Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Sucessor to 7300/7610  (Read 1232 times)

AF5CC

  • Posts: 1664
    • HomeURL
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2023, 10:59:55 PM »

If anything, I can imagine the manufacturers releasing “digital-only” radios…fixed frequencies with no provision for a mic, key, speaker, or headphones…for under $500. Just a transceiver with a sound card and USB connection to a computer.

Far fetched? I hope so ;).

QRP labs has already done so.  See the March 2023 QST product review.  Does most digital modes but not PSK.

73 John AF5CC
Logged

HAMHOCK75

  • Member
  • Posts: 1297
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #16 on: February 20, 2023, 03:58:50 PM »

Thank you for posting that AF5CC. Here is a link to the QST review. Only $69, less than the cost of the SignaLink sound card I used to have for my FT100D.

https://qrp-labs.com/images/qdx/QST_QDX_Review.pdf
Logged

VK6HP

  • Member
  • Posts: 1222
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #17 on: February 20, 2023, 07:57:12 PM »

I've been following the QRP Labs website for a while and reading the QDX material posted on their site.  While the QDX is not quite the definitive stand-alone all-digital-mode radio, it is a very credible development which does many things right - such as recognizing that analog transceivers and linear amplifiers are neither required nor optimum for many digital modes.

There's a lot of very useful background information in the article by Hans (G0UPL) at: https://qrp-labs.com/images/qdx/fdim2022.pdf  The method of determining the "audio" offset is interesting and I'd be curious to have a look at the very near-in JT mode spectra to compare them with typical analog transceiver spectra.  I suspect they are much improved, as in many all-digital exciters.  Analog exciters (transceivers) are often beset with far more artifacts than most operators realize, simply because they don't measure them, nor check secondary decode levels etc.

One other commendable aspect of the QRP Labs development is that they are making monoband transceivers available for 630 and 2200 m (recognizing the difficulty of very wideband switching in the multi-band units), continuing their support for an LF/MF community often ignored by the likes of Icom and Yaesu - but not Kenwood, Flex, Elecraft, and some others.

One comment I would make is that the QST review is very poor.  For a novel, low-cost and potentially popular kit, I would have expected a more detailed lab review, looking at some potentially interesting points of differentiation with the traditional way of doing the signal generation, transmitting and receiving.  For example, there are no near-in JT-mode spectra, nor any quantitative measurements of receiver performance.  Fortunately, QRP Labs do post some pretty decent transmitter test data on their site which, with a bit of interpretation, presents a fairly favourable view of that side of the radio.

73, Peter.



« Last Edit: February 20, 2023, 08:03:33 PM by VK6HP »
Logged

KF6QEX

  • Member
  • Posts: 788
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #18 on: March 13, 2023, 02:14:49 AM »

Quote
it is a very credible development which does many things right - such as recognizing that analog transceivers and linear amplifiers are neither required nor optimum for many digital modes.
Pptimum and required is what gets your signal to where you want it to go.
If you require to get to Lebanon from California , smoke signals, is not an optimum method.
Neither is 5Watts.

Logged
sdrawkcab daer tseb si txet sihT

VK6HP

  • Member
  • Posts: 1222
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #19 on: March 13, 2023, 03:27:22 AM »

You've missed the point: it's not about the power output so much as the architecture of the radio.  However, leaving aside transceiver signalling systems for FSK, contemporary non-linear RF power amplifiers are capable of competitive outputs at very high efficiencies and spectral purity. 
« Last Edit: March 13, 2023, 03:39:20 AM by VK6HP »
Logged

W1VT

  • Member
  • Posts: 6071
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #20 on: March 13, 2023, 04:29:06 AM »


One comment I would make is that the QST review is very poor.  For a novel, low-cost and potentially popular kit, I would have expected a more detailed lab review, looking at some potentially interesting points of differentiation with the traditional way of doing the signal generation, transmitting and receiving.  For example, there are no near-in JT-mode spectra, nor any quantitative measurements of receiver performance.  Fortunately, QRP Labs do post some pretty decent transmitter test data on their site which, with a bit of interpretation, presents a fairly favourable view of that side of the radio.

http://www.arrl.org/employment-opportunities
Digital RF Engineer
Assist in the development of the testing of the performance of amateur radio equipment in digital operating modes.
Logged

K0UA

  • Member
  • Posts: 9589
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #21 on: March 13, 2023, 07:46:25 AM »

The 7610 and FTdx10 I had both had a monitor output for a big screen and I never used it after cheking it out.
They were not like a computer sdr screen, just bigger versions of the lower res screens on the radios.
I am unsure of the expense added to include a video output...rather have an RX antenna port which costs a relay and jack...

I agree with you about the video monitor port. The 7610 has that of course, and after looking at that at friends shacks, I decided they were of no value. The display on the 7610 is large enough. Even for my old eyes. So no value added there. At least not to my operation. The receive antenna port of the 7610 IS useful, and I do use it. It would be handy on a 7300 also. An audio peaking filter in the 7300 would be a welcome addition for CW. The 7610 has it and I use it a lot. The 7300 does not. Unfortunately.
Logged
73  James K0UA

KF6QEX

  • Member
  • Posts: 788
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #22 on: March 13, 2023, 03:54:49 PM »

You've missed the point: it's not about the power output so much as the architecture of the radio.  However, leaving aside transceiver signalling systems for FSK, contemporary non-linear RF power amplifiers are capable of competitive outputs at very high efficiencies and spectral purity.

Skipping the "arrl lab bashing " vs  "qrp labs design praise" ,as far as missed points go, the point you seem to be making is that there are "better" ways to design radios and concesquenty amplification stages , rather  than going through the audio stage.
All I was trying to point out is that's all fine and dandy as long as I'm not limited to 4.98 Watts. Otherwise gimme all the power I can get by whatever method will get me there. :)
Logged
sdrawkcab daer tseb si txet sihT

VK6HP

  • Member
  • Posts: 1222
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #23 on: March 14, 2023, 03:47:56 AM »

As a member and supporter of the ARRL I'll continue to comment freely on the published material, much of which is good but some of which misses the mark editorially and technically.  It's also the case that companies like QRP Labs deserve praise for their innovation in ham radio, notwithstanding the inability of the technically and comprehension-challenged to appreciate them.  Zak's link to the ARRL job ad is very relevant and interesting; it shows that at least the League appreciates the need for more horsepower in the digital communications area.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2023, 03:53:14 AM by VK6HP »
Logged

N6YWU

  • Posts: 362
    • HomeURL
Re: Sucessor to 7300/7610
« Reply #24 on: March 16, 2023, 02:48:00 PM »

When was the last time an amateur radio transceiver, mode specific, didn't at least have provisions for a mic, key, speaker, or headphones? Not normal, but certainly different.

The Hermes Lite 2 QRP transceiver (currently in production) only has an ethernet port and a key jack.  No front panel controls, tuning knob, mic, speaker, or headphone connection.  Of course software on the connected PC, Pi, or iPad can synthesize a digital IQ signal containing CW, SSB or FT8, etc. (or any combination thereof).
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up