Stereo & sidetone recording via DAX

John G3WGV

Continuing the quest to integrate the 6500 into my station, attention turns to recording QSOs. My home brew logging program records in stereo. When operating split (in Flex terms, transmitting/listening to the pileup on slice 1 while listening to the DX on slice 0) I have traditionally recorded "DX" on the LH audio channel and "pileup" on the RH channel. This is a fairly common set up.

I have DAX working fine. It creates a mono audio device which I can use with my logging program. I can see that I can allocate the "pileup" slice to a second DAX channel. This is now two separate mono channels. Is there, or is there planned, any way to merge any two selected DAX mono channels into a single stereo channel?

Along the way I also discovered that the DAX channels do not carry sidetone. As a keen CW operator I would obviously rather like to be able to hear what I sent on the recordings. Again, is there an option I am missing, or any plans to provide the sidetone on DAX?

I understand the concept of a rigorous relationship between slice RX and DAX channel but as QSO recording is such a common requirement it seems that it's something that would be useful to have. The alternative, I suppose, is to appropriate the stereo loudspeaker output for recording and connect up to the PC sound card using bits of wire. I'd rather hoped those days were over.

73, John, G3WGV

Ken - NM9P

I haven't tried this yet, but can you put the rig in REMOTE mode and tap the audio from the computer's default sound device driver instead of DAX? I think that would carry side tone audio, as well as reflect DX in one ear and pileup in the other. BUT, you may have latency issues, as the sound needs to go through another sound card driver.....

John G3WGV

Interesting thought. Yes, that might well work and latency isn't really an issue, within reason, as it's just for recording. Except... update: setting remote stops audio to the headphone/LS sockets on the Flex itself, which is understandable. So no, sadly, it doesn't look like it will do what we need.

Sergey R5AU

I think we need request the right fucnionality again via dedicated DAX port with mixing/splitting inside the radio, like from competitors : http://eesdr.com/images/Document/ESDR2_SKIMMER_N1NM.pdf
via deciated VAC output line

Tim - W4TME

Is there, or is there planned, any way to merge any two selected DAX mono channels into a single stereo channel?

DAX is intended for digital mode operation so the audio per channel is slice specific; there is no way to mux the channels together.  We currently do not have any plans to modify this behavior.

John G3WGV

I agree with you Sergey. Reading other related posts it seems that there is some concept of digital sanctity in the DAX stream approach. I can see that in a commercial radio setting and even in some amateur settings but there really should be some way to provide a recording stream that doesn't involve pieces of wire and digital > analogue > digital conversions.

Can this be submitted as a formal new feature request?

Tim - W4TME

Can this be submitted as a formal new feature request?

Of course.  Create an Idea post in the Community and write up your feature request in detail so that others can comment on it.

John G3WGV

OK, well perhaps DAX is the wrong vehicle, although it does seem to be 75% of the way there. Let's talk instead about functional requirements. I believe that there is a strong case for including QSO recording capability into the Flex/SSDR product.

John G3WGV

https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/proposal-qso-recording-stream

K3ZJ - Dave

Note that recording is necessary for serious single operator competitors in the CQ Worldwide and CQ WPX contests, both phone & CW.  Recording capability should provide full compliance with this rules requirement.  The rule in WPX is a mirror image of that in the Worldwide:

"Audio Recordings: Any single operator entrant . . . competing for a top three finish at the (a) World, (b) Continent, or (c) USA levels, must record the transmitted and received audio as heard by the operator for the duration of the contest operation. The recording must be in a common format (e.g., mp3) and should include the audio to each ear as a separate channel. The recording may be requested by the Committee within 90 days after the log deadline to help adjudicate the log. The recording files must be provided by the entrant within 5 days of the request. If no recording is made available, the Committee may reclassify or disqualify the entry."

Ken - NM9P

We currently have DAX Mic Audio Streaming, which I really like, and DAX TX Input Streaming (which is awesome).

It is possible to record both sides of a SSB contact by using DAX Mic Streaming and a receive DAX channel, but it gets dicey when using multiple slices.

It would make good sense to allow either of these two options to configure audio recording...

1) A digital audio output that is identical to the stereo output of the Powered Speaker output, (but at a constant digital level)  this would include L/R panned audio as well s MON and CW Sidetone output to whatever position it is panned, and the outputs of all of the slices that are unmuted, at whatever location to which they are panned.)

2) The ability to run with REMOTE ON in order to send audio our via the windows sound app to the recorder, but still have the ability to have phones and powered speaker controlled either ON or OFF.

This would also require MON and CW Sidetone to be sent to the computer with REMOTE.

I don't know what the different audio CODECs will allow, so this may not be possible without major effort.

Ken - NM9P

John G3WGV

Option 1 does it for me. This is a more inclusive solution than that I proposed at https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/proposal-qso-recording-stream

I think option 2 is less attractive because it is using the remote facility in a way that wasn't intended.

John G3WGV

Ken,

I've taken the liberty of copying your option 1 proposal across to my proposal thread, as I think it is a better solution. Hope that's OK with you!

73, John.

Ken - NM9P

Sure. I like #1 better, too.

John G3WGV

Bringing this back to the top of the pile as it seems to me that something should have happened with this request that was added to the development wish list nearly 8 years ago.