Request DAX Audio Output/Input for External Audio Processing Gear Use When Remote

  • 1
  • Idea
  • Updated 9 months ago
When operating SmartSDR remote and using the excellent built-in Opus codec, there is no way to export the TX audio as received at the radio location in order to use external TX audio processing gear, then insert the processed audio back into SmartSDR.  Many operators have external audio processing equipment with much more than simple EQ like the W2IHY EQplus, commercial audio processors, etc.  As of now, only the local shack mic can get to external audio gear.  Request a software update to permit DAX audio from the remote mic to be routed out into either HW (via radio rear panel or sound card connection), and/or out via sw export into PC software based external audio processing systems.  Hopefully others are interested in using their external audio processing gear (HW and SW systems) with the remote mic audio from DAX.
Photo of Steve W4YHD

Steve W4YHD

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 2 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Mike va3mw

Mike va3mw

  • 824 Posts
  • 195 Reply Likes
Hi Steve

Is there a need to really do this considering the built in EQ on SSDR and the Maestro as well as CESSB (or a version of it) also included in SSDR and the Maestro?  

http://www.arrl.org/files/file/QEX_Next_Issue/2014/Nov-Dec_2014/Hershberger_QEX_11_14.pdf

What processing is in the W2IHY EQPlus that isn't already included with your Flex solution?  Would that not result in over processing of our audio?

Just curious.

Mike va3mw
Photo of Steve W4YHD

Steve W4YHD

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Mike,  
The TX audio processing options in SmartSDR are OK; EQ, Downward expander, CESSB.  These are basic and effective, however many of us enjoy the art and science of audio processing that is much more advanced.  Goal here is to provide clear clean audio with more variables that are more effective than those options provided by SmartSDR.  The W2IHY EQplus provides a nice audio compressor and downward expander working together, and an effects processor, and basic EQ.  Others use professional audio processing solutions such as Orban 9200, 9300, 9400 and PCn-1600 solutions from the broadcast industry.  There are many more from Behringer, and many others in HW and SW, etc.  Oh yes, many will say that any TX external audio processing is not necessary or silly, however anyone in the professional communications or broadcast industries understand the high value of this technology.  Properly used it is very valuable in front of the basic Flex options.  Anyone can screw this up of course, and many do.  TX audio processing options are vast and useful in Amateur Radio, for those willing to listen.
Photo of Juha Jussila

Juha Jussila

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Steve,
I am in the same boat with you and wondered how you ended up solving this?  The way you explained the need to any of this external audio processing stuff is bang-on, IMO.  Flex offers an excellent "platform" to further experiment and develop the art of audio processing which is what I am thrilled about.
I am contemplating SDR  (6400M) for the first time and have used hardware processors of the 19" rack mount type,  but have transitioned over to software based processing only.  Using Live Professor 2 (LP 2),  Steinberg UR22 USB/Audio Interface and 3rd party plug-ins that run inside LP 2 with excellent results.
I guess what I am asking is what is the most straightforward way to feed the audio processed by the PC to the Flex?
Sure would appreciate hearing back from you or anyone else out there!
Cheers,
Juha
NI2M
(Edited)
Photo of Mike va3mw

Mike va3mw

  • 824 Posts
  • 195 Reply Likes
When using it remote, can you not inject the audio at your sitting location and before it is sent to the radio end?

Thanks for the details.

Mike va3mw
Photo of Steve W4YHD

Steve W4YHD

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
When operating remote, typically the remote equipment is minimal; PC with microphone/headset, Maestro with mic, iPad or smart phone with earbuds w/mic, all to keep things lightweight and easily portable.
Most audio processing gear is not designed to be portable, is tabletop size or rack mount, and/or sw running on a PC at the home shack perhaps.
Complete audio injected at the sitting location would require all audio gear to also be at that sitting location.
Goal here is to provide the option to have access and to use the TX audio gear already mounted in the shack with the transceiver, when operating remote with the minimal gear laying at the pool or in a hotel room.
Many op's don't care about TX audio beyond basics, and that is great!  Many others however would like to have access to that audio equipment used in the shack when remote.  All part of the fun here :-)
Photo of km9r.mike

km9r.mike

  • 425 Posts
  • 62 Reply Likes
Steve,

The only actual experience I have with tx audio processing is with what is available w/in SSDR so please bear with me. In your opinion, the level of processing that you are trying to achieve, can that be accomplished w/ software or is external hardware the only way to achieve this ?  I like what is provided w/in SSDR, however, having the ability to take that to the next level would be neat as well but can that only be accomplished with external audio processing hardware ?
Photo of Steve W4YHD

Steve W4YHD

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Not talking about any extreme level of audio processing here, just more advanced and different external ways to do it with excellent results for what you want to achieve. DX'ing, Rag Chew, or HiFi. 
The hardware options are the most common because; no PC is required in the shack or to be running, hardware does not have the latency issues associated with sw processing options, hardware can be easier to use and often are lower cost.  Software solutions are typically more sophisticated and feature rich, require a PC to operate, suffer from some latency, and often cost more.  So many options available out there for TX audio processing fun.
Remember that all pro Radio Broadcasters, TV, Internet streaming, etc. use audio processing beyond what Flex provides.  Smart SDR provides a good set of the basics, no doubt.
External audio processing options can do much better for those that are interested, and these options can be either hardware or software based.
Most Amateurs interested in audio use some external audio processing, then use the CESSB in Smart SDR as an additional light amount of peak audio limiting that is distortion free.
Again, TX audio processing (done right!) is just one aspect of the hobby only some are interested in, and as one might expect the Flex radios are so clean that they host this great audio perfectly and are preferred in this area.
Photo of km9r.mike

km9r.mike

  • 425 Posts
  • 62 Reply Likes
Thanks Steve. Like I said my experience with this is very limited. It also seems that providing access to this remote tx audio once it gets back to the flex SS rig for processing in external audio hw would be the route to go vice expanding the audio processing abilities of SSDR. Even if FRS took the effort to develop a leading edge audio processing suite for SSDR history has shown there would still be those who complain that it did work like or wasn't controlled like or didn't sound like their old tube audio gear (purely an example and not a reflection of you in the least).
Photo of Carmine Iannace, W1EQX

Carmine Iannace, W1EQX

  • 45 Posts
  • 15 Reply Likes
You should be able to easily use a software based audio processor with Smart SDR and VAC to route audio from the the shack mike through the processor and out to the Flex 6000 series radio. For example Stereo Tool is a professional multiband AM and FM broadcast audio processor available for free or a nominal cost depending what functionality you want.