Topics

Modern Receiver Design?

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

I'm an OF! I went to school when radios had tubes. Except the CRYSTAL SET. I did make one of these when I was a kid. Late 1940's.
 
I remember TRF radios, REGEN radios, and the long standing SUPERHET.
 
I have read about DC recivers but I have never used one. I have a 49'er to build I I hope to do it soon.
 
A few years ago I bought a SoftRock SDR and I have been using it during some contests. I'm going to try it again this weekend.
 
Because of my age I like stuff that I can accumulate the parts "ONE PIECE AT A TIME" and build when I get enough to start.
 
I am getting the impression the radio technology is moving to the QSD/DSP direction. I have looked at several radio chips and they have moved from superhet to QSD.
 
Are there any books on the new radio technology. My latest ARRL handbok is 2010. It doesn't say much about this stuff.
 
I'm a retired SrEE (over 40 years design experiance) and I spent most of my last 15 years writing microcontroller firmware. I got onto the Atmel chips probably 15 years ago. Before that I was working with PIC chips.
 
My first microcomputer was the Intel 8008 in 1973. I was in one of the first groups to use the Intel 8080. In 1975 a 8080 chip cst $300. That was just the chip.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
 
 

eyelessmisfit
 

Welcome to the group, seems like there are more than a few of us. Built a crystal set, wound the coil on a toilet paper tube. Things were a lot different when a person could fix a valued piece by looking to see which tube quit glowing. My 1st transmitter was a single 6l6 crystal oscillaator/final filter. 5 watts on the novice band, and one could work most states with a 1/4 wave 40 meter vertical with 3 radicals pointing east. Like I say welcome, there probably isn't room for us old geezers much longer.!
Ron W0QVJ.



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

W5ET
 

And it was crystal controlled.  That”s all you could use back then.
 
 
 

Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 3:58 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?
 
Welcome to the group, seems like there are more than a few of us. Built a crystal set, wound the coil on a toilet paper tube. Things were a lot different when a person could fix a valued piece by looking to see which tube quit glowing. My 1st transmitter was a single 6l6 crystal oscillaator/final filter. 5 watts on the novice band, and one could work most states with a 1/4 wave 40 meter vertical with 3 radicals pointing east. Like I say welcome, there probably isn't room for us old geezers much longer.!
Ron W0QVJ.
 
 
 
Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

jjpurdum
 

Who you callin' an old geezer? Just cuz I got my license in 1954 doesn't mean I'm...errr...yes, it does.

Jack, W8TEE

On Wednesday, November 21, 2018, 4:58:50 PM EST, eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...> wrote:


Welcome to the group, seems like there are more than a few of us. Built a crystal set, wound the coil on a toilet paper tube. Things were a lot different when a person could fix a valued piece by looking to see which tube quit glowing. My 1st transmitter was a single 6l6 crystal oscillaator/final filter. 5 watts on the novice band, and one could work most states with a 1/4 wave 40 meter vertical with 3 radicals pointing east. Like I say welcome, there probably isn't room for us old geezers much longer.!
Ron W0QVJ.



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

Tony VK3ZTR
 

Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna  I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna  I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 

eyelessmisfit
 

My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
Happy thanksgiving!
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna  I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 

eyelessmisfit
 

BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.
You may want to sign up with them too.
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...>
Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
Happy thanksgiving!
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna  I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

I didn't know it was an "ANTENNA ANALYZER" group. The group name is "SoftwareControlledHamRadio".
 
And SDRs are Software Controlled Ham Radios.
 
I have a 49'er with Jack's VFO to build. But I still need an encoder for it.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2018 4:56 AM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.
You may want to sign up with them too.
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...>
Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
Happy thanksgiving!
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna  I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 

Alan Jones
 

Hi Ron,
According to our groups.io home page:
" This group is for anyone who is interested in using software in ham radio projects."

Al, N8WQ

On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 07:56:47 -0500, eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...> wrote:

BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.
You may want to sign up with them too.
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...>
Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
Happy thanksgiving!
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
 "Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

jjpurdum
 

Bob:

Anything that uses a µC is fair game here, especially SDR's, which is a topic near and dear to me. I actually started this group to help those who were building the Forty-9er rig that appeared in the March, 2016, issue of QST. In Ron's defense, most of the growth in this group started after my AA article that appeared in the Nov, 2017, issue of QST. It was that article that really got the group growing and, expectedly, there was a lot of discussion about the AA at that time. I've seen another spurt in membership since the DL article in the Nov, 2018, issue of QST. The common thread to all of them is the part microcontrollers play in their functioning. Makes sense, if you think about it, since I don't know crap about EE stuff, but I'm okay with software.

As to the SDR topic, does anyone really think that JackAl needs the horsepower of a Teensy 3.6 to do what it does? True, we're doing some pretty cool DSP stuff with FFT's inside JackAl, but that still leaves about 750K of code space loafing along under the direction of a 180MHz clock. Close your eyes and what's scrolling across the back of your eyelids?

Nope...SDR topics are more than welcomed here. Indeed, anything that might even remotely benefit from a µC is fair game. Personally, I've learned a lot here and that's one of the goals of this group. Some have asked me if I get upset when someone take one of my projects and then spring-boards it into an extension, like John's spearhead here on the AA. Absolutely not! That's the whole purpose of this group: To serve as a platform to enhance and improve things. I think of anything I do as a starting point. JackAl's no different. Al does all the heavy lifting...I just stand in the background and try to look smart. We both expect you people to use whatever we do as a platform to make it better, or derive new things from them. Hardware or software...all are welcomed.

This is your group and you can make it branch off in almost any direction. I'm just here to make sure we don't fly totally off the rails.

Jack, W8TEE




On Thursday, November 22, 2018, 8:55:28 AM EST, Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...> wrote:


I didn't know it was an "ANTENNA ANALYZER" group. The group name is "SoftwareControlledHamRadio".
 
And SDRs are Software Controlled Ham Radios.
 
I have a 49'er with Jack's VFO to build. But I still need an encoder for it.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2018 4:56 AM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.
You may want to sign up with them too.
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...>
Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
Happy thanksgiving!
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna  I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 

Graham, VE3GTC
 

An antenna analyzer group?

I must have joined the wrong group, I thought I joined a "Software
Controlled Ham Radio" group.

Happy Thanksgiving all,

cheers, Graham ve3gtc near Ottawa Canada

On 11/22/2018, "eyelessmisfit" <eyelessmisfit@...> wrote:

BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.You may want to sign up with them too.Ron W0QVJSent from my Galaxy Tab® E
-------- Original message --------From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...> Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00) To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design? My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.Happy thanksgiving!Ron W0QVJSent from my Galaxy Tab® E-------- Original message --------From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...> Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00) To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?
I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers.
Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
From:

Tony VK3ZTR
To:
SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?


Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna 
I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had
to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 





eyelessmisfit
 

Ok, I stand corrected. (Like I said I Didn't know the rules.🤐)
Ron W0qvj


Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Alan Jones <oalanjones@...>
Date: 11/22/18 7:01 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

Hi Ron,
According to our groups.io home page:
" This group is for anyone who is interested in using software in ham radio projects."

Al, N8WQ

On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 07:56:47 -0500, eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...> wrote:

BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.
You may want to sign up with them too.
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...>
Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
Happy thanksgiving!
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
 "Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

eyelessmisfit
 

You still may want to sign on with the sdr group. They're doing neat things with pretty expensive dongles.(I bought one of the cheaper ones, doesn't work below 100mhz, I liked the waterfall display and such, but I don't spend a lot of time on 2 meters or above and lost interest.)
An hf one would make a great panadapter.
73's
Ron



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/22/18 6:55 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

I didn't know it was an "ANTENNA ANALYZER" group. The group name is "SoftwareControlledHamRadio".
 
And SDRs are Software Controlled Ham Radios.
 
I have a 49'er with Jack's VFO to build. But I still need an encoder for it.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2018 4:56 AM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.
You may want to sign up with them too.
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...>
Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
Happy thanksgiving!
Ron W0QVJ



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna  I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 

K9HZ
 

Yes I’m on the path of modern transceiver design too…  After the uBITx came out and I purchased one, I got excited to make some upgrades with my own designs.  Since I’ve always wanted to design my own “ultra” transceiver, I started collection information and understanding leading-edge circuits to make that happen.  I retired a few months ago and that gives me a little time to work on designs when I’m not consulting (and more than I want to be working).  There are several people working on non-SDR designs as witnessed by the number of new kits available… and they should be researched to understand the good parts of what they have contributed to designs.  There are some very good books on transceiver (receiver) design too that are great starting points (one by EI9GQ called “Building a Transceiver” obtainable from the RSGB is particularly good).  You will have allies here in whatever you want to propose for a new receiver design.

 

 

Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ

 

Owner - Operator

Big Signal Ranch – K9ZC

Staunton, Illinois

 

Owner – Operator

Villa Grand Piton – J68HZ

Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I.

Rent it: www.VillaGrandPiton.com

Like us on Facebook! facebook icon

 

Moderator – North American QRO Group at Groups.IO.

 

email:  bill@...

 

 

From: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io [mailto:SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob Macklin
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 11:47 PM
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

 

I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.

 

Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.

 

QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?

 

Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers. Even WWV is in the sewer.

 

Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.

 

Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM

Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

 

Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna  I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 




AVG logo

This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com


Graham, VE3GTC
 

Ron,

that is a very good idea.

Which SDR group do you suggest? I searched for SDR and found 42 groups
but none really stood out as "the one".

Some have only a few members and others are not that active.

cheers, Graham ve3gtc near ottawa Canada

On 11/22/2018, "eyelessmisfit" <eyelessmisfit@...> wrote:

You still may want to sign on with the sdr group. They're doing neat things with pretty expensive dongles.(I bought one of the cheaper ones, doesn't work below 100mhz, I liked the waterfall display and such, but I don't spend a lot of time on 2 meters or above and lost interest.)An hf one would make a great panadapter.73'sRonSent from my Galaxy Tab® E
-------- Original message --------From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...> Date: 11/22/18 6:55 AM (GMT-07:00) To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?
I didn't know it was an "ANTENNA ANALYZER" group. The group name is "SoftwareControlledHamRadio".
 
And SDRs are Software Controlled Ham Radios.
 
I have a 49'er with Jack's VFO to build. But I still need an encoder for it.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
From:
eyelessmisfit

To:
SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2018 4:56 AM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?


BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.
You may want to sign up with them too.
Ron W0QVJ







Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E




-------- Original message --------
From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...>

Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?



My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
Happy thanksgiving!
Ron W0QVJ







Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E




-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?



I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
 
Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
 
QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
 
Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers.
Even WWV is in the sewer.
 
Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
From:

Tony VK3ZTR
To:
SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?


Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna 
I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had
to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.

Tony VK3ZTR 





Doug W
 

On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 08:53 AM, eyelessmisfit wrote:
You still may want to sign on with the sdr group. They're doing neat things with pretty expensive dongles.(I bought one of the cheaper ones, doesn't work below 100mhz, I liked the waterfall display and such, but I don't spend a lot of time on 2 meters or above and lost interest.)
An hf one would make a great panadapter.
73's
Ron
add an upconverter like this one http://www.nooelec.com/store/ham-it-up.html to your cheap rtl-sdr and you're in business for about $40

eyelessmisfit
 

Doug, That's great! Thanks much!
Ron



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

eyelessmisfit
 

I've been lurking in sdr-radio for awhile. They've been developing consoles, etc. Seems pretty active.
73's
Ron



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E

-------- Original message --------
From: Graham <planophore@...>
Date: 11/22/18 8:36 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?

Ron,

that is a very good idea.

Which SDR group do you suggest?  I searched for SDR and found 42 groups
but none really stood out as "the one".

Some have only a few members and others are not that active.

cheers, Graham ve3gtc near ottawa Canada


On 11/22/2018, "eyelessmisfit" <eyelessmisfit@...> wrote:

>You still may want to sign on with the sdr group. They're doing neat things with pretty expensive dongles.(I bought one of the cheaper ones, doesn't work below 100mhz, I liked the waterfall display and such, but I don't spend a lot of time on 2 meters or above and lost interest.)An hf one would make a great panadapter.73'sRonSent from my Galaxy Tab® E
>-------- Original message --------From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...> Date: 11/22/18  6:55 AM  (GMT-07:00) To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?
>I didn't know it was an "ANTENNA ANALYZER" group. The group name is "SoftwareControlledHamRadio".
> 
>And SDRs are Software Controlled Ham Radios.
> 
>I have a 49'er with Jack's VFO to build. But I still need an encoder for it.
> 
>Bob Macklin
>K5MYJ
>Seattle, Wa.
>"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From:
>eyelessmisfit
>
>To:
>SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
>Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2018 4:56 AM
>Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?
>
>
>BTW, I Don't know the rules around here, but receiver design is pretty off topic for an antenna analyzer group. You may want to start another group. Also there is already an SDR topic group in this forum.
>You may want to sign up with them too.
>Ron W0QVJ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E
>
>
>
>
>-------- Original message --------
>From: eyelessmisfit <eyelessmisfit@...>
>
>Date: 11/22/18 5:07 AM (GMT-07:00)
>To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
>Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?
>
>
>
>My 49er is direct conversion, but the ubitx is dual conversion. Don't think things have changed all that much. Circuits seem to be a little lower noise, so you can use higher gain in the front end, but It's still a balancing game.
>Happy thanksgiving!
>Ron W0QVJ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Sent from my Galaxy Tab® E
>
>
>
>
>-------- Original message --------
>From: Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
>Date: 11/21/18 10:47 PM (GMT-07:00)
>To: SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
>Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?
>
>
>
>I was hoping this thread would lead to a discussion of modern recover design.
> 
>Homebrew superhets seem to be out of style now. Most seem to be Direct Conversion types. SDR is the new kid on the block.
> 
>QRP Labs has a thing to hang on  the output of a SDR (QSD) receiver to get the audio without the need for a computer. How well does it work?
> 
>Right now because of the point of the current solar cycle the ham bands at my QTH are in the sewer. But I do see some activity on Congest days. During the last contest I was able to decode about 10 stations. And I do have several good receivers.
> Even WWV is in the sewer.
> 
>Anyway I want to study modern receiver design.
> 
>Bob Macklin
>K5MYJ
>Seattle, Wa.
>"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From:
>
>Tony VK3ZTR
>To:
>SoftwareControlledHamRadio@groups.io
>Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 8:06 PM
>Subject: Re: [SoftwareControlledHamRadio] Modern Receiver Design?
>
>
>Just my penny worth. My 1st transmitter was a domestic radio with a ECH35 as a mixer/oscillator I found that the local oscillator would feed up the Antenna at IF frequency away so by putting a Carbon Mic (from telephone handset) in series with long wire antenna 
> I could modulate. I was 10 at time. So then you place record player with LP playing next to Mic, get on your bike with one of these new Transistor radios things. I could cycle about a mile away any tune in! It was surprising how strong the signal was. Had
> to cycle back home (in UK) to change the record, did upgrade to an auto changer later.
>
>Tony VK3ZTR 
>
>
>
>
>
>



Doug W
 

 https://www.rtl-sdr.com/
is a great resource