Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: SDR Pro 2 (Has any compared RX Specs against convention Mid Size HF Radios?  (Read 3093 times)
NN2X
Member

Posts: 242




Ignore
« on: September 17, 2017, 02:54:29 PM »

Hello fellow Ham Operators!

I saw the Sherwood Engineering comparison with the HF Transceivers but not with these latest SDR receivers.

I am just wondering, has anyone compared the SDR Pro 2 against the mid size conventional HF Transceivers?

I just compared the SDR Pro2 with my Kenwood 590s and found that for my location the SDR  Pro2 unit is substantially better than my Kenwood (When using SSB). When I used the NR (Noise reduction) feature (On the SDR), I was able to eliminate the noise, while the Kenwood 590s could only reduce some (Note this was using NR feature)

This is no way an official comparison, but for the casual operator using SSB, for my location, the SDR Pro2, allowed me to work stations I could not work before..Oh yes a spectrum display!

Best

Tom, NN2X

 
« Last Edit: September 17, 2017, 03:03:06 PM by NN2X » Logged
N2DTS
Member

Posts: 736




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2017, 08:03:03 PM »

Some things about sdr radios work better then analog radios, the filter ability and fidelity seem to be much better on even a cheap sdr.
Dynamic range can be more limited.
Logged
K9AQ
Member

Posts: 92




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2017, 06:53:48 AM »

I have an SDR play and use it as a panadapter.  The dynamic range of the SDR Play is not as good as most HF transceivers.  A very strong signal on the same band can overload the SDR and cause the noise floor to be modulated by the strong signal.  The other weakness is the latency.  The latest QST test shows the latency is over 500 ms.  I tried using the audio for the SDR Play as a second receiver and gave up on it because of the latency. 

Otherwise it makes a good panadapter.

Don
K9AQ
Logged
K6BRN
Member

Posts: 458




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2017, 11:41:59 PM »

What K9AQ said.  BTW - the RSP-1 and RSP-2 are not direct sampling SDRs.  They use a chipset with an integral down converter, I/Q splitter and dual ADCs.

Brian - K6BRN
Logged
N2DTS
Member

Posts: 736




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: September 25, 2017, 05:09:44 AM »

Keep in mind, there are at least three different programs that work with the sdr play units.
They can act different and have different features.




Hello fellow Ham Operators!

I saw the Sherwood Engineering comparison with the HF Transceivers but not with these latest SDR receivers.

I am just wondering, has anyone compared the SDR Pro 2 against the mid size conventional HF Transceivers?

I just compared the SDR Pro2 with my Kenwood 590s and found that for my location the SDR  Pro2 unit is substantially better than my Kenwood (When using SSB). When I used the NR (Noise reduction) feature (On the SDR), I was able to eliminate the noise, while the Kenwood 590s could only reduce some (Note this was using NR feature)

This is no way an official comparison, but for the casual operator using SSB, for my location, the SDR Pro2, allowed me to work stations I could not work before..Oh yes a spectrum display!

Best

Tom, NN2X

 
Logged
AB7R
Member

Posts: 228




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2017, 08:05:24 AM »

Isn't the OP referring to the Expert Electronics SDR PRO2 and not the SDR Play?  The SDR Pro2 Is direct sampling and excellent performing radio although only 15W if I remember correctly.  One of the better SDRs I have tried in that class.

73
Greg
AB7R
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!