waterfall rate slower now

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 2 years ago
  • Not a Problem
It seems to me the waterfall rate when the Slider is at 100 and you zoom in is slower than it is displaying. The scale has a marker every 2 seconds and I am timing the waterfall at over 3 seconds in that span.

Measuring method
I take a horizontal line in the waterfall produced by noise and I start the stopwatch when it reaches 2 seconds and stop it at 4 seconds. I know I will not be exact, but it is consistently in the 3 seconds range




The Scale changes depending on the rate but anything between 86 and 100 rate will still keep the scale at -2, -4, -6, etc... which is odd. There isn't a clear direct relation between the rate number and the actual speed.

The slower pace of the waterfall was noticeable to my naked eye because before I could easily see the dots and dashes on CW and now they get "mashed" together.

When I zoom out the speed goes back to the correct speed. I can time it with a speed watch and it is consistently 2s vs the 3s when I am zoomed in.
Photo of EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

  • 1730 Posts
  • 530 Reply Likes

Posted 2 years ago

  • 1
Photo of EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

  • 1730 Posts
  • 530 Reply Likes
No one else is seeing this behavior?
Photo of EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

  • 1730 Posts
  • 530 Reply Likes
Trying to get some attention.... has anyone notice this behavior?
Photo of KC9NRN

KC9NRN

  • 324 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
Yes, I noticed it when I installed 1.8.4 last night.
Photo of EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

  • 1730 Posts
  • 530 Reply Likes
Thanks Nordic! Good to know I am not going completely crazy already.
(Edited)
Photo of Tim - W4TME

Tim - W4TME, Customer Experience Manager

  • 9035 Posts
  • 3434 Reply Likes
We timestamp the spectrum data as it is received from the radio.  I'd like to hear if others observe this same behavior before entering it as a defect.
Photo of EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

  • 1730 Posts
  • 530 Reply Likes
Thanks Tim. I feel the same way... I am also very hesitant to call something a defect unless it is seen by others... therefore the sharing with the community.
Photo of KC9NRN

KC9NRN

  • 324 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
I'll be out of town starting this afternoon so I won't be able to verify until Sunday. I'm sure it will be verified either way by others before then.
Photo of EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

  • 1730 Posts
  • 530 Reply Likes
Bumping this.
Anyone seeing this behavior of the waterfall?
Photo of NICETO - EA5ZL

NICETO - EA5ZL

  • 7 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Hi all,

Salvador, following your stopwatch procedure, timestamp is correct in my 6300. Tested for a 10 seconds period.

My system: Core i5, Windows 10 pro anniversary update, 24GB Ram, 456GB SSD, Video card Gigabyte GT730 2GB DDR5.
All drivers provided by the operating system (installed from Zero).



Hope usefull ;-)

73 Ni
EA5ZL
Photo of NICETO - EA5ZL

NICETO - EA5ZL

  • 7 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Full zoom in, no difference. tested now 20 seconds, Android chronometer showed 20.4 sec (possibly not accurate because of the tactil interface. If necessary I can borrow a sports stopwatch from my wife). 

By the way, SSDR full zoom and full screen on 29" LCD.

Best Ni
Photo of EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

EA4GLI - 8P9EH - Salvador

  • 1730 Posts
  • 530 Reply Likes
Moderator you can close this post.
Photo of Tim - W4TME

Tim - W4TME, Customer Experience Manager

  • 9035 Posts
  • 3434 Reply Likes
I am closing this topic as per the poster's request.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.