reason they went to SSDR and left PSDR is because PSDR can not be made to do what they want to do. They hit a wall in PSDR as stated by Gerald. Anan is working on a thin client fix, as they know they will need to. SSDR is already thin client.

Lee - N2LEE

Walt, the world HAS already moved to thin clients in almost every aspect of computing. Just look at the growth in mobile computing and what can be done with an iPad and a simple app. Just look at the growth in PC sales, they continue to drop as more and people use mobile devices.

I am not a hardware engineer but I would bet the 6000 series has WAY more capability than you are giving it credit.

Bill -VA3WTB

I can't speak to all the check ins on the 20M net. But I talk to several people each weekend with their Flex 6000's and they have some of the finest audio on the ham bands. But they did take the time to get them that way. Most of the Anan's that do sound very good are running a lot of audio gear before the radio, virtual audio also. It all depends how we set them up and EQ them.

Walt - KZ1F

Lee, I am very familiar with not only the distinction between thin and **** clients but also when that transition in the software industry took place. It occurred before mobile.

Walt - KZ1F

I actually like the recieve audio on the 6000 and have received many praises on the quality of my audio when I do operate SSB. I only tried AM once and got politely brushed off, not because of the radio but because I was trying to do AM on 100 W and the group of AMers was saying that I really needed to be pushing power behind the signal as I was sporadically fading into oblivion and just over the noise floor best case. But I don't pretend to be an AM aficionado.

Steve K9ZW

The ANAN series of radios hasn't caught my interest enough to open my checkbook. 

The Flex-6000 has - and enough to buy two.  (I didn't want to drag a 6700 with me on weekend excursions, so I bought a 6300 to do that).

Greatly respect the teams behind and using both. 

These are co-existing options, neither which is going to threaten the other in the marketplace. 

That many hams have both is a direct reflection that enough product differentiation exists to make both successful.

How either works for a particular ham is more about the ham than the radio.

Here is my personal take and decision making - YMMV and it really should vary:

Overall I do consider the Flex-6000/SmartSDR to be 'leading edge" in full production product, rather than a mixture of "bleeding edge' and cobbled-legacy in the ANAN/PowerSDR+ combination.

I'm also much more comfortable with the 6700/6300 being supported & operational rigs 5 & 10 years from now than the HPSDR/ANAN radios.

Realistically I don't consider myself "techie" enough with enough free-time to really extract what I get from the Flex-6000/SmartSDR from the ANAN/PowerSDR+.

As an added plus the people I've met from FRS are people who I'd like to work with and make me feel comfortable with what I've purchased and that they will get to where they say they are going. 

I've yet to have a chance to meet the ANAN team, which if I had might be a reason to add an ANAN.  Can't say though.

YMMV and never lose sight that if a radio inspires you to enjoy the hobby, then it is by at least my definition "A Good Radio."

73

Steve K9ZW

Lee - N2LEE

@billAnan is working on a thin client fix, as they know they will need to. SSDR is already thin client.

It is my understanding that the way they are going to achieve this is adding NVIDA CUDA cpu boards and running multiple copies of Powersdr on those boards. Again I am not a hardware engineer but this seems like a hack approach. This is why I keep referring to the Anan as a science project.

Walt - KZ1F

"How either works for a particular ham is more about the ham than the radio."
"if a radio inspires you to enjoy the hobby, then it is by at least my definition "A Good Radio"
Amen brother! And if there is a technical difference of 1db on the noise floor or 3rd order dynamic range, is anybody going to hear that difference?

Bill -VA3WTB

Walt, funny thing, I wrote an article that touched on this subject. People say things and emotions run high as they feel they must justify spending so much money on a radio.