..with the same receiver and antenna (e.g. rsp1a and mla30 for example) varying the software (sdruno vs sdr console always for example) do we have the same performance in terms of receivable signals?...in the sense...isn't it that with one software you lose some signals that perhaps you can pull out with another??..what do you think?signals that can be listened to in different software
-
guidomartino
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2023 11:42 am
signals that can be listened to in different software
good morning...a question that will surely spark the laughter of many but I'll ask it anyway...
..with the same receiver and antenna (e.g. rsp1a and mla30 for example) varying the software (sdruno vs sdr console always for example) do we have the same performance in terms of receivable signals?...in the sense...isn't it that with one software you lose some signals that perhaps you can pull out with another??..what do you think?
..with the same receiver and antenna (e.g. rsp1a and mla30 for example) varying the software (sdruno vs sdr console always for example) do we have the same performance in terms of receivable signals?...in the sense...isn't it that with one software you lose some signals that perhaps you can pull out with another??..what do you think?Re: signals that can be listened to in different software
As nobody else has replied...... When it comes to basic reception with no noise reduction applied and no critical filtering required then I would say very little difference in terms of outright RF performance assuming that the software can accurately recover the signal from the hardware through to IQ data. Once you start getting into noise reduction algorithms and requirement for specialised filtering there will definitely be differences in the most critical situations as the noise reduction algos certainly will vary significantly from software to software.
But overall I would day most of the limitations are on what the antenna system and hardware can pull out of the available signal and that there will be much bigger variations due to hardware then software assuming that the software has no significant errors in it. A lot of the differences in software will come down to the ergonomics and how easy it is for the average operator to extract the best from it. In this respect I would say SDR Console cannot be beaten. Simon is a brilliant coder and the regular users have a huge amount of (daily) input to which Simon is astonishingly responsive. I would think that this situation is close to unique.
Max
But overall I would day most of the limitations are on what the antenna system and hardware can pull out of the available signal and that there will be much bigger variations due to hardware then software assuming that the software has no significant errors in it. A lot of the differences in software will come down to the ergonomics and how easy it is for the average operator to extract the best from it. In this respect I would say SDR Console cannot be beaten. Simon is a brilliant coder and the regular users have a huge amount of (daily) input to which Simon is astonishingly responsive. I would think that this situation is close to unique.
Max
-
guidomartino
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2023 11:42 am
Re: signals that can be listened to in different software
great explanation! thank you so much!!!Max wrote: ↑Sun Oct 08, 2023 7:05 pm As nobody else has replied...... When it comes to basic reception with no noise reduction applied and no critical filtering required then I would say very little difference in terms of outright RF performance assuming that the software can accurately recover the signal from the hardware through to IQ data. Once you start getting into noise reduction algorithms and requirement for specialised filtering there will definitely be differences in the most critical situations as the noise reduction algos certainly will vary significantly from software to software.
But overall I would day most of the limitations are on what the antenna system and hardware can pull out of the available signal and that there will be much bigger variations due to hardware then software assuming that the software has no significant errors in it. A lot of the differences in software will come down to the ergonomics and how easy it is for the average operator to extract the best from it. In this respect I would say SDR Console cannot be beaten. Simon is a brilliant coder and the regular users have a huge amount of (daily) input to which Simon is astonishingly responsive. I would think that this situation is close to unique.
Max
Re: signals that can be listened to in different software
The issue I have, especially with the one and only RSP1A I got left... (lightning strike took the others out!)
Is that there are so many variables to tweak to get the same results. i.e. you have RF Gain, IF Gain (actually attenuation), and lastly visual gain. It takes practice to manipulate the three variables to get results that are reasonably correct, such as an honest -100dBm signal at the antenna appearing as -100dBm on SDRC. Which is why I don't give signal reports from any of my 13 SDR's!
I prefer to operate my AirspyHF+ units for the most part, less fiddling with gains/attenuators. I just toggle the pre-amp on when on 20m and higher.
As Max stated above, SDRC rocks!
As a car salesman says...
YMMV Your milage may vary!
73 Kriss KA1GJU
Is that there are so many variables to tweak to get the same results. i.e. you have RF Gain, IF Gain (actually attenuation), and lastly visual gain. It takes practice to manipulate the three variables to get results that are reasonably correct, such as an honest -100dBm signal at the antenna appearing as -100dBm on SDRC. Which is why I don't give signal reports from any of my 13 SDR's!
I prefer to operate my AirspyHF+ units for the most part, less fiddling with gains/attenuators. I just toggle the pre-amp on when on 20m and higher.
As Max stated above, SDRC rocks!
As a car salesman says...
YMMV Your milage may vary!
73 Kriss KA1GJU
73 Kriss KA1GJU Home of the KA1GJU Super Station SDRC Servers in NH, USA (FN42mw & FN43na)
Re: signals that can be listened to in different software
I totally agree Kriss. If it was HF listening I wanted it's unlikely I'd choose SDR Play hardware. HF+ is pretty much "plug and go"! For much of VHF and all UHF then obviously that rules out the HF+ and the RSP becomes the better (only) option out of the two.KA1GJU wrote: ↑Sun Oct 22, 2023 1:32 pm The issue I have, especially with the one and only RSP1A I got left... (lightning strike took the others out!)
Is that there are so many variables to tweak to get the same results. i.e. you have RF Gain, IF Gain (actually attenuation), and lastly visual gain. It takes practice to manipulate the three variables to get results that are reasonably correct.
I prefer to operate my AirspyHF+ units for the most part, less fiddling with gains/attenuators. I just toggle the pre-amp on when on 20m and higher.
73 Kriss KA1GJU
I think what we are agreed on is that the hardware is an important choice right at the start.
Of course also some software offers facilities not provided by others. So for example, say you want diversity reception with SDR-Duo then the only real choice would be SDR-Uno for the software, if you are willing to battle with it. Personally, I'm not!
73
Max