Hi All,
I was talking to the guys from Flex this weekend at the ARRL Centennial convention the subject was brought up about future ability to be able to right click RX filters per mode and customize and save them. PowerSDR had this feature. For example, edit the 1.6K button, rename it to 2.0K and change the low cut and high cut to 300/2300 Hz.
I'd like to see how much interest there is in this ability. I know I would like to have different filter buttons than the default six buttons.
Dave, wo2x
David Decoons wo2x, Elmer
Posted 6 years ago
Lee, Elmer
That was a suggestion of mine from the early days of the SDR-1000 and I think it was implemented by Eric. I always wanted to have one spot dedicated to the narrowest bandwidth possible.
73 W9OY
73 W9OY
Thanks for that, Lee. I made custom filters for cw and each digital mode
that I used.
Ned, K1nj
that I used.
Ned, K1nj
This is a highly desirable feature, especially for contesting and CW operation. Another nice touch for the CW ops would be to save an IF Shift offset along with the high cut/low cut frequencies.
Paul Christensen, W9AC, Elmer
> "I like to listen to a low "growl" of the background with the CW signal standing out in contrast at around 400-450 hz. Adjusting the IF shift becomes less and less effective (or even noticeable) as the filter width drops below 250 hz because the IF bandwidth itself is so narrow that the contrast between the pitch of the background noise and the CW note becomes negligible."
Charles,
I do the same here for CW widths that exceed about 500 Hz. On larger CW widths, I always pull the lower skirt to the CW offset frequency -- in my case it's 600 Hz. This ensures "single signal" reception so that close-in signals on opposite side of the center frequency are fully suppressed. Also, by setting the lower skirt to the offset, the full CW audio background is maintained. (i.e., the growl you mentioned).
Paul, W9AC
(Edited)
Ned & Stan,
I did some more experimenting and made a short video. The setup is 2 slices with one set for a 50 HZ filter and the other set for a 10 HZ filter. There is a carrier at 14.016.8
First - the 50 HZ slice will move up and over the carrier so you can hear when the signal first is heard and when it stops being heard. It then rests at a frequency a little below where you first hear the carrier and the sound is muted.
Second - the 10 HZ filter is un-muted and moved up and over the carrier. You will notice although the BLUE filter line is much narrower, the sound starts and stops at the same locations as the 50 HZ filter.
Does this support the theory that the 10 HZ filter is still 50 HZ wide? And that only the display is 10 HZ wide? Thoughts?
Regards, Al / NN4ZZ
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
I did some more experimenting and made a short video. The setup is 2 slices with one set for a 50 HZ filter and the other set for a 10 HZ filter. There is a carrier at 14.016.8
First - the 50 HZ slice will move up and over the carrier so you can hear when the signal first is heard and when it stops being heard. It then rests at a frequency a little below where you first hear the carrier and the sound is muted.
Second - the 10 HZ filter is un-muted and moved up and over the carrier. You will notice although the BLUE filter line is much narrower, the sound starts and stops at the same locations as the 50 HZ filter.
Does this support the theory that the 10 HZ filter is still 50 HZ wide? And that only the display is 10 HZ wide? Thoughts?
Regards, Al / NN4ZZ
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
I have no test data to prove it, but I have observed a difference in response on my 6500 when dragging CW filters narrower than 50. (Usually 25-30) But I only find it usefull on noisy bands like 160/80 under certain conditions. Usually 50 is enough. And I also use the RXEQ with 500 all the way up and all the rest at bottom. I use a 500 Hz side tone so don't need the 1k slider up at all. APF is helpful, but still needs a little bit of tweaking.
Watch the S meter closely. In both cases it rises as you approach the carrier, holds steady across the blue, drops as you move away from the carrier. From much earlier conversations you can view the skirts of the filter and watch the AGC function.
The filter top (blue portion for 10 or 50Hz) is flat and the skirts are the same on either pass.
I am impressed with how well this filter functions. Steve has said the filters could be made sharper at the expense of more delay. Not necessary in my opinion. Perhaps the mathematicians and coders can improve the skirts; but it can wait, at least after NB.
It is hard to imagine better skirts on these filters, especially the SSB "Brick Wall" filters. The CW filters are nothing short of amazing in my book! I understand that the Digi filters have a bit less slope performance, but that is to reduce latency. Still, they are better than anything I have ever used before, and a generation better than PowerSDR's, which were my previous favorite!
Lee, Elmer
The issue is one of bandwidth vs data transfer. A carrier has basically no bandwidth. As soon as you start keying a bandwidth develops. A 10hz filter therefore may be too sharp to be able to demodulate the information contained in the signal. The bandwidth generated is a function of data rate. A 100 wpm CW signal has a wider bandwidth than a 10wpm CWsignal. Signal to noise on the other hand is also a function of bandwidth. As the band width decreases the relative signal to noise increases. So what you want is the least bandwidth capable of sustaining intelligent demodulation at whatever the data rate is. My experience for most CW is about 25hz-30hz bandwidth. Does this really matter? If you are trying to receive a signal basically under the noise it matters. It's not dramatic but subtle. If you add things like diversity which again often adds a subtle improvement pretty soon you are copying what you could not copy before. The point of course is you want to design filters for signals with bandwidth, and not just something that is amazingly sharp on signals with no bandwidth.
73 W9OY
73 W9OY
(Edited)
Right on point, Lee. Combine 25-50 Hz filters, tweak the audio chain noise with the RXEQ, add a little APF, fine tune the AGC-T to find the "sweet spot" (or carefully adjust gain level with AGC OFF) and I am copying signals that I never would have even noticed before. Add a super-zoomed panafall display that lets me see a signal before I even begin to tune for it, and "the hits just keep on coming!"
I am really looking forward to customizable filter buttons. I would gladly lose the widest one or two CW filters and add a 25 Hz at the other end. I hardly ever use anything even as wide as 400Hz, but then I am seldom on the receiving end of a CW pileup, or running a frequency during a contest. (This may change when my tower and Log Periodic go online!)
I am really looking forward to customizable filter buttons. I would gladly lose the widest one or two CW filters and add a 25 Hz at the other end. I hardly ever use anything even as wide as 400Hz, but then I am seldom on the receiving end of a CW pileup, or running a frequency during a contest. (This may change when my tower and Log Periodic go online!)
Ken and Lee,
Just updated to 1.2.17 to see if it would make a difference.
However I still cannot drag the filter so that the number in the middle of
the bottom of the tuning trapezoid to less than 50. Are you both able to
do that with your 6500 and 6300?
Ned, K1NJ
Just updated to 1.2.17 to see if it would make a difference.
However I still cannot drag the filter so that the number in the middle of
the bottom of the tuning trapezoid to less than 50. Are you both able to
do that with your 6500 and 6300?
Ned, K1NJ
Figured out how to do this by grabbing the vertical filter edges instead
of moving the mouse up/down at the base of the filter center line. All OK.
Ned, K1NJ
of moving the mouse up/down at the base of the filter center line. All OK.
Ned, K1NJ
Peter K1PGV, Elmer
_large.png)
Older thread but found it after taking delivery on a new M radio. I miss the ability to program filters as mentioned above. The 250 filter is my most common used CW filter and its not available in the right panel and only available on the slice. I was able to set filter widths on my "non smart" Icom transceivers so seems like the SMARTEST radio should be able to do it.
That said what brought me here was functionality of my new 6600M. I probably should start a new thread but will add it here unless told otherwise. Toggling through 8 filters on the BW select on the new radios (and Maestro) does not work well. That's to many filters and if you go past the one you want you have click 6 or 7 times to get back. Typically 3 filters is enough and some might argue they want 4 of their choice.
I would like it see a press and hold on the filters so you can choose knob delectable filters.
In the photoshop below I added a tab on the corner of the filter but could be a star or anything else.
I am sue there will be a lot of changes in the future with the "M" interface as the amount of users is going to dramatically increase but I think thinks would be a great addition.
Rich
That said what brought me here was functionality of my new 6600M. I probably should start a new thread but will add it here unless told otherwise. Toggling through 8 filters on the BW select on the new radios (and Maestro) does not work well. That's to many filters and if you go past the one you want you have click 6 or 7 times to get back. Typically 3 filters is enough and some might argue they want 4 of their choice.
I would like it see a press and hold on the filters so you can choose knob delectable filters.
In the photoshop below I added a tab on the corner of the filter but could be a star or anything else.
I am sue there will be a lot of changes in the future with the "M" interface as the amount of users is going to dramatically increase but I think thinks would be a great addition.
Rich
I also would like programmable filter widths. As far as toggling through all filter widths, you can mark your favorites and then toggling only sees these so maybe 3 or 4 (your choice) instead of 8.
Well I have a red face. LOL
Not only is that feature available, its exactly what I photo shopped.
OK, I better get the manual out again :)
Sorry for the waste of bandwidth. And yes, I still want programmable filters.
Rich
Not only is that feature available, its exactly what I photo shopped.
OK, I better get the manual out again :)
Sorry for the waste of bandwidth. And yes, I still want programmable filters.
Rich
At
this point I have giving up on waiting for new features in SSDR I
just take them as they come.
At the current pace that SSDR is being developed it may be 4
to 8
years before SSDR has a feature set including so many of these basic
features.
Now
don't get me wrong what FRS has achieved with SDR radio is nothing
less than remarkable and
what SSDR and
the 6000 series
does today it does very well. I like many of you know that the 6000
platform are the finest radios available today.
My
hope now is after the dust settles with the launch of the new
radios and amplifier that FRS puts a lot more resources into SSDR
development.
(Edited)
Tim - W4TME, Customer Experience Manager
It will.
I agree with all this John. I guess there are pros and cons to dealing with small company's.
I personally think Flex has the best thing going for HF radio. But, I doubt anyone will argue that some updates don't come as fast as we would like.
That said, I sure hope we don't lose the small company feel and support that we currently have if they grow large enough to handle the above mentioned updates.
It's often hard to have both. I am still bitter over large company treatment from Yaesu on a FT-980 in the mid 80s and have never bought another of their products since.
Rich
I personally think Flex has the best thing going for HF radio. But, I doubt anyone will argue that some updates don't come as fast as we would like.
That said, I sure hope we don't lose the small company feel and support that we currently have if they grow large enough to handle the above mentioned updates.
It's often hard to have both. I am still bitter over large company treatment from Yaesu on a FT-980 in the mid 80s and have never bought another of their products since.
Rich
My feeling about Kenwood match yours about Yaesu, but I reserve real hatred for Microsoft.
(Edited)
I did find this in the manual but it was not easy. I have an edit suggestion for the manual.
I could only find a single reference on how to custom set the filters that are selectable via the knob under "HOW TO OPERATE SINGLE SIDEBAND MODE (SSB)" and did not see it under CW or any other mode.
It seems the most appropriate place to have this info (which is where I looked) is here.
Rich
I could only find a single reference on how to custom set the filters that are selectable via the knob under "HOW TO OPERATE SINGLE SIDEBAND MODE (SSB)" and did not see it under CW or any other mode.
It seems the most appropriate place to have this info (which is where I looked) is here.
Rich
(Edited)
Tim - W4TME, Customer Experience Manager
I have forwarded this to our documentation team. Thanks.
