Why can't I hear a clients audio when he transmits on my radio remotely

Bill -VA3WTB

No problem at all Steve, Meanwhile the rest of us will just continue haveing fun with this great upgrade.

Steve

Bill,
You seem to be involved with a lot of stuff here...perhaps since you read everything you should start a list of what works and what does not work??  And please tell me specifically what is great about this upgrade?  Oh wait, I will look at the user guide and test the features
and through specific instructions then I will know what works...


Edward Armstrong-WB2K

Pat N6PAT

Bill -VA3WTB

You can do the same thing Steve, many have well documented the types of software that works with V3, perhaps if you list what you would like to work we can just tell you if it does.

As far as what I have read, everything is working as intended as far as SSDR V3 is conserned.

And, if you care to read at all, it is very clear what V3 is about and why some, may need it.

Bill -VA3WTB

Pat, really? It is perfectly fine he does not want V3 or cares less about it, I'm not selling anything. but by all means,,the rest of us will continue enjoying a good thing. Pull your horns in and stop being so critical about everything people say.

Pat N6PAT

Bill,

I can no longer take anything you say seriously because of your constant drum beating for Flex.

I really like my Flex 6700. That being said no company gets it right 100% of the time and you need to accept that. Flex is not the God of ham radio. It's just a company that many times has issues - heat sinks falling off, 2 year wait for an amp,  software bugs, etc.

You need to be more objective.

Bill -VA3WTB

Let me make this plain.

I do beat the the Flex drum, and I will continue to do that. I think the Flex company is first rate. But like any other company there are thousands of things that go wrong and I understand that. Flex is not perfect, but looking at the companies record, it is astounding. Flex thinks out of the box, they take risk, they do things no other radio company does, nor can they. It is invitable that things take a while to perfect.

I will keep gaurding against cheap, uninformed comments from people, and it's alway the same ones, always. There is a clear pattern.

Or I could just chose to ignore them and pretend they were never there.

If you have been following my comments over the last few year, and it looks like your hanging on every word I say, you would have read were I have been strong about some things that should have not happened.

Example, not long ago there was a update that made the RF slider move to 100w with each startup. I was the first one to find it and I came down really **** Flex for allowing that to happen and said it was very critical for those using an amp. I did not mix words.
As it was Flex fixed it a week later with a maintenance update.

Also, when the record and playback stopped working correctly I was the fist one to find that, It took me a week trying to get people to look closer at it. I think It is fixed now in V3 and it should be back ported to V2.5

As to the examples you used on how things go wrong with Flex.
The heatsinks were clearly explained, how and why it happened and was delt with in fast order.

For the PGXL, it is common for a company to spend a couple years planning and developing an amp to shipping. When people put a down payment down the amp was only a drawing.

At any rate, I am not going away unless I chose to, you will not and can not bully me to stop posting my comments.

Eric-KE5DTO

Kevin

Not sure who this post is directed to. Bill?

Bill -VA3WTB

Thank you Eric

Bill -VA3WTB

Kevin, he will know...

Kevin

Bill. I don't mean this as a personal attack but you are kind of an instigator. You might notice that many of the conversations you join start going down hill pretty quickly. This is just an observation. A person can have a negative opinion of something but you need to learn to respect that it is that person's opinion. There's no need to get defensive. Even your response, "Thank you Eric" is kind of odd.

Again, please don't take this personally. I'm just saying things might go smoother if you let them take their course.

73. Really,
Kev K4VD

Bill -VA3WTB

I said thank you to Eric because I agree with what he pointed out and that it is something we should all consider.

Dan KG0AQ

Looks like an old topic but I too have been pondering this issue as well. If I, as the control operator cannot monitor the activity going on from the remote station is that not an issue with Part 97.109?

I am not sure the difference between "remotely controlled" and "automatically controlled"? That would be the defining protocol.

§97.109 Station control.

(a) Each amateur station must have at least one control point.

(b) When a station is being locally controlled, the control operator must be at the control point. Any

station may be locally controlled.

(c) When a station is being remotely controlled, the control operator must be at the control point.

Any station may be remotely controlled. (d) When a station is being automatically controlled, the control operator need not be at the control

point. Only stations specifically designated elsewhere in this part may be automatically controlled.

Automatic control must cease upon notification by a Regional Director that the station is transmitting

improperly or causing harmful interference to other stations. Automatic control must not be resumed

without prior approval of the Regional Director.

I too have tried numerous options with SmartSDR AND Smart IOS and have not found a way within the Flex 6XXX to monitor the transitted audio of the "other" station using my equipment. Is this by design?

Thanks, 73

John WA7UAR

In my opinion, both legal ham operators, using any of the controlling points (using SmartSDR) function as their own “control operators” of the one single (remote) Flex Radio Server and so meet the spirit (and the letter?) of 97.107.

I say “letter?” because who could have contemplated the evolutionary ecosystem of a networked Flex Radio when the regulations were first articulated! Still I believe it’s all good because each legal ham operator is a controlling station.

KD0RC

Yes! Each instance of SmartSDR (or Maestro, etc) is a control point at which a control operator is in control.

Mike-VA3MW

@Dan KG0AQ

If you turn on MONITOR, you will hear the other stations transmission.

If you use FTStack on a PC, you can easily monitor the other stations VFO and RX/TX mode as well as disconnect the remote user.

John WA7UAR

@Mike-VA3MW

The issue I have with turning on the MONITOR function Mike is that while it allows you to hear the other station you ALSO hear yourself — causing an interruption (we all know what that kind of feedback can do while we are trying to talk).

The MONITOR is a global feature that is on or off for all clients attached to the Flex server. Changing it so that both operators can optionally listen without having to also hear themselves would be a nice way to monitor audio from a second operator.

Patrick

Using earphones can correct for the feedback loop.

KD0RC

Hi John, I bet that a Node-Red script or a C# program could be written to leave monitor on while you listen and turn it off while you transmit. I'll bet @David Decoons, wo2x or @Alan would have some ideas here.

I will look at a quick and dirty C# program using FlexLib. John, are you running SmartSDR on Windows?

Dan KG0AQ

Mike VA3MQ said

"If you turn on MONITOR, you will hear the other stations transmission.

If you use FTStack on a PC, you can easily monitor the other stations VFO and RX/TX mode as well as disconnect the remote user."

Mike,

My friend across town is using my radio using SmartSDR and Smartlink. I am in my shack next to my 6400. He is using PC Audio within SmartSDR on his laptop and receiving/transmitting fine. I cannot access SmartSDR in my shack because it is in use.

I do use FR Stack and can see him logged in. I can toggle the MON but it does nothing for me on my end. It does turn the MON on for him. I can adjust just about anything in FR Stack but I CANNOT HEAR the QSO going on.

I just want to monitor the live receive and transmit QSO AUDIO going on within my 6400 in my shack? You know, be a control operator. Please advise as to what I am missing here. Thanks,

KD0RC

Hi Dan, You should be able to use SmartSDR from your shack, unless there are already two GUI client instances connected (i.e. your buddy plus one more, or your buddy has two open). This is how MultiFlex works.

Is your friend connecting using SmartSDR and a Maestro? If so, that will lock you out.

Let us know what all is connected and any messages that you get that show you not getting into your radio.

John WA7UAR

@KD0RC

Thanks for those ideas about a C# program (or maybe a future option within FRStack perhaps?) but it has been my experience that MONITOR needs to be a "local" setting for each client (like how AGC is currently). But it is presently a "global" setting. If it gets turned off I do not hear myself transmit (which is good), then it will also be off for the other client as well (both of us are running SmartSDR on Windows) and so they are unable to hear what I am saying when I transmit. Perhaps I'm not using it correctly?

And @Patrick , I use headphones all the time.

KD0RC

Hi John, I will have to experiment with that when I get my radio back. Some things are truly global, some are set per GUI Client session. For example, in a MultiFlex situation, if SmartSDR 1 is set to 25 WPM and SmartSDR 2 is set to 30 WPM, they do not affect each other when it is their turn to transmit. Each station can set their own freq, mode, volume, AGC-T and much more.

I can do a client bind which ties my non-GUI client (on a laptop, Raspberry Pi, Arduino, etc) to one or the other of the two stations. I will then see either 25 or 30 WPM depending on who I am bound to. Until I get a chance to experiment with it, I won't know for sure, but I strongly suspect that the Monitor function will behave like that. If it does not behave that way, then my idea won't work.

I have an experimental program that works fine and can select between two stations logged in using MultiFlex. All I would need to add is the logic to turn Monitor on and off for the selected station (GUI client).

My 6400 is on its way to Austin and is scheduled to get there by Monday. Hopefully the fix will be quick and I will see it again soon. Until then, I can't do much fooling with the API.

Dan KG0AQ

Len, KD0RC stated,

"Hi Dan, You should be able to use SmartSDR from your shack, unless there are already two GUI client instances connected (i.e. your buddy plus one more, or your buddy has two open). This is how MultiFlex works.

Is your friend connecting using SmartSDR and a Maestro? If so, that will lock you out.

Let us know what all is connected and any messages that you get that show you not getting into your radio."

I am using 2.7.6 is that the show stopper? I didn't realize 3.0 opened that particular window of opportunity. Not a contester here so thought 3.0 had no use for me.

Also, If I use SmartIOS I cannot launch SmartSDR locally.

Thanks Len!

KD0RC

Hi Dan. Yes, that is it! To use MultiFlex, you need version 3.x. 3.2.39 is the latest and greatest as of 12/4/2021. I do not recommend other versions of 3 as Flex fixed some issues that can cause corruption of the SD card.

If you upgrade, all stations that you want to connect to your radio need to be upgraded as well. The only cost is to upgrade the radio (server), no cost for the remote stations (clients).

Butch

Is it safe to assume the owner of the transmitter is legal responsible for the transmission content of those using the transmitter remotely? If so, if that capability is not available in SmartSDR, it would make sense to use a 2nd receiver for monitoring remote operations.

KF4HR

John WA7UAR

@KF4HR

This is an interesting discussion.

My thinking is that with a traditional, non-SDR, radio, and where the owner is local to the radio that any guest operator would be under the control of the operator/owner. In fact even a non-ham could transmit as long as the control operator/owner is present.

But with our internet-capable Flex Radio “server”, access is “provided” by the control operator/owner (through a password provided by the owner) — not to any non-ham (because who could supervise remotely if not another licensed operator?) — but only to a qualified ham operator that is being given “complete” access to operate as they wish (subject to their own license restrictions).

Yes, you are the owner of the physical radio and you control all access to that radio, but, how can you be responsible for the operations of another, remote, and qualified/licensed ham?

Maybe I’m just splitting hairs here. But I believe that the remote licensed ham would not be under (nor need to be under) your “control” but could only use your radio with your permission. In my opinion you would not be “legally” responsible for any “bad behavior” on the part of the remote operator. Take all that with a grain of salt of course — I’m no legal beagle. ;-)

WX7Y

Looking at the FCC Part 97 (definitions) https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.3. I think with the Flex the control operator of the station is responsible for the emission of the Station (97.3 #13) and become the control point (97.3 #14).

The radio would NOT operate unless they are at the control point with the proper software or apparatus to run it, also see (97.3 #31).

In this case if a Technician wanted to operate outside his band he would be in violation unless someone with the proper license class was beside them actually being the control operator at the same control point.

This is NOT automatic control as the Flex would have to have a Control operator at a Control point to operate.

This is just my opinion and doesn't mean much.