Adjacent Station Interference v1.9

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 3 years ago
I wonder if anyone else has noticed a difference in the level of filtering on adjacent stations with the SSDR v1.9 release? It could just me but it seems to me that the brick wall filtering isn't as solid on keeping them silent with this release. Just curious.
Photo of David

David

  • 320 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes

Posted 3 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Jim Gilliam

Jim Gilliam

  • 944 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes

I have both a 5000 and a 6500 and notice no difference in the out of band rejection. Could be you are confusing in-band stuff with out of band stuff. If there is "bleed over" from an adjacent station due to non-linearity, etc. it is a "valid" in band frequency and you will here it.


Jim, K6QE

Photo of Ross - K9COX

Ross - K9COX

  • 352 Posts
  • 108 Reply Likes
Who said anything about out of band?
Photo of Lewis Cheek

Lewis Cheek

  • 240 Posts
  • 42 Reply Likes
I assume you know, with this release one may adjust sharpness of filters, I don't know if default changed or not from prior release.

Lew
N4CO
Photo of Kevin LaFata / K0KEV

Kevin LaFata / K0KEV

  • 39 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
David,  I was operating last weekend for the first time with 1.9.. And did end up asking myself if something was a little different  (hearing stations 1-2 KHz away, when I didn't remember that being an issue before).  I haven't played with the new filter options yet, so it could very well be it. Maybe the defaults are less sharp.
Photo of David

David

  • 320 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes
Sounds like were sensing the same thing. I will have to try the filter out of the auto mode to sharp (the next and last notch up in the slider).
Photo of Steven G1XOW

Steven G1XOW

  • 292 Posts
  • 129 Reply Likes
if you haven't changed them already, then I found the default filter settings to be less than ideal for DX/contest working (too soft on the slope). The first thing I did was to set them back to the sharp end of the scale and manual not auto.
Photo of Steven G1XOW

Steven G1XOW

  • 292 Posts
  • 129 Reply Likes
faster turns are nice on CW, but of no use in SSB contests if you are going to get clobbered by S9+40 sigs over 5kHz away, as is often the case in the bigger EU contests.
Photo of KY6LA - Howard

KY6LA - Howard, Elmer

  • 3784 Posts
  • 1637 Reply Likes
Which is why the filters are adjustable by MODE - so for SSB they can remain Brick Wall Sharp
Photo of David

David

  • 320 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes
I wonder how the auto setting logic works. It would seem for SSB it would default sharp keeping the Flex brick wall standard in place. But maybe the auto does some sensing and adjusts as necessary. In the limited comparison testing of low latency to sharp I didn't perceive and latency difference but I am not a contester so I probably don't know what to pay attention to to notice.

Thank you everyone for pointing out the filters.
Photo of Stan - VA7NF

Stan - VA7NF

  • 469 Posts
  • 119 Reply Likes

Filters on CW contesting.  The slightly wider slope is great; the broad setting not so. 

On a cluttered band, or with heavy noise/weak signals I move the filters in to under 200Hz.  BUT: With the old filters a station answering slightly off frequency would not be heard, at all; only clue was a signal on the panadapter.  Now that signal is just audible, enough to catch a call. 

Then there were the days with a couple of crystals.  Someone answering could be as much as 25Khz away, and I'm now complaining about 200Hz off frequency;  times have changed.

Photo of W7NGA

W7NGA

  • 451 Posts
  • 190 Reply Likes
Calling CQ and then tuning a big dial above and below your Xtal frequency was a great thrill when you heard a weak signal pounding out your call 20 kHz away. Always gave me goosebumps. T/R Latency was measured by how fast I could flip the knifeblade antenna switch. haha ...
(Edited)