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

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Zeus ZS-1 and Anan 10/100 SDR Transceivers  (Read 10846 times)
K9BCT
Member

Posts: 1




Ignore
« on: July 14, 2013, 11:26:28 AM »

 Although there has been some discussion of the Apache-Labs ANAN-10 is a 10+ watt HF + 6M Software Defined Radio multimode Transceiver based on the hermes platform, I am yet to read anything on the new Russian Zeus ZS-1 which purports to be a HF all-mode fully software defined transceiver with direct sampling receiver, direct digital synthesis based transmitter and USB 2.0 interface. (Little concerned about the USB interface as didn't think it fast enough)

Currently have a Flex 5000 and KX-3 but interested in a second SDR for QRP use and wondering whether the ANAN or the Zeus (or some other) would be the best.
Randy, K9BCT
Logged
K3GM
Member

Posts: 1776




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2013, 05:58:12 PM »

I saw the SSB Zeus at Dayton this year, and got to play with it a little there.  It was a nice design. But I was attracted to the open architecture of ANAN radios.  The Zeus radios came with software written by a third party in Russia.  It was a very simple design, but appeared to all modes including digital modes.  I went with an ANAN-100 with its PowerSDR.
Logged
TRACER
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2013, 10:42:21 PM »

Hi all!
I'd like to write some words about ZS-1
ZS-1 developed by PARS LLC in 2010. www.zs-1.ru, groups.yahoo.com/group/zs1sdr.
From this year SSB-Electronic manufactures ZS-1 in Germany under license from PARS LLC. And sales it worldwide.
We are constantly trying to improve our software (ZeusRadio) and bring new features in it.
Soon we are going to release new version with a "better" look. Smiley
http://zs-1.ru/media/kunena/attachments/55/SXSC.png
73!
Alexandr.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2013, 10:54:51 PM by TRACER » Logged
TRACER
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2013, 11:30:30 PM »

BTW, we are still working on firmware too. Always trying to realize new features in the same hardware. Thanks to DUC/DDC SDR technology...
For example, starting from the spring 2013, ZS-1 has built in digital predistortion for TX signal. The worst IMD at full output power is -40 dB.
You can find more results in our yahoo group or webpage.
Here is a screenshot of ZS-1 full power (15W) output TX signal with previous "software look". At RX side of course.
http://zs-1.ru/media/kunena/attachments/55/183noise.png
73!
Logged
NI0Z
Member

Posts: 560


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2013, 06:53:45 AM »

Since you shared this image, I am curious to get your take on the signal bleed showing on the bottom of this image you shared in the waterfall.  What is causing the signal to bleed outside the filter width horizontally? 

Logged

TRACER
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2013, 07:55:14 AM »

Actually nothing... One ZS-1 was in TX mode with filter width 3kHz on 18100kHz.
Another ZS-1 was in RX mode on 18095kHz. RX filter was shifted just for better view.
I hope i understood you right...
Logged
NI0Z
Member

Posts: 560


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2013, 08:11:29 AM »

I am talking about the green horizontal spikes extending out the  sides of the red TX block in the waterfall.

Logged

TRACER
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2013, 08:43:12 AM »

Waterfall dynamic range is set using band noise level. And even a couple of dB causes such green lines.
Maybe slight mic overdrive...
On screenshot is just simple mic noise amplified to "full power".
Plus there are problems with USB hub speed. Both ZS-1 were connected to one USB hub, and it easily handles only one ZS-1. With 2 devices delays in data transfer can appear => noise pops up => green line on waterfall.
Logged
NI0Z
Member

Posts: 560


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2013, 09:04:10 AM »

Thanks, its not unique to the Zeus which is why I asked, I wanted to get your take on what it was. 

I have had my eye on the Zeus for a while.  I wish I could get my hands on one to play with.  If you ever want a review of it I would be happy to take a lender and ensure it gets back to you.

I am working on a new SDR focused Website Portal and that would make a nice feature article.
Logged

TRACER
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2013, 09:42:50 AM »

Thanks, Mark! It would be interesting.
Logged
TRACER
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: August 08, 2013, 05:28:09 AM »

Finally, the new ZeusRadio v2.5 is released.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SM0ZxM1Nzs
You can download and try it even without the ZS-1, just using an IQ file.
http://zs-1.ru/index.php/downloads
http://zs-1.ru/index.php/downloads/category/iq-records
« Last Edit: August 08, 2013, 05:32:04 AM by TRACER » Logged
KB0FX
Member

Posts: 1




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: July 25, 2014, 05:18:16 AM »

I just purchased a ZS-1 from Vibroplex. I am very happy with it and would be happy to answer any questions you may have. You can email me at mweilb@gmail.com
Logged
ZENKI
Member

Posts: 916




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: August 15, 2014, 03:41:32 AM »

Unfortunately there are no validated and acceptable testing protocols for   testing and comparing different SDR radios.

Only SM5BSZ has been doing  a lot of researching comparing the functionality of  different SDR  hardware and software platforms.

 Since traditional  receiver test method has very little relevance  in defining  how SDR radios perform it would be good if some agreement could be made about
how SDR receivers should be tested.

Then the other issues is how  well the transmitters are tested. If you dont identify transmitter issues such as IMD and spurious products that are below standards how can you even say one radio is better than the other. While the ARRL and other  reviewers of equipment ignore and sweep this issue under the carpet, whoever makes claim that brand or the other is better is being deceptive at best.

Another test that would be relevant would be  a   transmitter IMD  or spurious product receiver limited dynamic range number. This would indicate how much a transmitter would limit a receivers dynamic range when considering IMD and spurious products. This number would be specified at 5, 10, 15 20 and 100khz signal spacings and would clearly show how bad  and really bad transmitters impact a receivers performance and the importance of operating a clean transmitter. This is unlikely to happen while people like the ARRL heap accolades on radios that have filthy transmitters with design issues on TX.

The best thing about SDR radios  is that  just about all models have a decent calibrated S-meters that are super accurate. This is a huge  step forward for hams. TX pre-distortion will also be a feature that puts SDR radios well ahead of the junk coming out of Japan.  We unlikely to see a Icom radio with a calibrated S-meter or a TX PA with pre-distortion. The Zeus without pre-distortion has very good IMD performance. I dont know what their 100 watt versions are like in terms of IMD performance. I would encourage Zeus to set the benchmark and make the cleanest SDR transmitter without pre-distortion.

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!