Date   
Re: AirspyHF+ and Ferrite Tubes #airspyhfplus #firmware

jdow
 

Er, in what frequency range were you interested. Please tell me it was NOT around 8 MHz as that antenna would be particularly bad at 8 MHz due to the 9:1 balun. A direct coax connection with high-Q (not attenuator grade ferrite) 1:1 balun will perform pretty well for you at 8 MHz, though. (Historically I've had better luck with transformers than linear chokes.)

{^_^} Joanne

On 20180216 23:30, Mike Jackson wrote:
I thought the group might be interested in a situation that I found myself in with the new AirspyHF+ receiver.
For a few years I had a wire horizontal dipole cut for 8MHz half-wavelength coupled to a home brewed 9:1 transformer running RG58 to my receivers.
These receivers were both analogue (R-75, R5000) and SDR (Cloud-IQ, Afedri and Winradio G-33DDC) and reception was pretty good.  I had some ferrite tubes stacked at the end of my coax near the receiver to reduce common mode noise picked up along the coax.
When I received my HF+ I simply plugged it in via BNC to SMA adapter and I was away..... or was I?
Ever since that point I have not been happy with HF reception on the HF+ so I set about re-configuring the antenna system from dipole to loop to longwire, checking all connections, turning off power here and there, coupling and uncoupling the earth rod, removing VHF antennas, checking and replacing the transformer and also flashing firmware a few times to see if any changes became apparent....nothing changed, signal levels were well down over previous receivers using the exact same antenna.
I was on the cusp of putting the HF+ on the market resigned to the fact that it was not as good as the hype.  This morning I was toying with what I needed to do to dismantle the whole system and one of the first things I had to contend with was to remove the ferrite tubes from the coax so I could pull the feedline out of the shack.  It then occurred to me that removing the tubes was the one thing I had not tested so I removed them, reconnected the plug and receiver and tuned back to where I had been a few miniutes ago when I had very poor but some barely audible copy of New York aero.
Well, blow me down with a feather!  New York came in like I had never seen it before on the HF+!  A check of other frequencies yielded reception five times clearer than before.
Reception had returned, hallelujah!
It seems like I was not only choking the noise on the coax but also the signal inside the coax.
Happy days!

Re: #airspyhfplus #airspyhfplus

prog
 

On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 02:30 am, Patrick wrote:
Is it necessary to install firmware 20180215 before 20180216, or can one only run the latter (the one you name R1.3 I guess) along with SDR#1642 ?
The updates are not cumulative. You can install the latest version regardless of what you have.

Re: #airspyhfplus #airspyhfplus

Patrick
 

Hi mates !

Is it necessary to install firmware 20180215 before 20180216, or can one only run the latter (the one you name R1.3 I guess) along with SDR#1642 ?
Thanks.

Have a nice day.

Re: #airspyhfplus #airspyhfplus

prog
 

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:11 pm, VE7KED wrote:
Here is some insane results from today....   Things well, are working perfectly !!  I think we had a good propagation day today, but this far exceeded my expectations for my Attic based 20 meter dipole on the west Coast of Canada.

My HF+ had 47416 decoded transmissions today from 45 countries.

My IC-7610 had  27228 decoded transmissions today from 31 countries.

Putting that into perspective, the HF+ performance resulted in 14 additional counties heard (31% more) and (42.6%) more decoded transmissions than the IC-7610.

My test today is the best receive performance I have ever had on FT8 on 20 meters in the 5 months I have been active on the mode.  My gear runs 24/7 here in the shack in a monitoring / decoding state, and I occasionally make a contact here and there.

Now to find a deal on some additional HF+ receivers so I can get more bands up in monitor mode to give back to the community as a DX spotter.  Last one I snagged off of eBay was lost in the mail and the budget doesn't allow me to get another 3 at retail so ill need to slowly build the capacity.

Anyhow, thanks for all the great work on this...  To say I am greatly impressed...  Well, floored actually, would be a massive understatement.

73
Thanks for the report. Which version of the firmware did you use in this test? Can you check how the new settings behave with FW R1.3 and SDR# 1642?

locked Re: Problems with firmware update HF+

prog
 

On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 02:03 am, Bernard Malet wrote:
I would have liked to be encapsulated with the compressed folder a single changelog file
Thanks to Ian DXer for more information
Best regards
Bernard
Are you sure you don't need the source code too? And the schematics and spice models?

locked Re: Problems with firmware update HF+

Bernard Malet
 

I would have liked to be encapsulated with the compressed folder a single changelog file
Thanks to Ian DXer for more information
Best regards
Bernard

AirspyHF+ and Ferrite Tubes #airspyhfplus #firmware

Mike Jackson <mde.jackson@...>
 

I thought the group might be interested in a situation that I found myself in with the new AirspyHF+ receiver.
 
For a few years I had a wire horizontal dipole cut for 8MHz half-wavelength coupled to a home brewed 9:1 transformer running RG58 to my receivers.
 
These receivers were both analogue (R-75, R5000) and SDR (Cloud-IQ, Afedri and Winradio G-33DDC) and reception was pretty good.  I had some ferrite tubes stacked at the end of my coax near the receiver to reduce common mode noise picked up along the coax.
 
When I received my HF+ I simply plugged it in via BNC to SMA adapter and I was away..... or was I?
 
Ever since that point I have not been happy with HF reception on the HF+ so I set about re-configuring the antenna system from dipole to loop to longwire, checking all connections, turning off power here and there, coupling and uncoupling the earth rod, removing VHF antennas, checking and replacing the transformer and also flashing firmware a few times to see if any changes became apparent....nothing changed, signal levels were well down over previous receivers using the exact same antenna.
 
I was on the cusp of putting the HF+ on the market resigned to the fact that it was not as good as the hype.  This morning I was toying with what I needed to do to dismantle the whole system and one of the first things I had to contend with was to remove the ferrite tubes from the coax so I could pull the feedline out of the shack.  It then occurred to me that removing the tubes was the one thing I had not tested so I removed them, reconnected the plug and receiver and tuned back to where I had been a few miniutes ago when I had very poor but some barely audible copy of New York aero.
 
Well, blow me down with a feather!  New York came in like I had never seen it before on the HF+!  A check of other frequencies yielded reception five times clearer than before.
 
Reception had returned, hallelujah!
 
It seems like I was not only choking the noise on the coax but also the signal inside the coax.
 
Happy days!

Re: #airspyhfplus #airspyhfplus

VE7KED
 

Here is some insane results from today....   Things well, are working perfectly !!  I think we had a good propagation day today, but this far exceeded my expectations for my Attic based 20 meter dipole on the west Coast of Canada.

My HF+ had 47416 decoded transmissions today from 45 countries.

My IC-7610 had  27228 decoded transmissions today from 31 countries.

Putting that into perspective, the HF+ performance resulted in 14 additional counties heard (31% more) and (42.6%) more decoded transmissions than the IC-7610.

My test today is the best receive performance I have ever had on FT8 on 20 meters in the 5 months I have been active on the mode.  My gear runs 24/7 here in the shack in a monitoring / decoding state, and I occasionally make a contact here and there.

Now to find a deal on some additional HF+ receivers so I can get more bands up in monitor mode to give back to the community as a DX spotter.  Last one I snagged off of eBay was lost in the mail and the budget doesn't allow me to get another 3 at retail so ill need to slowly build the capacity.

Anyhow, thanks for all the great work on this...  To say I am greatly impressed...  Well, floored actually, would be a massive understatement.

73

Re: Much better signal levels on HF after connecting VHF antenna #airspyhfplus

Siegfried Jackstien
 

let me do a rough guess

both antennas are not very well built for shortwave ... so it might be that both coax cables have high common mode currents on shortwave (yes on the shields) ... that means both antennas together (exactly both antenna PLUS its cables) form something like a (somewhat fuzzy looking) dipole on shortwave .... the shield is couped to inner conductor with a big tubular cap (capacitance betwenn inner conductor and shield that is roughly one pif per meter) ... and then inside your receiver

i also can receive shortwave signals with my 2m/70cm vertical ... not cause the antenna is built to do that ... but just cause it is a long metal stick in the clear high up on my roof ... the bit of zig zack folding that is used for phasing the element on vhf uhf ... does not do much on shortwave ... only problem is that the input network of such a vhf uhf antenna may short out some of the shortwave signals (levels are a bit low) ... but by the same amount the received noise is lowered and so signal to noise ratio stays the same (and might be better as with a different antenna that is better for shortwave but closer to a noise source)

dg9bfc sigi


Am 16.02.2018 um 22:46 schrieb Peter Gagarinov:

Hello,

I've received my airspy hf+ today and applied firmware 1.2. When doing experiments I noticed an interesting effect.

When I plug 2 meter dipole (located inside a house next to a window) to "H" input the signal level and the overal quality of broadband reception on 7Mhz is very poor wich is expected with such a poor antenna.  BUT then I additionally plug my second Quad Band Antenna HH-9000 29/50/144/430Mhz antenna (located outside on a conditioning unit) to "V" input the quality of reception and signal levels increase significantly. HH-9000 alone doesn't seem to have a noticable sensitivity on HF...

Any ideas why this might happen? I.e. how is that possible that plugging VHF/CB antenna to "V" socket improves an efficiency of primitive 2 meter telescopic dipole antenna plugged to "H" input?

Also, can you please explain a meaning of two LEDs, are they just to be able to tell "V" from "H" in the dark?

Thanks,
Peter

Re: New file uploaded to main@airspy.groups.io

Gary
 

I got my mojo working...….thanks prog.


Gary, W5GGH

Much better signal levels on HF after connecting VHF antenna #airspyhfplus

Peter Gagarinov
 

Hello,

I've received my airspy hf+ today and applied firmware 1.2. When doing experiments I noticed an interesting effect.

When I plug 2 meter dipole (located inside a house next to a window) to "H" input the signal level and the overal quality of broadband reception on 7Mhz is very poor wich is expected with such a poor antenna.  BUT then I additionally plug my second Quad Band Antenna HH-9000 29/50/144/430Mhz antenna (located outside on a conditioning unit) to "V" input the quality of reception and signal levels increase significantly. HH-9000 alone doesn't seem to have a noticable sensitivity on HF...

Any ideas why this might happen? I.e. how is that possible that plugging VHF/CB antenna to "V" socket improves an efficiency of primitive 2 meter telescopic dipole antenna plugged to "H" input?

Also, can you please explain a meaning of two LEDs, are they just to be able to tell "V" from "H" in the dark?

Thanks,
Peter

locked Re: Problems with firmware update HF+

prog
 

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 02:06 pm, Ian DXer wrote:
The only other suggestive thought I have in regard to your comments that you might find helpful would perhaps be a brief description of firmware differences to the right of the firmware links
Or just a single changelog file.

locked Re: Problems with firmware update HF+

Ian DXer
 

Hi Bernard,

You will find the details (improvements) that each firmware release provides in the files section here in the io.groups
https://airspy.groups.io/g/main/files/Airspy%20HF+%20Firmware%20Releases

I think this negates the need for Yousef to provide a customised individual text file in each firmware package explaining the difference in firmware.
Just my thoughts on the topic. 
The only other suggestive thought I have in regard to your comments that you might find helpful would perhaps be a brief description of firmware differences to the right of the 
firmware links on https://airspy.com/airspy-hf-plus/
The implementation is Yousef's decision.

Cheers.

New file uploaded to main@airspy.groups.io

main@airspy.groups.io Notification <main+notification@...>
 

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the main@airspy.groups.io group.

File: airspy-hf-flash-20180216.zip

Uploaded By: prog

Description:
This revision adds the ATT setting to control the HF gain distribution. Also, many other fixes. To use the new features, you will need SDR# r1642 or later. The flashing software only works in Windows 7 and Windows 10. Other versions may not work. Read the instructions inside before proceeding.

You can access this file at the URL:
https://airspy.groups.io/g/main/files/Airspy%20HF+%20Firmware%20Releases/airspy-hf-flash-20180216.zip

Cheers,
The Groups.io Team

locked Re: Problems with firmware update HF+

prog
 

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 08:26 am, Bernard Malet wrote:
This is only a constructive remark
OK. What am I supposed to do? Bringing "not a problem" with "no solution" is still no value.

locked Re: Problems with firmware update HF+

Bernard Malet
 

Dear Youssef,

Firmware Updates

R09 airspy-hf-flash-20171022.zip

R1.0 airspy-hf-flash-20180119.zip

R1.1 airspy-hf-flash-20180207.zip

R1.2 airspy-hf-flash-20180215.zip

I did not expect to find Updates at the bottom of this page, but why not.
Affected page: https://airspy.com/airspy-hf-plus/

 

In each folder.zip, above there is a file: airspy-hf-flash \ README.txt, this file contains the different procedures Pre-requisites:, Recovery Procedure: but there is actually no information on the modifications or improvements contained.
It would be very pleasant to know for each of these directories airspy-hf-flash what it contains as modification or improvement.
Currently you have, Youssef you still very much moved and this is your honor, however, for us, your users, we completely ignore the content of these different Zippes folder said improvement.

This is only a constructive remark


Best regards
Bernard

Re: Problems with firmware update HF+ [SOLVED]

Ian DXer
 

I read it & noted it, but the proceeding bit-: "due to bug in the first firmware" prior to: "this procedure must be used for the first firmware upgrade" combined with external references elsewhere to r0.9 firmware which one would naturally assume proceeds r1.0 only created confusion (for my logic driven mind). Seeing r1.00.00 in SDR#1640 one might assume it doesn't apply to them as they might assume the factory provided them with the 2nd release of firmware r1.00.000 (assuming r0.9 was the first) & factory provided it before the io.groups release & therefore not applicable. Hope you can see the logic. Slightest bit of conflicting info/structure (in a paragraph or across associated webpages) can confuse one enough such that the rest of the best written sentences following won't be digested as intended.
I write tech reports & teach students - this is my experience. 
That said, assumptions often gets one into trouble as well. 
Anyway I'm sure topic getting boring now for us all.
Your provided link clarifies - thanks again.

I'll have some positive feedback experiences re the HF+ & SDR# with plug-ins re recent FM BCB DX observations with the HF+ to post in near future that should be of interest.
Keep up the great work.

Re: Problems with firmware update HF+ [SOLVED]

Mike Bott <mike_bott@...>
 

I had absolutely no issue with this update. :)

--
Mike

On 02/16/2018 07:44 AM, prog wrote:
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 04:40 am, Ian DXer wrote:
Perhaps the clarification could be further  emphasised in the read.me file (as per the message link) in the firmware files to avoid repeat uncertainties.
Ironically, that was cut from... the readme file!

Due to a bug in the first firmware, this procedure must be used for the first firmware upgrade. Subsequent updates should work with the standard procedure above.
Now why no one reads the readme file? That will remain a mystery.

locked Re: Problems with firmware update HF+

prog
 

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 04:40 am, Ian DXer wrote:
Perhaps the clarification could be further  emphasised in the read.me file (as per the message link) in the firmware files to avoid repeat uncertainties.
Ironically, that was cut from... the readme file!

Due to a bug in the first firmware, this procedure must be used for the first firmware upgrade. Subsequent updates should work with the standard procedure above.
Now why no one reads the readme file? That will remain a mystery.

locked Re: Problems with firmware update HF+

Ian DXer
 

Thanks Yousef for the linked reply (below)
Sorry I missed this message - all very clear now.
Perhaps the clarification could be further  emphasised in the read.me file (as per the message link) in the firmware files to avoid repeat uncertainties.
Language expression/interpretation can be problematic for many of us all at times.
Anyway all good now :-)
All the best.

https://airspy.groups.io/g/main/message/27611?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,first+upgrade,20,2,0,11144456