Welcome to the FlexRadio Community! Please review the new Community Rules and other important new Community information on the Message Board.
The latest SmartSDR Software:
SmartSDR v4.2.20 | SmartSDR v4.2.20 Release Notes
SmartSDR v3.10.15 | SmartSDR v3.10.15 Release Notes
The latest 4O3A Genius Product Software:
The latest 4O3A Genius Product Software and Firmware
SmartSDR v4.2.20 | SmartSDR v4.2.20 Release Notes
SmartSDR v3.10.15 | SmartSDR v3.10.15 Release Notes
The latest 4O3A Genius Product Software:
The latest 4O3A Genius Product Software and Firmware
How to Receive Technical Support::
If you are needing assistance with FlexRadio products, please refer to the product documentation or check the Help Center for known solutions. Need technical support from FlexRadio? It's as simple as creating a HelpDesk ticket.
If you are needing assistance with FlexRadio products, please refer to the product documentation or check the Help Center for known solutions. Need technical support from FlexRadio? It's as simple as creating a HelpDesk ticket.
FLEX 6600M Receiver Test Data
Options
Валерий Смирнов
Member
WHY FlexRadio posted thith --https://www.flexradio.com/flex-6600/
>155 dB Dynamic Range
115 dB 2kHz RMDR
BUT i see
http://www.sherweng.com/table
Dynamic Range = 99 dB
>155 dB Dynamic Range
115 dB 2kHz RMDR
BUT i see
http://www.sherweng.com/table
Dynamic Range = 99 dB
0
Answers
-
To much testing not enough using.
2 -
Craig :-) While I may agree with your statement (yes, it IS an amazing radio), it does not provide
an answer to the original poster.
It is a fair question he asks; why Flex's data and Sherwood's data do not agree, and the likely
answer is testing methodology differences. But until (and if) Flex employees answer, you and me
do not know the answer he is looking for, and we are only speculating.
Cheers. (no harm intended)
Neal3 -
I suspect the >155 db number is referring to blocking dynamic range which would be about right compared to the Flex RMDR claim. The 115 db 2khz RMDR number is 16 db better than Sherwood's test. I've read that there can be a pretty wide variation in this number between ADC chips that are used in the radio. This might answer that question ? Maybe Gerald can weigh in on this ?0 -
Why presume Sherwood has it right? Complete nonsense to treat any single guy as the benchmark setting standard. This has been covered before in the community and Gerald has spoken to it before on the community. Personally I’m less interested in arguing which lab does it technically correct and is less free of economic bias knowing that some of these independent labs have asked to be compensated. They all have skin in the game somehow. More interested in certification labs who professionalism requires best practices. 73 Steve K9ZW1
Leave a Comment
Categories
- All Categories
- 401 Community Topics
- 2.2K New Ideas
- 687 The Flea Market
- 8.6K Software
- 196 SmartSDR+
- 6.6K SmartSDR for Windows
- 200 SmartSDR for Maestro and M models
- 457 SmartSDR for Mac
- 278 SmartSDR for iOS
- 268 SmartSDR CAT
- 220 DAX
- 395 SmartSDR API
- 9.6K Radios and Accessories
- 103 Aurora
- 348 FLEX-8000 Signature Series
- 7.2K FLEX-6000 Signature Series
- 994 Maestro
- 58 FlexControl
- 872 FLEX Series (Legacy) Radios
- 971 Genius Products
- 481 Power Genius XL Amplifier
- 357 Tuner Genius XL
- 133 Antenna Genius
- 321 Shack Infrastructure
- 226 Networking
- 483 Remote Operation (SmartLink)
- 145 Contesting
- 846 Peripherals & Station Integration
- 147 Amateur Radio Interests
- 1.1K Third-Party Software


