Topics

BITX V6 CW PROBLEM REG


LAKSH MUTHU
 

HI,
GOOD DAY TO ALL.
I am using BITX V 6.1. In it , in the  CW mode, the first character is not transmitted fully and hence the CW sending is not proper. I understand this issue is in the software which will be discussed in this group and solved.I like to know whether any solution has been arrived. In as much as the output  power   from UBITX V6.1 in SSB is very low and hence contacts cannot be established and at the same time due to the CW problem, CW contacts can also not be had properly. Therefore, this rig cannot be used more effectively.
   An early solution to the CW issue will be very highly appreciated.
With regards and 73
MUTHU
VU2LMN


Bill Cromwell
 

Hi,

If you are using the factory consider going with Reed's software. I found the CW with the factory software to be completely useless due to the problem you have. Reed's software fixed that.

73.

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/3/20 11:02 AM, LAKSH MUTHU wrote:
HI,
GOOD DAY TO ALL.
I am using BITX V 6.1. In it , in the CW mode, the first character is not transmitted fully and hence the CW sending is not proper. I understand this issue is in the software which will be discussed in this group and solved.I like to know whether any solution has been arrived. In as much as the output  power   from UBITX V6.1 in SSB is very low and hence contacts cannot be established and at the same time due to the CW problem, CW contacts can also not be had properly. Therefore, this rig cannot be used more effectively.
   An early solution to the CW issue will be very highly appreciated.
With regards and 73
MUTHU
VU2LMN


Jeff Debes
 

Muthu,

Did anyone answer your comment /question?
I know there are prior discussions / fixes  on this issue, but I was not paying close  attention because my interest is in SSB. 
Still, I think that this CW ( false initiation) is deficiency in design that should be fixed in the kit as it is shipped. The basic kit should work acceptably /basically without necessary modification  in both CW and SSB modes after proper assembly and alignment.

Jeff
AC2JB 





On Aug 3, 2020, at 11:02 AM, LAKSH MUTHU <vu2lmn@...> wrote:


HI,
GOOD DAY TO ALL.
I am using BITX V 6.1. In it , in the  CW mode, the first character is not transmitted fully and hence the CW sending is not proper. I understand this issue is in the software which will be discussed in this group and solved.I like to know whether any solution has been arrived. In as much as the output  power   from UBITX V6.1 in SSB is very low and hence contacts cannot be established and at the same time due to the CW problem, CW contacts can also not be had properly. Therefore, this rig cannot be used more effectively.
   An early solution to the CW issue will be very highly appreciated.
With regards and 73
MUTHU
VU2LMN

--
jeff.debes@...


Bill Cromwell
 

Hi Jeff,

It has been on here several times and once again for this thread that the factory software causes this problem. The software from Reed eliminates the problem. It fixed a couple of other things into the deal.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/4/20 6:02 AM, Jeff Debes wrote:
Muthu,
Did anyone answer your comment /question?
I know there are prior discussions / fixes  on this issue, but I was not paying close  attention because my interest is in SSB.
Still, I think that this CW ( false initiation) is deficiency in design that should be fixed in the kit as it is shipped. The basic kit should work acceptably /basically without necessary modification  in both CW and SSB modes after proper assembly and alignment.
Jeff
AC2JB


LAKSH MUTHU
 

Dear All,
   Good day. Can any one kindly guide me to get and install Reed's CW software for UBITX V6 ?
I am totally new to this type of getting software and installing  a step by step procedure will be highly appreciated. Or else atleast a link details in this regard will be much helpful.
    Expecting guidance from the group and thanks in advance.
With regards and 73
MUTHU
VU2LMN


Neil k8it <k8it@...>
 

Bill I am OK I haven't been able to do anything just basically trying to exist but I am OK I am healthy as far as the transceiver goes I find it to be useless so I'm really getting very frustrated with it the receiver is junk Neil 73KHIT.

Thanks 73 Neil Sablatzky K8IT

On 4 Aug 2020 09:21, "Bill Cromwell" wrote:

Hi Jeff,

It has been on here several times and once again for this thread that
the factory software causes this problem. The software from Reed
eliminates the problem. It fixed a couple of other things into the deal.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/4/20 6:02 AM, Jeff Debes wrote:
> Muthu,
>
> Did anyone answer your comment /question?
> I know there are prior discussions / fixes  on this issue, but I was not
> paying close  attention because my interest is in SSB.
> Still, I think that this CW ( false initiation) is deficiency in design
> that should be fixed in the kit as it is shipped. The basic kit should
> work acceptably /basically without necessary modification  in both CW
> and SSB modes after proper assembly and alignment.
>
> Jeff
> AC2JB



Jeff Debes
 

Thanks Bill, glad to hear that. & kudos for Reed.
But why isn’t this basic fix for the issue incorporated by HF Sigs????

Jeff




On Aug 4, 2020, at 5:37 PM, Neil k8it <k8it@...> wrote:


Bill I am OK I haven't been able to do anything just basically trying to exist but I am OK I am healthy as far as the transceiver goes I find it to be useless so I'm really getting very frustrated with it the receiver is junk Neil 73KHIT.

Thanks 73 Neil Sablatzky K8IT

On 4 Aug 2020 09:21, "Bill Cromwell" wrote:

Hi Jeff,

It has been on here several times and once again for this thread that
the factory software causes this problem. The software from Reed
eliminates the problem. It fixed a couple of other things into the deal.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/4/20 6:02 AM, Jeff Debes wrote:
> Muthu,
>
> Did anyone answer your comment /question?
> I know there are prior discussions / fixes  on this issue, but I was not
> paying close  attention because my interest is in SSB.
> Still, I think that this CW ( false initiation) is deficiency in design
> that should be fixed in the kit as it is shipped. The basic kit should
> work acceptably /basically without necessary modification  in both CW
> and SSB modes after proper assembly and alignment.
>
> Jeff
> AC2JB



--
jeff.debes@...


Dale Parfitt
 

Neil,

I guess I have not followed this thread, but as  a V6 owner, I can assure you the receiver is anything but junk. Yes, for CW TX the software needs to be updated- a simple, quick process.

What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.

This is amateur radio, and hopefully we have not all become appliance operators. But even if one is, there is a LOT of technical assistance at their fingertips.

73,

Dale W4OP

 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Neil k8it
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 1:22 PM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Cc: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] BITX V6 CW PROBLEM REG

 

Bill I am OK I haven't been able to do anything just basically trying to exist but I am OK I am healthy as far as the transceiver goes I find it to be useless so I'm really getting very frustrated with it the receiver is junk Neil 73KHIT.

 

Thanks 73 Neil Sablatzky K8IT

On 4 Aug 2020 09:21, "Bill Cromwell" wrote:

Hi Jeff,

It has been on here several times and once again for this thread that
the factory software causes this problem. The software from Reed
eliminates the problem. It fixed a couple of other things into the deal.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/4/20 6:02 AM, Jeff Debes wrote:
> Muthu,
>
> Did anyone answer your comment /question?
> I know there are prior discussions / fixes  on this issue, but I was not
> paying close  attention because my interest is in SSB.
> Still, I think that this CW ( false initiation) is deficiency in design
> that should be fixed in the kit as it is shipped. The basic kit should
> work acceptably /basically without necessary modification  in both CW
> and SSB modes after proper assembly and alignment.
>
> Jeff
> AC2JB


Todd Carney
 

What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.

Dale--I agree with you 100%. I believe some think a radio "kit" (defined in this case as a rig that only needs finishing, tweaking, and testing) is functionally--and ethically--equivalent to a cake mix. Even with a mix, there are some people who buy cakes from the bakery because they are buyers and not makers. That's okay, and I don't even care that the majority of amateur-radio operators (now) fall into that category. But if one wants to make a radio--from a kit or from scratch--then one has to accept certain realities. "Same as it ever was," to quote David Byrne and The Talking Heads.

Also, someone here said something about a "factory" flaw in the software. Look, there is no factory. There's Farhan and the women's collective who do the assembly. Farhan is not a professional engineer or software developer--he's a radio amateur just as most of us are. The women aren't professionals, either. They're just trying to support their families with some piece work. Under the name HFsignals, they have offered the BITX40 and the μBITX for an extremely-small amount of money relative to any store-bought, plug 'n play, full-warranty option available. Thousands of these have been completed and put on the air all over the world. If some can't get theirs to work, then "the fault, dear Brutus, is not in [their] stars, but in [themselves]." Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene III.

Todd K7TFC





Arv Evans
 

Jeff

It has been reported.  This is the support group for HF Sigs, and it has been reported here.

Arv
_._


On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:54 PM Jeff Debes <jeff.debes@...> wrote:
Thanks Bill, glad to hear that. & kudos for Reed.
But why isn’t this basic fix for the issue incorporated by HF Sigs????

Jeff




On Aug 4, 2020, at 5:37 PM, Neil k8it <k8it@...> wrote:


Bill I am OK I haven't been able to do anything just basically trying to exist but I am OK I am healthy as far as the transceiver goes I find it to be useless so I'm really getting very frustrated with it the receiver is junk Neil 73KHIT.

Thanks 73 Neil Sablatzky K8IT

On 4 Aug 2020 09:21, "Bill Cromwell" wrote:

Hi Jeff,

It has been on here several times and once again for this thread that
the factory software causes this problem. The software from Reed
eliminates the problem. It fixed a couple of other things into the deal.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/4/20 6:02 AM, Jeff Debes wrote:
> Muthu,
>
> Did anyone answer your comment /question?
> I know there are prior discussions / fixes  on this issue, but I was not
> paying close  attention because my interest is in SSB.
> Still, I think that this CW ( false initiation) is deficiency in design
> that should be fixed in the kit as it is shipped. The basic kit should
> work acceptably /basically without necessary modification  in both CW
> and SSB modes after proper assembly and alignment.
>
> Jeff
> AC2JB



--
jeff.debes@...


Reed N
 

Muthu,

I don't see any links here yet, so let me provide them in case you weren't already able to track them down yourself. See Appendix B in the manual for download and installation instructions.
User guide: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jlllZbvFMCzO1MJLzlJDGb10HXSehlFNMDPsxGJZtvY/edit#
Software/download: https://github.com/reedbn/ubitxv6/


Jeff,

Re: why isn't this fixed stock: I don't know exactly. A similar thing happened with the earlier uBiTX models, where KD8CEC's version still reigns supreme. Since all the code is on GitHub, it would be easy for Ashhar to merge any/all of it back into his own stock code base. My assumption is that he has other things he'd rather do with his time than manage the code bases, and probably doesn't see it as a priority, since his software works well enough for his own use. I can't fault him too much for that, especially since he's already put so much effort into this project, and made it so easy for people like me to get started in the first place. "Don't bite the hand that feeds", and all that.


Reed


Bill Cromwell
 

Hi Neil,

My call was a social call. I was worried that the covid may have you down. It is more than enough that you lost your wife. You don't need that, too.

I have wondered if a relay, particularly the T-R relay has failed on your radio. There is a transistor that is vulnerable in there and can cause receive to fail, too. You are right that it is not the best radio but it is maybe the *cheapest*. For somebody like me it is worthwhile. I can go in and make repairs as they pop up. I bought mine to get my hands on a specimen I can use as a pattern to make my own radio modules. The open source software and hardware is valuable for that. Meanwhile I am using it as a radio and as a bench instrument. When you get the chance, send it back here and I will see what has happened to it.

Stay away from that virus and keep safe!

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/4/20 5:22 PM, Neil k8it wrote:
Bill I am OK I haven't been able to do anything just basically trying to exist but I am OK I am healthy as far as the transceiver goes I find it to be useless so I'm really getting very frustrated with it the receiver is junk Neil 73KHIT.
Thanks 73 Neil Sablatzky K8IT
On 4 Aug 2020 09:21, "Bill Cromwell" wrote:
Hi Jeff,
It has been on here several times and once again for this thread that
the factory software causes this problem. The software from Reed
eliminates the problem. It fixed a couple of other things into the deal.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 8/4/20 6:02 AM, Jeff Debes wrote:
> Muthu,
>
> Did anyone answer your comment /question?
> I know there are prior discussions / fixes  on this issue, but I
was not
> paying close  attention because my interest is in SSB.
> Still, I think that this CW ( false initiation) is deficiency in
design
> that should be fixed in the kit as it is shipped. The basic kit
should
> work acceptably /basically without necessary modification  in
both CW
> and SSB modes after proper assembly and alignment.
>
> Jeff
> AC2JB


Jeff Debes
 

Again: I’ll say that the kit as sold should have the CW initiation problem fixed. 
Perhaps Reed would offer his software solution to HF Sigs? 

There is a very wide range of interests and abilities in those licensed  amateur radio operators who purchase and build these.
I resent the attitude that amateur radio must entail expected & defined  set of interest level or technical depth etc. That attitude seems a form of snobbery.
People are thankfully highly varied in interests and abilities. 
It is absurd that CW does not work correctly in the basic kit.

Jeff
AC2JB
 



On Aug 4, 2020, at 7:34 PM, Todd Carney <carneytf@...> wrote:



What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.

Dale--I agree with you 100%. I believe some think a radio "kit" (defined in this case as a rig that only needs finishing, tweaking, and testing) is functionally--and ethically--equivalent to a cake mix. Even with a mix, there are some people who buy cakes from the bakery because they are buyers and not makers. That's okay, and I don't even care that the majority of amateur-radio operators (now) fall into that category. But if one wants to make a radio--from a kit or from scratch--then one has to accept certain realities. "Same as it ever was," to quote David Byrne and The Talking Heads.

Also, someone here said something about a "factory" flaw in the software. Look, there is no factory. There's Farhan and the women's collective who do the assembly. Farhan is not a professional engineer or software developer--he's a radio amateur just as most of us are. The women aren't professionals, either. They're just trying to support their families with some piece work. Under the name HFsignals, they have offered the BITX40 and the μBITX for an extremely-small amount of money relative to any store-bought, plug 'n play, full-warranty option available. Thousands of these have been completed and put on the air all over the world. If some can't get theirs to work, then "the fault, dear Brutus, is not in [their] stars, but in [themselves]." Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene III.

Todd K7TFC





--
jeff.debes@...


Bill Cromwell
 

Hi Jeff,

You have to ask HF Signals about that. I think they are mostly phone (SSB) oriented and not motivated to enhance the radio for CW. I have used radios that offset the transmit instead of the receive for CW operation. If you know how your radio(s) work, either one will get the job done. As for me, I want to know what frequency is being transmitted as it may be outside my privileges. It isn't that difficult to do some simple arithmetic in our heads.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/4/20 5:47 PM, Jeff Debes wrote:
Thanks Bill, glad to hear that. & kudos for Reed.
But why isn’t this basic fix for the issue incorporated by HF Sigs????
Jeff

On Aug 4, 2020, at 5:37 PM, Neil k8it <k8it@...> wrote:


Bill I am OK I haven't been able to do anything just basically trying to exist but I am OK I am healthy as far as the transceiver goes I find it to be useless so I'm really getting very frustrated with it the receiver is junk Neil 73KHIT.

Thanks 73 Neil Sablatzky K8IT

On 4 Aug 2020 09:21, "Bill Cromwell" wrote:

Hi Jeff,

It has been on here several times and once again for this thread that
the factory software causes this problem. The software from Reed
eliminates the problem. It fixed a couple of other things into the
deal.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/4/20 6:02 AM, Jeff Debes wrote:
> Muthu,
>
> Did anyone answer your comment /question?
> I know there are prior discussions / fixes  on this issue, but I
was not
> paying close  attention because my interest is in SSB.
> Still, I think that this CW ( false initiation) is deficiency in
design
> that should be fixed in the kit as it is shipped. The basic kit
should
> work acceptably /basically without necessary modification  in
both CW
> and SSB modes after proper assembly and alignment.
>
> Jeff
> AC2JB

--
*jeff.debes@...*


Bob Lunsford <nocrud222@...>
 

Considering the CW missing initial dit problem, I wonder if it would be possible to merely use a CW switched audio oscillator or CPO set at about 800 Hz fed into the microphone or the mic line...? This would eliminate the missing initial dit problem, if a good transmitted signal is achieved. Such an oscillator could be built on a one-inch square board. Fed into the radio set for USB is my thought. Any suggestions and/or advice?

If the operating room is quiet enough, a good/decent code practice oscillator could also be used by feeding the speaker output acoustically into the mic if the PTT button is held in although a small box that feeds the mic through to the radio along with a small toggle switch for the PTT line could be installed in the box. Just another thought.

I have not experimented with the microphone supplied with the complete kit but wonder if the jack on the case where the mic cable enters the mic could be for an external audio source. Has anyone experimented with this jack to see what it will do? I hate to take the mic apart, did it twice and don't want to risk a broken wire.

Bob — KK5R

On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 8:32:02 AM EDT, Jeff Debes <jeff.debes@...> wrote:


Again: I’ll say that the kit as sold should have the CW initiation problem fixed. 
Perhaps Reed would offer his software solution to HF Sigs? 

There is a very wide range of interests and abilities in those licensed  amateur radio operators who purchase and build these.
I resent the attitude that amateur radio must entail expected & defined  set of interest level or technical depth etc. That attitude seems a form of snobbery.
People are thankfully highly varied in interests and abilities. 
It is absurd that CW does not work correctly in the basic kit.

Jeff
AC2JB
 



On Aug 4, 2020, at 7:34 PM, Todd Carney <carneytf@...> wrote:



What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.

Dale--I agree with you 100%. I believe some think a radio "kit" (defined in this case as a rig that only needs finishing, tweaking, and testing) is functionally--and ethically--equivalent to a cake mix. Even with a mix, there are some people who buy cakes from the bakery because they are buyers and not makers. That's okay, and I don't even care that the majority of amateur-radio operators (now) fall into that category. But if one wants to make a radio--from a kit or from scratch--then one has to accept certain realities. "Same as it ever was," to quote David Byrne and The Talking Heads.

Also, someone here said something about a "factory" flaw in the software. Look, there is no factory. There's Farhan and the women's collective who do the assembly. Farhan is not a professional engineer or software developer--he's a radio amateur just as most of us are. The women aren't professionals, either. They're just trying to support their families with some piece work. Under the name HFsignals, they have offered the BITX40 and the μBITX for an extremely-small amount of money relative to any store-bought, plug 'n play, full-warranty option available. Thousands of these have been completed and put on the air all over the world. If some can't get theirs to work, then "the fault, dear Brutus, is not in [their] stars, but in [themselves]." Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene III.

Todd K7TFC





--
jeff.debes@...


Bill Cromwell
 

Hi Bob,

In the past some SSB transceivers used an audio tone to generate the CW. To meet spectral purity requirements the tone *must* be extremely clean sine wave. Even the famous maker guys got in trouble with that so they dropped it. That is how fldigi can send CW. Be careful about proper adjustments so as to not splatter all over the band. Be sure the tome is a single frequency sine wave.

More recently, as in my Kenwood, the CW sidetone is used to key the T-R switching but the tone itself is NOT transmitted. It keys the T-R by applying the sidetone to the VOX circuit. The Kenwood also will do the T-R changeover with a front panel switch labeled - wait for it - "Send and Receive". I haven't tried it with uBitX but you might get it to work with either the VOX or the manual switch. The switch might be PTT line but I think I recall using PTT in CW mode actually sending the carrier. We only want it to switch over to TX and remain silent until we hit the key (or paddles). You might be able to add a separate switch to the radio just for that purpose. With my Kenwood, using the manual switch I can very quickly get into transmit just ahead of the first dit (left and right hand coordination). I suspect that sometimes the semi-QSK with the VOX mode cuts off some of the first element sent. uBitX is not unique in that. By the way, "semi QSK" really means "not QSK".

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/5/20 11:58 AM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
Considering the CW missing initial dit problem, I wonder if it would be possible to merely use a CW switched audio oscillator or CPO set at about 800 Hz fed into the microphone or the mic line...? This would eliminate the missing initial dit problem, if a good transmitted signal is achieved. Such an oscillator could be built on a one-inch square board. Fed into the radio set for USB is my thought. Any suggestions and/or advice?
If the operating room is quiet enough, a good/decent code practice oscillator could also be used by feeding the speaker output acoustically into the mic if the PTT button is held in although a small box that feeds the mic through to the radio along with a small toggle switch for the PTT line could be installed in the box. Just another thought.
I have not experimented with the microphone supplied with the complete kit but wonder if the jack on the case where the mic cable enters the mic could be for an external audio source. Has anyone experimented with this jack to see what it will do? I hate to take the mic apart, did it twice and don't want to risk a broken wire.
Bob — KK5R
On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 8:32:02 AM EDT, Jeff Debes <jeff.debes@...> wrote:
Again: I’ll say that the kit as sold should have the CW initiation problem fixed.
Perhaps Reed would offer his software solution to HF Sigs?
There is a very wide range of interests and abilities in those licensed  amateur radio operators who purchase and build these.
I resent the attitude that amateur radio must entail expected & defined  set of interest level or technical depth etc. That attitude seems a form of snobbery.
People are thankfully highly varied in interests and abilities.
It is absurd that CW does not work correctly in the basic kit.
Jeff
AC2JB

On Aug 4, 2020, at 7:34 PM, Todd Carney <carneytf@...> wrote:



What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of
some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might
assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.

Dale--I agree with you 100%. I believe some think a radio "kit" (defined in this case as a rig that only needs finishing, tweaking, and testing) is functionally--and ethically--equivalent to a cake mix. Even with a mix, there are some people who buy cakes from the bakery because they are /buyers/ and not /makers/. That's okay, and I don't even care that the majority of amateur-radio operators (now) fall into that category. But if one wants to /make/ a radio--from a kit or from scratch--then one has to accept certain realities. "Same as it ever was," to quote David Byrne and The Talking Heads.

Also, someone here said something about a "factory" flaw in the software. Look, there is no /factory/. There's Farhan and the women's collective who do the assembly. Farhan is not a professional engineer or software developer--he's a radio /amateur/ just as most of us are. The women aren't professionals, either. They're just trying to support their families with some piece work. Under the name HFsignals, they have offered the BITX40 and the μBITX for an extremely-small amount of money relative to any store-bought, plug 'n play, full-warranty option available. Thousands of these have been completed and put on the air all over the world. If some can't get theirs to work, then "the fault, dear Brutus, is not in [their] stars, but in [themselves]." Shakespeare, /Julius Caesar/, Act I, Scene III.

Todd K7TFC



--
*jeff.debes@...*


Bob Lunsford <nocrud222@...>
 

You are also right, Bill...

On my FT-890m, there are two push-button switches on the left-top of the panel. One is VOX and is what it says. The one above it is MOX which turns on the transmitter. I use it for fast-checking SWR while in FM or AM mode. (FM is best but AM is automatically at a lower power level.)

I know spectral purity is most important for any transmitted signal. Over-driving the audio line is asking for splatter regardless of how pure the audio sine wave is, however, because it increases the chance that the signal is being forced into a circuit that limits amplitude. Any forcefully chopping of the audio signal is somewhat inviting squaring of the waveform and this creates harmonics, etc.

A "pure" sine wave introduced in the mic audio line is a way to eliminate missing dits but the critical element is the purity of the audio, as you said. It is also advisable to listen to the transmitted signal (into a dummy load) while listening to the signal on a separate receiver set to CW mode to make sure the transmitted signal is providing the proper offset. Setting the receiver to "clarify" or using RIT as a constant is also inviting problems of missed contacts, etc.

Bob — KK5R

On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 12:17:15 PM EDT, Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:


Hi Bob,

In the past some SSB transceivers used an audio tone to generate the CW.
To meet spectral purity requirements the tone *must* be extremely clean
sine wave. Even the famous maker guys got in trouble with that so they
dropped it. That is how fldigi can send CW. Be careful about proper
adjustments so as to not splatter all over the band. Be sure the tome is
a single frequency sine wave.

More recently, as in my Kenwood, the CW sidetone is used to key the T-R
switching but the tone itself is NOT transmitted. It keys the T-R by
applying the sidetone to the VOX circuit. The Kenwood also will do the
T-R changeover with a front panel switch labeled - wait for it - "Send
and Receive". I haven't tried it with uBitX but you might get it to work
with either the VOX or the manual switch. The switch might be PTT line
but I think I recall using PTT in CW mode actually sending the carrier.
We only want it to switch over to TX and remain silent until we hit the
key (or paddles). You might be able to add a separate switch to the
radio just for that purpose. With my Kenwood, using the manual switch I
can very quickly get into transmit just ahead of the first dit (left and
right hand coordination). I suspect that sometimes the semi-QSK with the
VOX mode cuts off some of the first element sent. uBitX is not unique in
that. By the way, "semi QSK" really means "not QSK".

73,

Bill  KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/5/20 11:58 AM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
> Considering the CW missing initial dit problem, I wonder if it would be
> possible to merely use a CW switched audio oscillator or CPO set at
> about 800 Hz fed into the microphone or the mic line...? This would
> eliminate the missing initial dit problem, if a good transmitted signal
> is achieved. Such an oscillator could be built on a one-inch square
> board. Fed into the radio set for USB is my thought. Any suggestions
> and/or advice?
>
> If the operating room is quiet enough, a good/decent code practice
> oscillator could also be used by feeding the speaker output acoustically
> into the mic if the PTT button is held in although a small box that
> feeds the mic through to the radio along with a small toggle switch for
> the PTT line could be installed in the box. Just another thought.
>
> I have not experimented with the microphone supplied with the complete
> kit but wonder if the jack on the case where the mic cable enters the
> mic could be for an external audio source. Has anyone experimented with
> this jack to see what it will do? I hate to take the mic apart, did it
> twice and don't want to risk a broken wire.
>
> Bob — KK5R
>
> On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 8:32:02 AM EDT, Jeff Debes
> <jeff.debes@...> wrote:
>
>
> Again: I’ll say that the kit as sold should have the CW initiation
> problem fixed.
> Perhaps Reed would offer his software solution to HF Sigs?
>
> There is a very wide range of interests and abilities in those licensed
>   amateur radio operators who purchase and build these.
> I resent the attitude that amateur radio must entail expected & defined
>   set of interest level or technical depth etc. That attitude seems a
> form of snobbery.
> People are thankfully highly varied in interests and abilities.
> It is absurd that CW does not work correctly in the basic kit.
>
> Jeff
> AC2JB
>
>
>
>> On Aug 4, 2020, at 7:34 PM, Todd Carney <carneytf@...> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>>    What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of
>>    some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might
>>    assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.
>>
>> Dale--I agree with you 100%. I believe some think a radio "kit"
>> (defined in this case as a rig that only needs finishing, tweaking,
>> and testing) is functionally--and ethically--equivalent to a cake mix.
>> Even with a mix, there are some people who buy cakes from the bakery
>> because they are /buyers/ and not /makers/. That's okay, and I don't
>> even care that the majority of amateur-radio operators (now) fall into
>> that category. But if one wants to /make/ a radio--from a kit or from
>> scratch--then one has to accept certain realities. "Same as it ever
>> was," to quote David Byrne and The Talking Heads.
>>
>> Also, someone here said something about a "factory" flaw in the
>> software. Look, there is no /factory/. There's Farhan and the women's
>> collective who do the assembly. Farhan is not a professional engineer
>> or software developer--he's a radio /amateur/ just as most of us are.
>> The women aren't professionals, either. They're just trying to support
>> their families with some piece work. Under the name HFsignals, they
>> have offered the BITX40 and the μBITX for an extremely-small amount of
>> money relative to any store-bought, plug 'n play, full-warranty option
>> available. Thousands of these have been completed and put on the air
>> all over the world. If some can't get theirs to work, then "the fault,
>> dear Brutus, is not in [their] stars, but in [themselves]."
>> Shakespeare, /Julius Caesar/, Act I, Scene III.
>>
>> Todd K7TFC
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> *jeff.debes@...*
>




Bill Cromwell
 

Hi Bob,

I posted just to be sure you are aware of the pitfalls. I believe we have better materials now than we had back then. When most of us run the digital modes we are feeding audio tones into an SSB transmitter. If you tale a look at what is on the air you will see some that are not so good. There are many that look okay. So we know it can be done:)

Good luck with your project.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 8/5/20 1:22 PM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
You are also right, Bill...
On my FT-890m, there are two push-button switches on the left-top of the panel. One is VOX and is what it says. The one above it is MOX which turns on the transmitter. I use it for fast-checking SWR while in FM or AM mode. (FM is best but AM is automatically at a lower power level.)
I know spectral purity is most important for any transmitted signal. Over-driving the audio line is asking for splatter regardless of how pure the audio sine wave is, however, because it increases the chance that the signal is being forced into a circuit that limits amplitude. Any forcefully chopping of the audio signal is somewhat inviting squaring of the waveform and this creates harmonics, etc.
A "pure" sine wave introduced in the mic audio line is a way to eliminate missing dits but the critical element is the purity of the audio, as you said. It is also advisable to listen to the transmitted signal (into a dummy load) while listening to the signal on a separate receiver set to CW mode to make sure the transmitted signal is providing the proper offset. Setting the receiver to "clarify" or using RIT as a constant is also inviting problems of missed contacts, etc.
Bob — KK5R
On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 12:17:15 PM EDT, Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:
Hi Bob,
In the past some SSB transceivers used an audio tone to generate the CW.
To meet spectral purity requirements the tone *must* be extremely clean
sine wave. Even the famous maker guys got in trouble with that so they
dropped it. That is how fldigi can send CW. Be careful about proper
adjustments so as to not splatter all over the band. Be sure the tome is
a single frequency sine wave.
More recently, as in my Kenwood, the CW sidetone is used to key the T-R
switching but the tone itself is NOT transmitted. It keys the T-R by
applying the sidetone to the VOX circuit. The Kenwood also will do the
T-R changeover with a front panel switch labeled - wait for it - "Send
and Receive". I haven't tried it with uBitX but you might get it to work
with either the VOX or the manual switch. The switch might be PTT line
but I think I recall using PTT in CW mode actually sending the carrier.
We only want it to switch over to TX and remain silent until we hit the
key (or paddles). You might be able to add a separate switch to the
radio just for that purpose. With my Kenwood, using the manual switch I
can very quickly get into transmit just ahead of the first dit (left and
right hand coordination). I suspect that sometimes the semi-QSK with the
VOX mode cuts off some of the first element sent. uBitX is not unique in
that. By the way, "semi QSK" really means "not QSK".
73,
Bill  KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 8/5/20 11:58 AM, Bob Lunsford via groups.io wrote:
> Considering the CW missing initial dit problem, I wonder if it would be
> possible to merely use a CW switched audio oscillator or CPO set at
> about 800 Hz fed into the microphone or the mic line...? This would
> eliminate the missing initial dit problem, if a good transmitted signal
> is achieved. Such an oscillator could be built on a one-inch square
> board. Fed into the radio set for USB is my thought. Any suggestions
> and/or advice?
>
> If the operating room is quiet enough, a good/decent code practice
> oscillator could also be used by feeding the speaker output acoustically
> into the mic if the PTT button is held in although a small box that
> feeds the mic through to the radio along with a small toggle switch for
> the PTT line could be installed in the box. Just another thought.
>
> I have not experimented with the microphone supplied with the complete
> kit but wonder if the jack on the case where the mic cable enters the
> mic could be for an external audio source. Has anyone experimented with
> this jack to see what it will do? I hate to take the mic apart, did it
> twice and don't want to risk a broken wire.
>
> Bob — KK5R
>
> On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 8:32:02 AM EDT, Jeff Debes
> <jeff.debes@... <mailto:jeff.debes@...>> wrote:
>
>
> Again: I’ll say that the kit as sold should have the CW initiation
> problem fixed.
> Perhaps Reed would offer his software solution to HF Sigs?
>
> There is a very wide range of interests and abilities in those licensed
>   amateur radio operators who purchase and build these.
> I resent the attitude that amateur radio must entail expected & defined
>   set of interest level or technical depth etc. That attitude seems a
> form of snobbery.
> People are thankfully highly varied in interests and abilities.
> It is absurd that CW does not work correctly in the basic kit.
>
> Jeff
> AC2JB
>
>
>
>> On Aug 4, 2020, at 7:34 PM, Todd Carney <carneytf@...
<mailto:carneytf@...>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>>    What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of
>>    some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might
>>    assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.
>>
>> Dale--I agree with you 100%. I believe some think a radio "kit"
>> (defined in this case as a rig that only needs finishing, tweaking,
>> and testing) is functionally--and ethically--equivalent to a cake mix.
>> Even with a mix, there are some people who buy cakes from the bakery
>> because they are /buyers/ and not /makers/. That's okay, and I don't
>> even care that the majority of amateur-radio operators (now) fall into
>> that category. But if one wants to /make/ a radio--from a kit or from
>> scratch--then one has to accept certain realities. "Same as it ever
>> was," to quote David Byrne and The Talking Heads.
>>
>> Also, someone here said something about a "factory" flaw in the
>> software. Look, there is no /factory/. There's Farhan and the women's
>> collective who do the assembly. Farhan is not a professional engineer
>> or software developer--he's a radio /amateur/ just as most of us are.
>> The women aren't professionals, either. They're just trying to support
>> their families with some piece work. Under the name HFsignals, they
>> have offered the BITX40 and the μBITX for an extremely-small amount of
>> money relative to any store-bought, plug 'n play, full-warranty option
>> available. Thousands of these have been completed and put on the air
>> all over the world. If some can't get theirs to work, then "the fault,
>> dear Brutus, is not in [their] stars, but in [themselves]."
>> Shakespeare, /Julius Caesar/, Act I, Scene III.
>>
>> Todd K7TFC
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> *jeff.debes@... <mailto:jeff.debes@...>*
>


Skip Davis
 

Jeff the initial design was for HF SSB by a non CW enthusiast and he has moved on to other projects. CW was included as a after thought and yes the code could be refined for CW except he isn’t a professional programmer either. The source code is open source so if you have the ability to interpret the program differences between Reed’s and the original code you can correct it and also enhance it to add features to your liking. If you are unwilling to experiment with it and possibly update the code with another version then this was not the best choice at this time for you. 

Skip Davis, NC9O 

On Aug 5, 2020, at 08:32, Jeff Debes <jeff.debes@...> wrote:

Again: I’ll say that the kit as sold should have the CW initiation problem fixed. 
Perhaps Reed would offer his software solution to HF Sigs? 

There is a very wide range of interests and abilities in those licensed  amateur radio operators who purchase and build these.
I resent the attitude that amateur radio must entail expected & defined  set of interest level or technical depth etc. That attitude seems a form of snobbery.
People are thankfully highly varied in interests and abilities. 
It is absurd that CW does not work correctly in the basic kit.

Jeff
AC2JB
 



On Aug 4, 2020, at 7:34 PM, Todd Carney <carneytf@...> wrote:



What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.

Dale--I agree with you 100%. I believe some think a radio "kit" (defined in this case as a rig that only needs finishing, tweaking, and testing) is functionally--and ethically--equivalent to a cake mix. Even with a mix, there are some people who buy cakes from the bakery because they are buyers and not makers. That's okay, and I don't even care that the majority of amateur-radio operators (now) fall into that category. But if one wants to make a radio--from a kit or from scratch--then one has to accept certain realities. "Same as it ever was," to quote David Byrne and The Talking Heads.

Also, someone here said something about a "factory" flaw in the software. Look, there is no factory. There's Farhan and the women's collective who do the assembly. Farhan is not a professional engineer or software developer--he's a radio amateur just as most of us are. The women aren't professionals, either. They're just trying to support their families with some piece work. Under the name HFsignals, they have offered the BITX40 and the μBITX for an extremely-small amount of money relative to any store-bought, plug 'n play, full-warranty option available. Thousands of these have been completed and put on the air all over the world. If some can't get theirs to work, then "the fault, dear Brutus, is not in [their] stars, but in [themselves]." Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene III.

Todd K7TFC





--
jeff.debes@...


Jeff Debes
 

It would be better to not advertise the kit as  supporting CW until this issue is fixed in the kit as sold by HF Sigs
I stand by my prior comments on this.
Jeff
AC2JB




On Aug 5, 2020, at 3:47 PM, Skip Davis via groups.io <skipnc9o@...> wrote:

Jeff the initial design was for HF SSB by a non CW enthusiast and he has moved on to other projects. CW was included as a after thought and yes the code could be refined for CW except he isn’t a professional programmer either. The source code is open source so if you have the ability to interpret the program differences between Reed’s and the original code you can correct it and also enhance it to add features to your liking. If you are unwilling to experiment with it and possibly update the code with another version then this was not the best choice at this time for you. 

Skip Davis, NC9O 

On Aug 5, 2020, at 08:32, Jeff Debes <jeff.debes@...> wrote:

Again: I’ll say that the kit as sold should have the CW initiation problem fixed. 
Perhaps Reed would offer his software solution to HF Sigs? 

There is a very wide range of interests and abilities in those licensed  amateur radio operators who purchase and build these.
I resent the attitude that amateur radio must entail expected & defined  set of interest level or technical depth etc. That attitude seems a form of snobbery.
People are thankfully highly varied in interests and abilities. 
It is absurd that CW does not work correctly in the basic kit.

Jeff
AC2JB
 



On Aug 4, 2020, at 7:34 PM, Todd Carney <carneytf@...> wrote:



What I find a bit upsetting is the lack of technical knowledge of some owners and the complete lack of test equipment that one might assume to be required to finish a kit transceiver.

Dale--I agree with you 100%. I believe some think a radio "kit" (defined in this case as a rig that only needs finishing, tweaking, and testing) is functionally--and ethically--equivalent to a cake mix. Even with a mix, there are some people who buy cakes from the bakery because they are buyers and not makers. That's okay, and I don't even care that the majority of amateur-radio operators (now) fall into that category. But if one wants to make a radio--from a kit or from scratch--then one has to accept certain realities. "Same as it ever was," to quote David Byrne and The Talking Heads.

Also, someone here said something about a "factory" flaw in the software. Look, there is no factory. There's Farhan and the women's collective who do the assembly. Farhan is not a professional engineer or software developer--he's a radio amateur just as most of us are. The women aren't professionals, either. They're just trying to support their families with some piece work. Under the name HFsignals, they have offered the BITX40 and the μBITX for an extremely-small amount of money relative to any store-bought, plug 'n play, full-warranty option available. Thousands of these have been completed and put on the air all over the world. If some can't get theirs to work, then "the fault, dear Brutus, is not in [their] stars, but in [themselves]." Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene III.

Todd K7TFC





--
jeff.debes@...

--
jeff.debes@...