Date   
Re: New uBITX Ver. 6 Assembled Today

Ted
 

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 06:41 PM, Mick wrote:
Unfortunately I don’t have an HF SWR meter to test with.

Free shipping:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Workman-Hf-Swr-wattmetter-model-103/113846535984



* No snark intended; it's just a good buy and is a good part of any ham station's inventory.

-Ted
 K3RTA
 

Re: New uBITX Ver. 6 Assembled Today

Vaughn
 

Hi. I tested mine using another radio. Short length of just coax from the recivibg one. Then proper antenna on the other. Transmit abs as the receiving test, radio has little antenna it only gets a week signal but still enough to prove it is transmiting. 

If that test OK, get a friend to give you a shout and work from there. 

Vaughn

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020, 23:41 Mick <Mgsebele@...> wrote:
I’ve been testing my new v6 it seems to receive well I’ve heard several stations. Unfortunately I don’t have an HF SWR meter to test with. I now suspect I’m not transmitting. I tried listening (using a WebSDR site) to my own transmission  but I hear nothing. Anyone have any suggestions?

73
Mick VA3EPM

Re: audio to audio amp

Ted
 


I can heartily recommend this amp circuit from eBay. Take the yellow wire from the audio header and feed a voltage divider using 5k resistors with the common junction going to the volume control. The audio out from this board can be fine tuned with this board's input trimmer; keeping the trimmer low, raise volume with the regular volume knob to distortion, then back down a little. Then, raise this board's trimmer to distortion again and then back the trimmer down a smidgen. That's your max, should your speaker of choice not explode first.  It will sound good at "normal" listening levels and will wake the dead when necessary.  Consider silencing this amp during TX by tapping the high side of R52 for its B+ to keep stray RF at bay. The tab of this amp's TDA2030A can be chassis grounded :)  

On a V3 or V5/6 board, one could probably use a 2.2k/8k combination but the V4's got not much drive to begin with.





-Ted
  K3RTA

Re: Sotabeams DSP cw/SSB filter insertion rf in audio

Dennis Zabawa
 

I am using the SOTABEAMS Variable filter.  I twisted the ground and power wires together and added a 10nF capacitor to keep the RF gremlins out.

Re: CW Audio High Pitched and Thin #cw

Dean Souleles
 

HI Andy -

I don't have a document..... I just figured this out myself! 

The Memory Manager software requires the KD8CEC firmware.  The firmware and the Memory Manager software can be found via links on ubitx.net.  

You can either use Memory Manager or you can use the KD8CEC firmware directly on the radio to adjust the BFO.   See John vk2eta's note in this thread on that.

Good luck and 73,

Dean
 

Re: CW Audio High Pitched and Thin #cw

Dean Souleles
 

Hi Alex,

You connect the radio to the computer via the usb port on the Raduino (the Arduino Nano has a usb port).  You can get the find the links and instructions to load the KD8CEC firmware and memory manager on ubitx.net. 

Good luck,

Dean
KK4DAS

Re: S-meter in 20X4 display #smeter #ubitx

Vic WA4THR
 

Rereading your original post, I am not sure which version of the KD8CEC sketch you are using. Note that the versions with the -S suffix are not appropriate unless you add the second signal analyzer Nano chip. The standard software has everything needed for an S-meter using the spare analog input to the Raduino.

=Vic=

Re: [BITxV6] BRICKED recovery help needed

Reed N
 

Andy,

Did you have a chance to try the hex file I sent? If so, did the update fix the white screen issue you were seeing?


Reed

Re: one_stop_setting debugging #v6

Reed N
 

Dean - I haven't seen a PM in any of my inboxes, but shot you a message using the email you have on record with QRZ.com. Hopefully that puts us in touch.

All - I still plan on picking this endeavor back up, but I'm also still waiting on parts before I can complete my build, at which point I'll finally be able to test/debug the branch properly by myself :P


Reed

Re: ubitx #v6 Screen Speed Mod #v6

Reed N
 

Ron (and everybody else) - The absolute best spot to report problems in general is via GitHub's Issues page, since it automatically tracks them, they can be marked as resolved, easily reference them when code changes fix things, etc. Specifically, here: https://github.com/afarhan/ubitxv6/issues . For issues related to this specific piece of work (the pdq_gfx_update branch), the best spot is to comment on the Pull Request for it, located here: https://github.com/afarhan/ubitxv6/pull/3 . I don't expect everybody here to necessarily know exactly what bugs are from my branch, and which are inherited from the current master, but if you comment on the PR where you're having the problem, "us coders" can sort it out.

Armando - I just tried changing the BFO a few times on my nano running, and didn't see any graphical glitches. Do you know which version of the software you're running? Specifically, what commit number? I fixed a number of issues related to the setup menus in commit 9ebdf8b213dd6c4996796ec35b294ccc86016c2e a few days ago, so if you grabbed an earlier version of the branch, you might try updating to the current version (f1ea1fd081d128895f336d0ca16de6246a422f2f) and see if your problem "magically" disappears.


Reed

Re: uBITX V6.0 For Sale

Bill Cromwell
 

Hi Chris,

Exactly my point about starting with a new, blank controller. Even if the original dies unsupported I am not so sure I would be able to do that. And if it doesn't die it does everything I want already. See Hans' new post. Pretty sweet, eh? My comments were never about building clones for sale or profit. Some others have asked questions (even challenged Hans) about that and some may not be convinced. It's their hard luck:)

73,

Bill KU8H

On 1/8/20 11:01 PM, Christopher Miller wrote:
With regards to the legality of writing your own code for the QSX, that post clearly states that there is no way to reprogram the micro controller and that is strongly encrypted. Tome that says, you have to remove and replace the controller and then reverse engineer how to operate the hardware. So, sure it’s possible and not illegal if you void the warranty. However, selling a product on that would be illegal in the US. I’m sure patent law is involved but doubt any one here would try to do that.
I agree with Farnham, they are completely different products to fill two voids. I have seen a few posts about displeasure with having to hack the Bitx, so the QSX would fill that void.
Just my thoughts,
Chris
KF4FTR
--
bark less - wag more

Re: uBITX V6.0 For Sale - and others too

Bill Cromwell
 

Hi again Curt,

All of those have their delightful beauty marks and their own warts. I am thinking about that V6 as well. I am happy enough with the two line LCD in my V3 and I bought more of those to play with my experiments. I have no plans to seriously modify the V3 beyond the CEC software it is running and the taming of the sidetone and T-R thump.

I will only mention in passing there is already QRO gear here but most of it weighs more than 10 pounds. There is nothing much over ~100 watts.

Ashar has joined the thread too. Ham radio is a hobby for me. Whatever money I have has better places to be spent than on 5k and 10k radios that will only do the same things 50, 100, 200 dollar radios and radios home built from absolute found junk. We don't add an S unit by merely adding a couple of watts. we have to double the power and nearly double it again for one s unit. There isn't a lot of point to making and using radios much over 100 watts. Unless the FCC changes the rules for us to have megawatts.

The most reasonable first one to repair is the uBitX followed by the PFR-3. Meanwhile still working through that other guy's QCX. And a V6 is on the way here to see if I can help.

73 and hope to see a few of you on the air this weekend.

Bill KU8H

On 1/8/20 9:51 PM, Curt via Groups.Io wrote:
Bill
I was merely trying to contrast the business models,  not critique them. I aspire to have a QSX in my shack also.
If nothing is hidden in the hardware, one can indeed do their own firmware, if they work enough to understand the hardware. LOL with that, starting from scratch.
Well perhsps fix your rigs starting with the easiest one.
I watched v6 video and agree it looks nice. Ashar has told us how to update an earlier ubitx to this display. I myself am content with one ubitx, my v4. I have the extra 45 MHz xtal filter back in with shielded inductors on the original one. If it behaves still including cw transmit, I am optimistic it shall have decent spurious on ssb.
I did obtain the 50w cw amp from Hans, will build it for 40m. Yes its all keeping me from building with tubes.
Curt
--
bark less - wag more

Re: ubitx #v6 Screen Speed Mod #v6

W2CTX
 

This is just a suggestion to the group. People like Reed
have spent time to make ubitx better. I think these software
developers deserve respect. Lets report issues DIRECTLY to
the programmer first before posting to the group. That gives
the programmer a chance to fix or explain the issue. If a
fix is in order the programmer can alert the group. The reason
is that negative reports on the group are remembered longer
than kudos .......

Just my thoughts.

rOn

On January 8, 2020 at 11:18 PM Armando Escalante <@klimber> wrote:


Reed, I have been using your version for a couple of days, all had gone well until now, I just tried to improve the BFO calibration, when I enter the setup and select Calibrate BFO I get what appears to be a corrupt screen.
Top indicates:
Set BFO
A few lines of empty space then
2 lines above the final Press TUNE to Save I see, in this case:
11.053ziVv]]_sm=\aR1+];{;Y9+3

Afterward, the BFO gets so bad  I can't hear anything intelligible. (used to be fine before this attempt)

Any ideas?
A


Re: uBITX V6.0 For Sale

Bill Cromwell
 

Hi,

Hans comment came when I brought up the idea that some day the QSX might become unsupported when QRP Labs no longer exists. Hans also said if QRP Labs is going away he will release all the code. People won't have to roll their own. Without that people will be on their own. I brought that up because it is exactly what I am doing with a 40 year old radio who's unsupported and proprietary control system has died. The RF hardware was (is) pretty good. My first thoughts were to replace everything with a "raduino'. An arduino system could probably be used as a 'prosthesis' for the lost functions. Parts of it still try to work. Hans did say people are free to do what they want with their own property. At the same time he said he could not be expected to support it. In my case, if QRP Labs is supporting it I ain't messing with it. I would have no reason to. The QSX (as boasted) does everything I want. Even if support goes away (as with my Ten Tec) I will do whatever I can. The landfill is not far away <evil grin>.

Yes the QSX is SDR. I am digging into some of those things. I do not expect to start building anything like that (my time will expire before I learn enough) but want to learn as much as I can about it. I do not have any intention of building my own controller for my QSX when I get it. I have other radios for that kind of thing (including some SDR gear).

In this thread we have mentioned proprietary, copyrighted software again. It is what it is. The rights belong to Hans. And by the way..I bought boards from the Lab to build the replacement Raduino for that Ten Tec. I will be trying to set it up from public domain software. It won't be the same as my uBitX, and it won't be the same as the original Ten Tec but it will be back on the air:)

Yeah..I think it is silly to buy a QSX and then chop it up.

I am on six weeks of light duty due to surgery yesterday and cannot carry anything over ten pounds. I can use my soldering iron, cutters, QRP radios since those are all under 10 pounds. There are QRP on-air activities this weekend. Maybe get to play there.

73,

Bill KU8H

On 1/8/20 9:30 PM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io wrote:
Bill,
Did you follow my link?
Here's what Hans said regarding the QSX, in that post Oct of 2018.
Add much of 2019 to the effort, and likely a good chunk of 2020:

>  Regarding QSX, I do NOT agree to, or support, people collectively or
individually developing their own code for it.
>  Primarily for fear of cloning. Not that it would be at all easy to
undercut the price. But even clones
>  at a non-competitive price are damaging. For me it's the entire
2018's worth of work, and more.
That's pretty clear, even to me.
I doubt anybody is legally bound, but those are his wishes.
Hans may have encouraged coders to mess with other QRP Labs products, but not the QSX.
Writing DSP code for a phasing rig is beyond the abilities of most of us.
That's far more involved than writing Arduino code to show an S-meter on your uBitx display.
For the curious, here's what passes as an easy and accessible intro to DSP techniques:
http://www.dspguide.com/
If your google-foo is strong, you may be able to patch together existing code
to accomplish what you want.  But you still need a grasp of much of that material.
There's good reason the QSX has not yet been released to the world.
If you want to learn about radio and wish to whack at something relatively
cheap and easy to understand, the uBitx is a very good bet.
The Bitx40 might be even better (cheaper and simpler) if you can find one used.
Jerry, KE7ER
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 04:56 PM, Bill Cromwell wrote:
He did say we could do our own. As long as QRP Labs is around to
support it I won't even consider it. If I did and it went wrong I
would not be double foolish and expect him to fix it. It also would
not be a "clone" if I did it. It would be something else. If I want
something else I will buy (or make) that instead. In fact, I already
have several something elses:)
73,
Bill KU8H
Hide quoted text <#quoted-156392801>
On 1/8/20 6:56 PM, Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io wrote:
Hans does not encourage us to develop our own software for the
not-yet-out QSX:
https://groups.io/g/QRPLabs/message/27603
In part because he has had trouble with clones in the past.
Jerry, KE7ER
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 01:25 PM, Bill Cromwell wrote:
In some of the discussions about Hans' proprietary (not open source)
system the man himself pointed out that any of us can develop our
own software to drive the hardware. He says there is enough info
about how the hardware works to do that. perhaps not as well as his
proprietary software. That depends on what you want the radio to do.
It will be an SDR with no need for a computer. I am NOT there.
--
bark less - wag more
--
bark less - wag more

Re: uBITX V6.0 For Sale

Hans Summers
 

Hi Curt, all

> Oh yes - when the QSX finally comes out - take at look at that.  (But if you
> don't like its user I/O - you cannot change it, unlike the uBITX). 

This is not correct. The QSX user interface CAN be changed. Everything about the user interface is configurable. Display layout, operation of knobs and buttons, etc. You could also build your own totally different front-end hardware and interface it. 

Writing your own code for QSX totally would be very difficult; and the only way would be to physically remove the microcontroller and put in a new blank one, then do all your programming from scratch; someone who is capable of that would be capable of rolling their own entirely (hardware and software) and I would be surprised to hear of anyone actually doing this. 

The QSX does include its own programming language which controls the UI and many other features, and can be modified by the owner. It is powerful and flexible and allows a lot of extensions to the QSX. It makes the QSX very hackable, both in terms of hardware and software. At the same time it shields the owner from the most complex parts of the code, and protects the IP. 

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com

Re: ubitx #v6 Screen Speed Mod #v6

Armando Escalante
 

Reed, I have been using your version for a couple of days, all had gone well until now, I just tried to improve the BFO calibration, when I enter the setup and select Calibrate BFO I get what appears to be a corrupt screen.
Top indicates:
Set BFO
A few lines of empty space then
2 lines above the final Press TUNE to Save I see, in this case:
11.053ziVv]]_sm=\aR1+];{;Y9+3

Afterward, the BFO gets so bad  I can't hear anything intelligible. (used to be fine before this attempt)

Any ideas?
A

Re: uBITX V6.0 For Sale

Christopher Miller
 

With regards to the legality of writing your own code for the QSX, that post clearly states that there is no way to reprogram the micro controller and that is strongly encrypted. Tome that says, you have to remove and replace the controller and then reverse engineer how to operate the hardware. So, sure it’s possible and not illegal if you void the warranty. However, selling a product on that would be illegal in the US. I’m sure patent law is involved but doubt any one here would try to do that.

I agree with Farnham, they are completely different products to fill two voids. I have seen a few posts about displeasure with having to hack the Bitx, so the QSX would fill that void.

Just my thoughts,
Chris
KF4FTR

Re: New Teensy 4.0 to NANO direct plug in adapter #ubitx #v6

Jim Sheldon
 

Don’t need them.  Problem has been solved and as I’ve stated in several posts lately, NO hardware mods are needed to use the current adapter with a Factory V6 Raduino.

W0EB


On Jan 8, 2020, at 8:46 PM, Kees T <windy10605@...> wrote:

Jim,

It's pretty simple to build level converters using 2 resistors and a 2N7000. No problem.

73 Kees K5BCQ

Re: uBITX V6.0 For Sale

Ashhar Farhan
 

Hans will produce a great radio, I am quite certain of that. He is quite thorough with his stuff. I am in the line to get one as soon as they are released.
The uBitx and QSX are similar and also different. Both the radios break ground in accessibility, hackability and pricing. If you have followed the SSB hack on QCX, you will know what I mean.
The QSX will come with rock solid software but you have to solder up everything. The uBitx comes with all hardware soldered and tested but you have to make a few firmware updates as hackers keep going at it.
On the other hand, the higher end rigs like the K4 to the IC7300 have reached a point where the performance is more than adequate for every need and yet their pricing differential is enormous. The IC7300 costs 1000 usd while the K4 from Elecraft costs 5000 usd! For that extra 4000 USD you could buy a 40 meter full length yagi, mast, linear and a couple of Havans as well! The performance difference is almost imperceptible. Doesn't really make sense. At times it might even overwhelm you. Let me use an analogy by Rick, KK7B, he says the argument for how much dynamic range etc is like asking how many wheels for a car? Once you have figured out that all you need are 4 wheels, you move on. Look at other aspects.
What our homebrew radios need is a top class DSP IF at the back. Something that you can wade into and write you own. Whether is an S meter or new modulation scheme.
In the future, the soldering iron will have more and more competition from the keyboard. Filters will be written in software, modes will be implemented there too.
Our challenge is to make that as simple as we can. The SDR is actually just the same, really simple pieces like filters, mixers out together. An FIR filter is put together in about 10 lines of code. You feed it a different table of coefficients and get different filters. Once you know that, you can hack for months producing all kinds of filters :LPF, notch, BPF, etc. without touching your soldering iron. 
What daunts many, including me, is the steep learning curve. There is no equivalent of an Arduino for the DSP. That may change though, I am working (very randomly though) with Bob Larkin to get something akin to that going for homebrewers. I hope that arrives much sooner than later.
- f


On Thu 9 Jan, 2020, 8:22 AM Curt via Groups.Io, <wb8yyy=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Bill

I was merely trying to contrast the business models,  not critique them. I aspire to have a QSX in my shack also.

If nothing is hidden in the hardware, one can indeed do their own firmware, if they work enough to understand the hardware. LOL with that, starting from scratch.

Well perhsps fix your rigs starting with the easiest one.

I watched v6 video and agree it looks nice. Ashar has told us how to update an earlier ubitx to this display. I myself am content with one ubitx, my v4. I have the extra 45 MHz xtal filter back in with shielded inductors on the original one. If it behaves still including cw transmit, I am optimistic it shall have decent spurious on ssb.

I did obtain the 50w cw amp from Hans, will build it for 40m. Yes its all keeping me from building with tubes.

Curt

Re: uBITX V6.0 For Sale

Jerry Gaffke
 

By the way, that QRP-Labs thread also discusses users adding an RPi-Zero
to extend the QSX with shareable code, which Hans was fully on board with.  


On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 03:56 PM, Jerry Gaffke wrote:
Hans does not encourage us to develop our own software for the not-yet-out QSX:
    https://groups.io/g/QRPLabs/message/27603