Is ANF Working Better in V3 ?

SteveM

Yes you are allowed an opinion, Craig. Even a really, really boring opinion which "not bring any useful information".

Neal Pollack, N6YFM

OK, good report.   That is a proper and fine example of a detailed problem report.
Thanks!

SteveM

Why? Does it state whether Flex fixed ANF in v3?

Neal Pollack, N6YFM

Also, since Flex has a very small engineering group, it might be more effective for
them to license the Auto-Notch software code from HDSDR rather than spend a year inventing a new module on their own.  But they will need to decide on that.

In the mean-time, it sounds like defining a manual notch, parking it at the edge of the
band, and sliding it into place when needed, might be the best work-around I have read about in this thread.

Cheers,

Neal

SteveM

Yes, that's been the recommended work-around going on 5 years now - forget automatic, do it manually. Previous to v2.4.9, people were using this work-around and then began complaining that, over time, TNFs would be scattered all about the spectrum and then were too time consuming to remove. So Flex decided to add a "Remove All TNFs" function to v2.4.9. I guess that was one solution, but I would have thought fixing ANF is the better solution.

Bill -VA3WTB

I am not a Flex employee


None of the HPSDR code can work with SSDR.

Mark K1LSB

And how do you know that?

Once again, you come across as being privy to information that only an insider could possibly know.

1) To make the statement you made, you'd need to know (as a minimum) what language each program (HDSDR and SSDR) was/is written in.

2) Furthermore, you'd need to be enough of an expert at coding digital audio processing routines to know for a certainty that the algorithms used by each program are 100% incompatible insofar as being able to share any snippet of code logic between the two.

And I'm betting you're pretty much clueless on both counts.  If you weren't you'd be flaunting your credentials in every post you make.

So I ask you, how can you sit there and make such absolute declarations as the one in your post above?

Jeez!..and you wonder why I summarily dismiss so much of what you post!

EDIT:

Bill,

I just realized that you said "None of the HPSDR code can work with SSDR", which is correct.

However, HPSDR has never been previously mentioned on this page, though HDSDR has been mentioned nearly a dozen times.

So your statement, even though probably correct, is nonetheless irrelevant to the discussion.

I must concede I missed the nuance that you weren't talking about HDSDR, while you had a dozen opportunities to catch (and still missed) the fact that we were never talking about HPSDR. So I don't feel so bad.

Regards,

Mark K1LSB

Scott N8UMW

The part about the noise blanker. Hilarious. V1.5 was a while ago and they still have not achieved parity with the old rigs and software, let alone raise the bar. And we're up to v3. Yay

Bill -VA3WTB

This was a comment from the discussion.

Also, since Flex has a very small engineering group, it might be more effective for
them to license the Auto-Notch software code from HDSDR rather than spend a year inventing a new module on their own.
  My coment was:  None of the HPSDR code can work with SSDR.

My mystake, I'm sorry that I misread, I read HPSDR instead of HDSDR. 
I was not aware that the source code for HDSDR could work in SSDR code.

Neal Pollack, N6YFM

Bill:

I have no knowledge of HPSDR or HDSDR either, other than having used HDSDR.
I was simply suggesting that sometimes it is far faster to license an algorithm
than to invent it yourself.    Since I have not looked at the source code, you are
right, perhaps the code licenses, GPL, etc, come into play, blocking use by
commercial companies.

That said, I know for a fact that the actual author of any software, open or closed
source, GPL or whatever, has the right to dual-license it as they see fit.
In my "day job" with a very large corp, we would regularly approach the holder
of a GPL licensed code module we wanted to use in a commercial product, and
ask them to also license that same code directly to us under the BSD or MIT 
license so that we could actually put the code into a commercial product.
For the appropriate compensation most were usually happy to do so.
Some, not so much.

It is really Flex's discretion to decide to try to do it all in-house, or to try to
leverage work that is already completed by making agreements.  Their choice.

Cheers,

Neal

Bill -VA3WTB

Interesting thoughts Neal.
Using Geralds remarks, Flex is going about this in a very uncontional way, using wide band code. I don't think it is a matter of them not being able to pull this off as much as just not using the resources to get back to the project.