Topics

Sherwood test results -- 6600M


Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

Rob just posted his results of the 6600M results.    The receivers are sorted by Third Order Dynamic Range Narrow Spaced

  • 6700 remains in #1 position
  • 6600M is in #12 position


Details here.

http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

There have been some comments that a hardware fix for the 6600 may be in process.  I don't know the details but expect FRS will make some announcements about it.

Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
6700 & SSDR-W  V 2.1.30
Win10

***** EXCERPT showing the 6700 and 6600M  ********


Ria - N2RJ <rjairam@...>
 

That top tier is really tough competition.

As I've said though, any of the top rigs on Sherwood's list are fantastic performers and normal humans aren't likely to notice the difference. 

Ria
N2RJ



On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ <al@...> wrote:
Rob just posted his results of the 6600M results.    The receivers are sorted by Third Order Dynamic Range Narrow Spaced

  • 6700 remains in #1 position
  • 6600M is in #12 position


Details here.

http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

There have been some comments that a hardware fix for the 6600 may be in process.  I don't know the details but expect FRS will make some announcements about it.

Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
6700 & SSDR-W  V 2.1.30
Win10

***** EXCERPT showing the 6700 and 6600M  ********



kb5ve
 

Where did the 6500 end up never saw it reviewed

Dale Hankins 
KB5VE
DEC SE Mississippi ARES

On May 14, 2018, at 4:07 PM, Ria - N2RJ <rjairam@...> wrote:

That top tier is really tough competition.

As I've said though, any of the top rigs on Sherwood's list are fantastic performers and normal humans aren't likely to notice the difference. 

Ria
N2RJ



On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ <al@...> wrote:
Rob just posted his results of the 6600M results.    The receivers are sorted by Third Order Dynamic Range Narrow Spaced

  • 6700 remains in #1 position
  • 6600M is in #12 position


Details here.

http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

There have been some comments that a hardware fix for the 6600 may be in process.  I don't know the details but expect FRS will make some announcements about it.

Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
6700 & SSDR-W  V 2.1.30
Win10

***** EXCERPT showing the 6700 and 6600M  ********



Reg Boudinot
 

FLEX emailed out a PEN notification at 3:00 PM EDT today regarding how to get the free PEN updates.  FLEX is paying the shipping both ways.  Good for FLEX!

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 3:57 PM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Rob just posted his results of the 6600M results.    The receivers are sorted by Third Order Dynamic Range Narrow Spaced

  • 6700 remains in #1 position
  • 6600M is in #12 position



Details here.

http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

There have been some comments that a hardware fix for the 6600 may be in process.  I don't know the details but expect FRS will make some announcements about it.

Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
6700 & SSDR-W  V 2.1.30
Win10

***** EXCERPT showing the 6700 and 6600M  ********


Rob Sherwood
 

For clarification, the 6700 #1 position goes back to 2014.  A 6700 I tested in 2017 is #18.  Also note that there are “second samples” between #1 and #18, so you have to differentiate between absolute position and the number of actual radio models above it.  For instance, there are two K3 radios and two K3S radios above the 6600M.  

 

I tested a 6700 in 2014 and QST tested a 6700 in 2015.  We both measured similar results with dynamic range going UP modestly when the 20 dB preamp was turned ON.  When I tested a “second sample” 6700 in 2017 and QST tested a 6500 in 2017, the dynamic range went DOWN modestly with the 20 dB preamp turned ON.

 

Why are there more than one listing for some radios?  Changes occur over time, sometimes due to design improvements and sometimes results are different for unknown reasons.  The K3 in 2015 had a new synthesizer that produced better close-in results, and the 200-Hz 6-pole roofing filter had less passive IMD than the earlier 200-Hz 5-pole filter.  (I am assuming the current 200-Hz filter is still a 6-pole, but I did not find that information on the Elecraft website today.)

 

You will note quite a difference between the two Icom R8600s on my website.  Both radios were in my lab at the same time, and they tested differently.  One is #2 and one is #16, not taking into account the “second samples”.  This appears to be sample variation of the individual ADC chips.  Data from Adam Farson and the QST for the R8600 also show a scatter as to the dynamic range measurements.

 

Don’t have a coronary over a few dB here and there.  If you have a radio with a dynamic range of 90 dB vs. one that is 100 dB, I doubt you will ever know the difference.  When all we had were “up-conversion” radios for 20+ years, (TR-7 through the IC-756 Pro III for instance), all we had were 75 dB radios.   

 

73, Rob Sherwood, NC0B

 

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 2:57 PM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Rob just posted his results of the 6600M results.    The receivers are sorted by Third Order Dynamic Range Narrow Spaced

  • 6700 remains in #1 position
  • 6600M is in #12 position



Details here.

http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

There have been some comments that a hardware fix for the 6600 may be in process.  I don't know the details but expect FRS will make some announcements about it.

Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
6700 & SSDR-W  V 2.1.30
Win10

***** EXCERPT showing the 6700 and 6600M  ********

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com


k3gc74@...
 

I see just about all of the flex models except the 6500.  would it be about the same as the 6600 ???


Rob Sherwood
 

I never had a 6500 to test.  QST tested a 6500 in 2017.  My 2017 data for a second 6700 was very similar to QST data on the 6500.  Gerald always said exclusive of the dual receivers, the 6700 and 6500 had the same circuits, and should perform the same, exclusive of minor sample variation.

 

Rob, NC0B

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of kb5ve
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 3:47 PM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Where did the 6500 end up never saw it reviewed

Dale Hankins 

KB5VE

DEC SE Mississippi ARES


On May 14, 2018, at 4:07 PM, Ria - N2RJ <rjairam@...> wrote:

That top tier is really tough competition.

 

As I've said though, any of the top rigs on Sherwood's list are fantastic performers and normal humans aren't likely to notice the difference. 

 

Ria

N2RJ

 

 

 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ <al@...> wrote:

Rob just posted his results of the 6600M results.    The receivers are sorted by Third Order Dynamic Range Narrow Spaced

  • 6700 remains in #1 position
  • 6600M is in #12 position



Details here.

http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

There have been some comments that a hardware fix for the 6600 may be in process.  I don't know the details but expect FRS will make some announcements about it.

Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
6700 & SSDR-W  V 2.1.30
Win10

***** EXCERPT showing the 6700 and 6600M  ********

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com


Carl Moreschi
 

It would be the same as the 6700.

Carl Moreschi N4PY
58 Hogwood Rd
Louisburg, NC 27549
www.n4py.com

On 5/14/2018 5:16 PM, k3gc74@... wrote:
I see just about all of the flex models except the 6500. would it be
about the same as the 6600 ???


Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

Hi Reg,
I have a 6700 and guess the PEN just went to the 6600 owners. 

  • Is it posted somewhere? 
  • Out of curiosity did the PEN note what the changes were?   

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ 
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

 


Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

Hi Rob,
It does seem like there is a lot of variability in the radios.  I guess the SDRs are even more susceptible to that with all of the software changes. 

But like you said "Don’t have a coronary over a few dB here and there.  If you have a radio with a dynamic range of 90 dB vs. one that is 100 dB, I doubt you will ever know the difference. "

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

 


Ria - N2RJ <rjairam@...>
 

I don’t know. The preamp in the 6500 seems to be different. Either way it won’t be that much different.

Ria
N2RJ


On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 6:03 PM Carl Moreschi <n4py3@...> wrote:
It would be the same as the 6700.

Carl Moreschi N4PY
58 Hogwood Rd
Louisburg, NC 27549
www.n4py.com

On 5/14/2018 5:16 PM, k3gc74@... wrote:
> I see just about all of the flex models except the 6500. would it be
> about the same as the 6600 ???
>




kb5ve
 

Thanks Rob that is what Gerald has told me over the years. I have not had anything that I liked more than my 6500.

Dale Hankins
KB5VE
DEC SE Mississippi ARES

On May 14, 2018, at 5:03 PM, Carl Moreschi <n4py3@...> wrote:

It would be the same as the 6700.

Carl Moreschi N4PY
58 Hogwood Rd
Louisburg, NC 27549
www.n4py.com

On 5/14/2018 5:16 PM, k3gc74@... wrote:
I see just about all of the flex models except the 6500. would it be
about the same as the 6600 ???


Rob Sherwood
 

Hi Al,

 

I was surprised at the data scatter for the four R8600s that were tested, two by me, one by Adam and one by the League. 

 

Rob

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 4:14 PM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Hi Rob,


It does seem like there is a lot of variability in the radios.  I guess the SDRs are even more susceptible to that with all of the software changes. 

But like you said "Don’t have a coronary over a few dB here and there.  If you have a radio with a dynamic range of 90 dB vs. one that is 100 dB, I doubt you will ever know the difference. "

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com


Gerald Youngblood
 

Rob,

Based on extensive testing that we have now automated we believe that the upcoming software upgrade (v2.2.x) you used will significantly narrow the variability in IMD3 performance in our radios.  You saw this in the fact that the measurements are monotonic now and did not vary between SCUs.  We may see a couple of dB variability between radios with the new software.  At least 1 dB of that can be measurement error.

Are you planning to do extensive radio to radio measurements on all manufacturers and major models?

Gerald



Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR
President and CEO
FlexRadio Systems(TM)



On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:42 PM, Rob Sherwood <rob@...> wrote:

Hi Al,

 

I was surprised at the data scatter for the four R8600s that were tested, two by me, one by Adam and one by the League. 

 

Rob

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 4:14 PM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Hi Rob,


It does seem like there is a lot of variability in the radios.  I guess the SDRs are even more susceptible to that with all of the software changes. 

But like you said "Don’t have a coronary over a few dB here and there.  If you have a radio with a dynamic range of 90 dB vs. one that is 100 dB, I doubt you will ever know the difference. "

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com



Rob Sherwood
 

Gerald,

 

If you read some of my posts lately on a couple reflectors, the variability of tests data on the Icom R8600 is rather surprising.  There are two samples on my web site, and when one adds in the data from Adam Farson and QST, the data scatter is significant.  Of course 1 dB would be measurement error.

 

Please see attached PDF.  Right at the bottom is data on four R8600s.

 

Rob

NC0B

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Youngblood
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 7:22 AM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Rob,

 

Based on extensive testing that we have now automated we believe that the upcoming software upgrade (v2.2.x) you used will significantly narrow the variability in IMD3 performance in our radios.  You saw this in the fact that the measurements are monotonic now and did not vary between SCUs.  We may see a couple of dB variability between radios with the new software.  At least 1 dB of that can be measurement error.

 

Are you planning to do extensive radio to radio measurements on all manufacturers and major models?

 

Gerald




Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR
President and CEO
FlexRadio Systems(TM)

Email: gerald@...

 

 

 

 

 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:42 PM, Rob Sherwood <rob@...> wrote:

Hi Al,

 

I was surprised at the data scatter for the four R8600s that were tested, two by me, one by Adam and one by the League. 

 

Rob

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 4:14 PM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Hi Rob,


It does seem like there is a lot of variability in the radios.  I guess the SDRs are even more susceptible to that with all of the software changes. 

But like you said "Don’t have a coronary over a few dB here and there.  If you have a radio with a dynamic range of 90 dB vs. one that is 100 dB, I doubt you will ever know the difference. "

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com


Gerald Youngblood
 

Rob,

Are you planning to do variability testing on other radios?  

Gerald



Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR
President and CEO
FlexRadio Systems(TM)



On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Rob Sherwood <rob@...> wrote:

Gerald,

 

If you read some of my posts lately on a couple reflectors, the variability of tests data on the Icom R8600 is rather surprising.  There are two samples on my web site, and when one adds in the data from Adam Farson and QST, the data scatter is significant.  Of course 1 dB would be measurement error.

 

Please see attached PDF.  Right at the bottom is data on four R8600s.

 

Rob

NC0B

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Youngblood
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 7:22 AM


To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Rob,

 

Based on extensive testing that we have now automated we believe that the upcoming software upgrade (v2.2.x) you used will significantly narrow the variability in IMD3 performance in our radios.  You saw this in the fact that the measurements are monotonic now and did not vary between SCUs.  We may see a couple of dB variability between radios with the new software.  At least 1 dB of that can be measurement error.

 

Are you planning to do extensive radio to radio measurements on all manufacturers and major models?

 

Gerald




Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR
President and CEO
FlexRadio Systems(TM)

Email: gerald@...

 

 

 

 

 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:42 PM, Rob Sherwood <rob@...> wrote:

Hi Al,

 

I was surprised at the data scatter for the four R8600s that were tested, two by me, one by Adam and one by the League. 

 

Rob

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 4:14 PM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Hi Rob,


It does seem like there is a lot of variability in the radios.  I guess the SDRs are even more susceptible to that with all of the software changes. 

But like you said "Don’t have a coronary over a few dB here and there.  If you have a radio with a dynamic range of 90 dB vs. one that is 100 dB, I doubt you will ever know the difference. "

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com



Rob Sherwood
 

Gerald,

 

I think our emails crossed in the ether.  I have variability on the R8600 (4 samples, two on my website), four K3/K3s on my website, and two samples of the 7300 on my website.  There is also data on three IC-781s that go back to 2006.

 

Rob

NC0B

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Youngblood
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 7:44 AM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Rob,

 

Are you planning to do variability testing on other radios?  

 

Gerald




Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR
President and CEO
FlexRadio Systems(TM)

Email: gerald@...

 

 

 

 

 

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Rob Sherwood <rob@...> wrote:

Gerald,

 

If you read some of my posts lately on a couple reflectors, the variability of tests data on the Icom R8600 is rather surprising.  There are two samples on my web site, and when one adds in the data from Adam Farson and QST, the data scatter is significant.  Of course 1 dB would be measurement error.

 

Please see attached PDF.  Right at the bottom is data on four R8600s.

 

Rob

NC0B

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Youngblood
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 7:22 AM


To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Rob,

 

Based on extensive testing that we have now automated we believe that the upcoming software upgrade (v2.2.x) you used will significantly narrow the variability in IMD3 performance in our radios.  You saw this in the fact that the measurements are monotonic now and did not vary between SCUs.  We may see a couple of dB variability between radios with the new software.  At least 1 dB of that can be measurement error.

 

Are you planning to do extensive radio to radio measurements on all manufacturers and major models?

 

Gerald




Gerald Youngblood, K5SDR
President and CEO
FlexRadio Systems(TM)

Email: gerald@...

 

 

 

 

 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:42 PM, Rob Sherwood <rob@...> wrote:

Hi Al,

 

I was surprised at the data scatter for the four R8600s that were tested, two by me, one by Adam and one by the League. 

 

Rob

 

From: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io [mailto:FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io] On Behalf Of Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 4:14 PM
To: FlexRadioSmartSDR@groups.io
Subject: Re: [FlexRadioSmartSDR] Sherwood test results -- 6600M

 

Hi Rob,


It does seem like there is a lot of variability in the radios.  I guess the SDRs are even more susceptible to that with all of the software changes. 

But like you said "Don’t have a coronary over a few dB here and there.  If you have a radio with a dynamic range of 90 dB vs. one that is 100 dB, I doubt you will ever know the difference. "

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com

 

 


If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com