Date   
Re: Mike element

Ken Held KF7DUR
 

Greg,
I ordered a few of the -24 dB mic elements from Mouser. I put one in a cheapo Baofeng speaker mic and it works great! The stock mics element was very weak the -24 dB element made a huge difference. Good find.

Ken
KF7DUR

Re: uBitx Modulation only lows no highs in frequency response

Bill Cromwell
 

Hi Jerry,

That is a pretty good description. I have my BFO set so that the incoming signals start rolling off at 300 Hz just as you have described. A few decades ago when we were looking at "compandered" SSB we were shown that the human voice has three main 'bands' of audio spectrum that are required for intelligibility. The lowest band is at 300 Hz. there is a mid band (I don't recall the frequency range) and high band around 1500 to 1800 Hz. Compandering used some Rube Goldberg approaches to squeeze those bands all together (with multiple filters and mixers) so as to reduce the RF bandwidth used to transmit it. There was also some kind of pilot tone to help sort it back out at the receiver. Did I mention Rube Goldberg? It kind of worked in the lab. But not in the wild.

So our SSB filter would like to bridge all of those bands without mashing or bending them. Even with the narrower passband of the stock filters in the uBitx we can get all of that fitted in if the BFO presents that lowest frequency band at about 300 Hz (as you have described). The high end will be close to 19 or 20 kHz. Mine is right around 1900 Hz. "Narrow SSB filters are designed and installed with a 1.8 kHz bandwidth. So the uBitx filters are at the narrow side of SSB. They may sound a little better for armchair chatting at 2400 to 3000 Hz. The bottom end still wants to be rolling off stuff starting around 300 Hz and the wider passband used to to increase the high end of the audio spectrum.

That will probably be very good for digital operation too. I am a CW guy and it does nothing to hurt CW either. I have several times outlined how to set the BFO this way by using the noise shadow displayed on all of the digi-mode screens and the audio frequencies shown on the scale below it. If yours is working well for you just go take a look - without changing the BFO. The noise starts to drop off about 300 Hz on one end (or wherever your is actually set) and the other end it starts dropping off well above 1800 Hz. With CW (or other narrow) filters that noise band is obviously much narrower and the width of that 'noise shadow' is much less - as expected.

73,

Bill KU8H

On 07/22/2018 10:29 AM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io wrote:
You got it right.
Raising the BFO frequency brings it closer to signals coming from the
filter, which lowers the audio frequencies..
We have a BFO below the 12mhz crystal filter passband which mixes (at
D5,T7) with signals in that passband creating audio.
Lets give it some numbers, the numbers for your particular rig might be
a bit different.
I'm assuming we are in receive mode, transmit is the same math but in
the opposite direction.

The BFO frequency in the stock firmware is at 11996500 hz.
The 12mhz crystal filter has a roughly 2000 hz 3dB passband, something
like 11997000 to 11999000.
A signal coming in through the crystal filter on the bottom edge of the
passband creates an audio tone of 11997000-11996500 = 500 hz.
A signal coming in through the crystal filter on the top edge of the
passband creates an audio tone of 11999000-11996500 = 2500hz.

If we now raise the BFO frequency from 11996500 to 11996700 hz,
the audio coming through would fall between 11997000-1196700 = 300 hz
and 1199900-1199700 = 2300 hz.

Jerry


On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 06:19 AM, RCC WB5YYM wrote:

With my radio/engineering skills very much lacking, I probably don't
even need to be trying to contribute to this conversation, but here
is what I ran into on my build. My tx audio was very distorted when
I first tested. I then checked the transmit using the tones sent
from WSJTx. I found that no tones were passing that were around
500hz or lower, but higher tones around 1600hz caused more power to
be output from the radio. I adjusted the BFO until I had maximum
power out when sending a 1khz tone. This gave me power out in a
range from 200hz to 1600hz. This seemed to clean up the audio on
SSB. Apparently I have a very narrow filter, but I am getting good
audio reports on SSB. The down side is that with it being so narrow,
when operating FT8, I need to shift the VFO frequency to see all the
transmissions. If I remember right, to shift the audio frequency
down, I had to adjust the BFO frequency up, but please don't hold me
to this statement . I did adjust about 100hz at a time, and checked
the power out using different frequencies generated by WSJTx. I
don't exactly know what the above means, but it did help me to have
a good working radio. Hope this helps someone.

--
bark less - wag more

Re: uBitx Modulation only lows no highs in frequency response

Jerry Gaffke
 

You got it right.
Raising the BFO frequency brings it closer to signals coming from the filter, which lowers the audio frequencies..
We have a BFO below the 12mhz crystal filter passband  which mixes (at D5,T7) with signals in that passband creating audio.
Lets give it some numbers, the numbers for your particular rig might be a bit different.
I'm assuming we are in receive mode, transmit is the same math but in the opposite direction.

The BFO frequency in the stock firmware is at 11996500 hz.
The 12mhz crystal filter has a roughly 2000 hz 3dB passband, something like 11997000 to 11999000.
A signal coming in through the crystal filter on the bottom edge of the passband creates an audio tone of 11997000-11996500 = 500 hz.
A signal coming in through the crystal filter on the top edge of the passband creates an audio tone of 11999000-11996500 = 2500hz.

If we now raise the BFO frequency from 11996500 to 11996700 hz, 
the audio coming through would fall between 11997000-1196700 = 300 hz and 1199900-1199700 = 2300 hz.

Jerry


On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 06:19 AM, RCC WB5YYM wrote:
With my radio/engineering skills very much lacking, I probably don't even need to be trying to contribute to this conversation, but here is what I ran into on my build. My tx audio was very distorted when I first tested. I then checked the transmit using the tones sent from WSJTx. I found that no tones were passing that were around 500hz or lower, but higher tones around 1600hz caused more power to be output from the radio. I adjusted the  BFO until I had maximum power out when sending a 1khz tone. This gave me power out in a range from 200hz to 1600hz. This seemed to clean up the audio on SSB. Apparently I have a very narrow filter, but I am getting good audio reports on SSB. The down side is that with it being so narrow, when operating FT8, I need to shift the VFO frequency to see all the transmissions. If I remember right, to shift the audio frequency down, I had to adjust the BFO frequency up, but please don't hold me to this statement . I did adjust about 100hz at a time, and checked the power out using different frequencies generated by WSJTx. I don't exactly know what the above means, but it did help me to have a good working radio. Hope this helps someone. 

Re: uBitx Modulation only lows no highs in frequency response

Ralph Mowery
 

I found the filter in my ubitx to be about the same narrow range.  As I work ssb and no cw I modified the filter circuit slightly.  I replaced the 5 100 pf capacitors with some 82 pf capacitors and that seemed to broaden the audio response to a more normal ssb filter band width.

de ku4pt


On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 9:19 AM, RCC WB5YYM <curtis03@...> wrote:
With my radio/engineering skills very much lacking, I probably don't even need to be trying to contribute to this conversation, but here is what I ran into on my build. My tx audio was very distorted when I first tested. I then checked the transmit using the tones sent from WSJTx. I found that no tones were passing that were around 500hz or lower, but higher tones around 1600hz caused more power to be output from the radio. I adjusted the  BFO until I had maximum power out when sending a 1khz tone. This gave me power out in a range from 200hz to 1600hz. This seemed to clean up the audio on SSB. Apparently I have a very narrow filter, but I am getting good audio reports on SSB. The down side is that with it being so narrow, when operating FT8, I need to shift the VFO frequency to see all the transmissions. If I remember right, to shift the audio frequency down, I had to adjust the BFO frequency up, but please don't hold me to this statement . I did adjust about 100hz at a time, and checked the power out using different frequencies generated by WSJTx. I don't exactly know what the above means, but it did help me to have a good working radio. Hope this helps someone. 


Re: uBitx Modulation only lows no highs in frequency response

RCC WB5YYM
 

With my radio/engineering skills very much lacking, I probably don't even need to be trying to contribute to this conversation, but here is what I ran into on my build. My tx audio was very distorted when I first tested. I then checked the transmit using the tones sent from WSJTx. I found that no tones were passing that were around 500hz or lower, but higher tones around 1600hz caused more power to be output from the radio. I adjusted the  BFO until I had maximum power out when sending a 1khz tone. This gave me power out in a range from 200hz to 1600hz. This seemed to clean up the audio on SSB. Apparently I have a very narrow filter, but I am getting good audio reports on SSB. The down side is that with it being so narrow, when operating FT8, I need to shift the VFO frequency to see all the transmissions. If I remember right, to shift the audio frequency down, I had to adjust the BFO frequency up, but please don't hold me to this statement . I did adjust about 100hz at a time, and checked the power out using different frequencies generated by WSJTx. I don't exactly know what the above means, but it did help me to have a good working radio. Hope this helps someone. 

Re: S meter wiring

m5fra2@...
 

Thanks Bill. I am going to mount mine inside the BITX case and switch it in/out.

 

Coli – M5FRA

 

From: BITX20@groups.io <BITX20@groups.io> On Behalf Of Bill Carpenter
Sent: 22 July 2018 12:46
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] S meter wiring

 

I have built a couple of H-Per-Mite filters and used them with several rigs  I use one as an outboard filter with my uBITX.  They are excellent filters nice sharp 200 Hz width and no ringing at all.  I highly recommend it.

73, Bill NZ0T


Virus-free. www.avast.com

Re: S meter wiring

Bill Carpenter
 

I have installed both of Kees kits - the click board and the AGC board.  Both work very well.

Re: S meter wiring

hirosmb <hirosmb@...>
 

Thanks for your review, Bill.

Did you modify your uBitx such as adding the AGC or a preset pod btw diodes?

// hiro, JJ1FXF



2018/07/22 20:46、Bill Carpenter <nz0tham@...>のメール:

I have built a couple of H-Per-Mite filters and used them with several rigs.  I use one as an outboard filter with my uBITX.  They are excellent filters nice sharp 200 Hz width and no ringing at all.  I highly recommend it.

73, Bill NZ0T

Re: S meter wiring

Bill Carpenter
 

I have built a couple of H-Per-Mite filters and used them with several rigs.  I use one as an outboard filter with my uBITX.  They are excellent filters nice sharp 200 Hz width and no ringing at all.  I highly recommend it.

73, Bill NZ0T

Re: Bitx40 circuit diagrams? #bitx40

MVS Sarma
 

Mike and Allen,
It is possible to print by -edit - select all-  Copy. Later click file - print
 I checked the print preview is fine.
 Hope                 it helps
regards
 sarma
 vu3zmv


Regards
MVS Sarma
 

On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Mike Woods <mhwoods@...> wrote:
Allen

The circuit diagram is on this page:

http://www.hfsignals.com/index.php/2017/11/23/bitx40-circuit-description/

The link on the page doesn't work for downloading, but you can right click on the diagram and save the diagram ...

73 Mike ZL1AXG

On 22/07/18 2:04 AM, Allen Woolfrey wrote:
If anyone has the correct LINK, please let me know.


--
Mike Woods
mhwoods@...


Re: uBITX No Power Output all of a sudden #ubitx

David Wilcox <Djwilcox01@...>
 

Get real?  I am 73 years old and have been building kits since the Heathkit days and every day I learn something new makes it a good day to be alive.  I am of the old school persuasion that there are no dumb questions. Most of the kits I have built lately have had unused holes but the kits worked and I never even thought about it.  Once I was sent a prototype board by mistake by a very reputable kit seller and it took a month of Sundays and the help of the board designer to figure that out and fix the board for me.  Another good day. St. Peter don't you call me as I have 10 kits that aren't finished yet.

Dave K8WPE

On Jul 21, 2018, at 6:25 PM, Jim Sheldon <w0eb@...> wrote:

Parts on factory PC boards are 99 percent of the time outlined by silkscreened legends.  VIA's are unmarked.  Hole far too small for a component lead (30 gauge wire barely fit the hole), what would you think?  Get real.

On Jul 21, 2018, at 5:12 PM, David Wilcox via Groups.Io <Djwilcox01@...> wrote:

So you had to figure out that it was a VIA and not an unused plated through hole solder point?  I have never thought about that. It seems that many boards have unused holes for parts that later were not needed.  Are there any tip offs that a point on the board is a VIA?

Dave K8WPE

On Jul 21, 2018, at 10:26 AM, Jim Sheldon <w0eb@...> wrote:

As promised, pictures of the offending VIA.

W0EB<Img_5100.jpg><Img_5101.jpg>

Re: Bitx40 circuit diagrams? #bitx40

AndyH
 

Allen - I just uploaded the files I have.  They're in a zip file as downloaded from hfsigs on March 8, 2017.
https://groups.io/g/BITX20/files/bitx_with_raduino.zip

73 Andy KG5RKP


On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 07:09 PM, Allen Woolfrey wrote:
The bitx40 circuit diagrams at http://www.hfsigs.com/bitx_with_raduino.zip

are not found.  Do they have detail or better resolution than the images on the bitx40 circuit description web page?


72/3, Al - va3iaw

Re: Bitx40 circuit diagrams? #bitx40

Mike Woods
 

Allen

The circuit diagram is on this page:

http://www.hfsignals.com/index.php/2017/11/23/bitx40-circuit-description/

The link on the page doesn't work for downloading, but you can right click on the diagram and save the diagram ...

73 Mike ZL1AXG

On 22/07/18 2:04 AM, Allen Woolfrey wrote:
If anyone has the correct LINK, please let me know.


--
Mike Woods
mhwoods@...

Re: surprising CW sidetone value in uBITX Manager 0.11 #ubitx

W2CTX
 

OK - Agree about leaving code alone that is already there in EEPROM.


But since I never run CEC code does the Memory Manger check your inout when you

do enter a bad value?


rOn

On July 21, 2018 at 9:30 PM Mike KK7ER <groupio@...> wrote:

rOn,

I agree that uBITX Manager should flag bad values.  But this is not a user error.  It is simply the result of flashing CEC firmware on top of the stock firmware.  The stock firmware did not write the memory locations where CW speed and sidetone values are stored -- it left them uninitialized.  And apparently by design, the CEC firmware does not overwrite the EEPROM memory space used for user-defined parameters (probably to allow restoring the original firmware without losing settings).  I may be mistaken but this interpretation makes sense to me.

73 Mike KK7ER

Re: surprising CW sidetone value in uBITX Manager 0.11 #ubitx

Jack, W8TEE
 

I agree. It's important to keep in mind what both Farhan and Ian have shoehorned into an incredibly limited address space. To me, the most amazing part of their efforts is how they managed to fit everything into a 2K SRAM memory space. After all, that's where all of the data ends up residing plus it has to accommodate the heap and the stack. I'm sure both want to hear users' wish lists, but I would not be at all disappointed if most of those wishes end up on the to-do list simply because there aren't enough resources left to bring them to life.

Jack, W8TEE

On Saturday, July 21, 2018, 9:10:17 PM EDT, Tom, wb6b <wb6b@...> wrote:


It is true, better warnings and feedback would be good. The suggestion that the uBIX manager is the best place to add the feedback is good. But, remember this is the output of one programmer. I'd say the amount of code he has produces at a high level of code design is remarkable. 

I'm sure he does keep track of the users' experiences with his code (like this thread) and as he can, prioritize these along with other needs, and makes an effort to incrementally improve the code. So, in that light, user feedback and suggestions are valuable to everyone. I've definitely expressed my opinion where I think something should be changed, but I know that those suggestions will be weighed against other priorities. 

Tom, wb6b

Re: surprising CW sidetone value in uBITX Manager 0.11 #ubitx

Mike KK7ER
 

rOn,

I agree that uBITX Manager should flag bad values.  But this is not a user error.  It is simply the result of flashing CEC firmware on top of the stock firmware.  The stock firmware did not write the memory locations where CW speed and sidetone values are stored -- it left them uninitialized.  And apparently by design, the CEC firmware does not overwrite the EEPROM memory space used for user-defined parameters (probably to allow restoring the original firmware without losing settings).  I may be mistaken but this interpretation makes sense to me.

73 Mike KK7ER

Re: surprising CW sidetone value in uBITX Manager 0.11 #ubitx

Tom, wb6b
 

It is true, better warnings and feedback would be good. The suggestion that the uBIX manager is the best place to add the feedback is good. But, remember this is the output of one programmer. I'd say the amount of code he has produces at a high level of code design is remarkable. 

I'm sure he does keep track of the users' experiences with his code (like this thread) and as he can, prioritize these along with other needs, and makes an effort to incrementally improve the code. So, in that light, user feedback and suggestions are valuable to everyone. I've definitely expressed my opinion where I think something should be changed, but I know that those suggestions will be weighed against other priorities. 

Tom, wb6b

Re: uBitx Modulation only lows no highs in frequency response

Peter Parker
 

The carrier oscillator is an incredibly important adjustment that greatly affects transmitted audio.  This could be useful. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXJmAhpAjeI

Re: Nextion and the Icom7300 #ubitx

hirosmb <hirosmb@...>
 

Thanks for the URL, Yves.

// hiro, JJ1FXF



2018/07/22 8:01、Yves vk2auj <yves.bernier@...>のメール:

YO2LDK on an IC-7000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBXbxL18ftk

I too would love to be able to remote head an IC-7300 with a Nextion for mobile operations.

Yves vk2auj/ve2auj

AutoKey, Memory Keyer, operating CW via CAT #ubitx #ubitxcw

Mike KK7ER
 

After watching Ian's video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4au90STsdY), it was quite easy to establish control of the uBITX via CAT using Fldigi.  In the video, Ian demonstrates keying the mic via the Fldigi TX button.  Is it also possible to transmit CW?

From reading the Fldigi docs, it looks like Fldigi simply keys the mic and sends CW via a generated audio tone sequence over SSB.

After searching the BITX20 archives and Ian's blog site for a while, I see mentions of AutoKeyer and Memory Keyer but cannot find details anywhere.  Is it possible to generate and send CW from the uBITX Arduino given a character sequence over CAT / USB cable?

Sorry for the ignorant questions.  I got my novice license 42 years ago but have been mostly inactive for the past 30 years.  I feel like Rip VanWinkle!

73 Mike KK7ER