Date   

Re: Headset and bluetooth

Laurin Cavender
 

There is a Chinese circuit board that interfaces bt to audio in audio out it is usually used for intercom type applications but is 600 ohms so should be fine just use vox. WB4IVG Laurin 


On Sat, Sep 12, 2020, 23:10 Phil Baird via groups.io <mypactor=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

 

Has anyone out there figured out a way to  connect a Bluetooth headset (ie Jabra) to the ic-7000?  I suppose the rx would be easy enough just using a Bluetooth adapter to the audio out (earphone jack). The tx, however, would involve more especially configuring it to work with the with or without vox.  Such a setup would be ideal for going mobile.

 

Thanks and 73, de Phil, n6qca, in Prescott, AZ

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 


--
Look forward to learning more about my 7000


Re: Airband receive

Adrian McGonigle
 

Oops think I actually uploaded the file instead of linking the youtube video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2wnvJ96lGY

Adrian


Airband receive

Adrian McGonigle
 

Never even thought about it before but had a tune around the airband AM bands and the 7000 sounds quite nice, although was only using my 6 el Yagi pointed at Stansted Airport and on the approach frequency.


Re: Headset and bluetooth

WA8Y Steven
 

OK thanks,
I order a TX+RX I'll give'm a try.
Steven WA8Y


Re: Headset and bluetooth

Steve W3AHL
 

Look for BT headphones and adapters that support "aptx Low Latency"  protocols.  Latency is less than 40 ms.

Steve, W3AHL


Re: Headset and bluetooth

WA8Y Steven
 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01EHSX28M/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_BFIxFbEXENQVD

Tried BT again. This one was recommended in my Flex group.  Too much latency for CW.  I'm returning it.
Steven WA8Y


Re: Headset and bluetooth

Steve W3AHL
 

Search the Group's Messages for Bluetooth and you'll see 119 prior posts.

Steve, W3AHL


Headset and bluetooth

Phil Baird
 

 

Has anyone out there figured out a way to  connect a Bluetooth headset (ie Jabra) to the ic-7000?  I suppose the rx would be easy enough just using a Bluetooth adapter to the audio out (earphone jack). The tx, however, would involve more especially configuring it to work with the with or without vox.  Such a setup would be ideal for going mobile.

 

Thanks and 73, de Phil, n6qca, in Prescott, AZ

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 


--
Look forward to learning more about my 7000


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

Duane Tesorero
 

Here are a couple links

a Asymetrical peak limiter prebuilt with a 6Khz cutoff filter https://www.ebay.com/itm/AM-HF-ASYMMETRICAL-PEAK-LIMITER-6KHZ-LOW-PASS-FILTER-MW-HF/224105586976?hash=item342dbbe120:g:OkIAAOSwuCBeLBMz

There is also one with a 10Khz cutoff if you want to hog some bandwith, LOL https://www.ebay.com/itm/AM-HF-ASYMMETRICAL-PEAK-LIMITER-am-broadcast-limiter-hf-am-peak-limiter/224013531298?hash=item34283f38a2:g:gscAAOSwd1Jee4WU

These I am going to guess are derived from Steve WA1QIX's design found in the middle of this page http://amfone.net/Amforum/index.php?topic=42904.0


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

Duane Tesorero
 

So, if the IC7000 is that bad in AM why not try to improve it.

 

I remember way back when I had my old TRC-449 radio shack SSB CB and the D-104, I could run it two ways and it would scream, I could set the modulation limiter on a switch that would allow nothing over 100% positive or negative and flip the switch to allow the limiter to only clamp the negative peaks and let the positive peaks ride well past 100%. The compressor circuit in the radio was great at what it did.

A local DJ and radio station engineer Jay introduced me to the wonderful very simple diode clipper and filter circuit. Using a scope to set the correct phase for my voice and adding pots to each diode I could adjust the level of each to achieve the clean negative peaks with out clipping.

 

On to what I actually intended:

NU9N has a website on ESSB which also covers AM Hi-Fi audio Processing http://www.nu9n.com/am.html.

 

There is a whole bunch of goodness on AMphone.net

 

And there is the inline equipment like the innovonics 222 AM Assymetrical processor

And if you feel like taking a chance the is a product called Asymod, They advertise it for CB but also have listings about HF radio installations for the following radios

Icom IC718, 7300

Kenwood TS-930 Ts-480

Yaesu FTDX-1200

 

They boast about the hi-fi bandwith which is adjustable from a 4K to 20K limit

On AM it creates its own audio chain and modulator which then powers the driver/finals so it is high level audio not low level.

On SSB it is also its own audio chain but gets injected at the SSB modulator circuit.

This seems rather pricey and it has a short two month warranty. There is history on this product and there are two guys who both claim one stole the idea from the other, I don’t care about the politics.

Might be clean, might be splatter, It all depend how YOU set it up.

 

We as hams can design and replicate a similar product, I have a schematic somewhere for a 4 channel op amp that has a phase selector switch on the input, separate amps for the positive and negative peaks so each level can be adjusted correctly and the 4th op amp channel mixes both and allows for the output level to be adjusted also. On the input of the 4th channel there is a simple circuit to clean up and blend the positive and negative signals to eliminate the phase distortion.

 
Oh, one last thing - get a good mic There are good cheap ones out there that work great for our needs.

N1SFX


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

rich bassett
 

Ok, let's add more info since nobody is bring this up:  Capture effect.

I am surprise nobody brought up the fact that on narrow band fm, there is very little capture effect.   Why?   Let's see if anybody can figure out why?  Hint:  You don't need to have a understand of  Bessel functions, but it may help to understand the ratio of capture verses modulation index.



Ne6W   ( The Happy Ham!)

On Wednesday, September 9, 2020, 6:31:11 PM PDT, D C *Mac* Macdonald <k2gkk@...> wrote:


FM greatly reduces noise on received signals.  However there is 
factor called "capture effect" with FM where the strongest signal 
will "capture" a receiver almost totally.  As Dallas noted, if there
armore than one AM transmitter on a frequency simultaneously, 
the two (or more) carriers will almost always be slightly different in
RF frequency.  With AM, that difference will be an audio tone that
will signify to a competent operator at the receive site (Air Traffic
Control or other aircrew) that he/she needs to let all know of that
fact and get the interfering aircraft to take turns to get the info
through.

And that doesn't even begin to cover the humongous amounts of
money that it would take to change out ALL the aircraft and ground
equipment in the world simultaneously.
 
73 - Mac, K2GKK/5
Since 30 Nov 1953
Oklahoma City, OK
USAF (Retired) 61-81
FAA (Retired) 94-10
(Ground-to-Air Radio Overhaul Technician)


From: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io> on behalf of Dallas KD4HNX via groups.io <mylastname@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 16:47
To: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ic7000] So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?
 
The Military uses AM UHF comms for the same reason.  You might not understand what the weaker signal(s) said but the heterodyne lets you know there was a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, station in there...



73 Dallas, KD4HNX
Whatever you do, don’t fall victim to “paralysis by
analysis.” Go ahead and buy/build one and start 
tinkering with it. This is a learn by doing hobby.

No politician or scholar assured your freedoms.
A Soldier, Sailor, Marine, or Airman did!


On Wednesday, September 9, 2020, 01:46:33 PM EDT, Gene Horr <genehorr@...> wrote:


Possibly.  Though it doesn’t seem prevent you having to duplicate transmissions.  Often.  Best case seems to be that ATC can tell there was a double.  All they seem to do is keep working with one and let the other pilot call again when the first QSO is over.  If you are lucky when finished they will announce “aircraft calling, please repeat.”  They don’t act like they actually hear both transmissions.

 

That may be the reason given but I suspect the primary (or at least close second) is the cost of having to change out all the coms in a 200,000+ fleet in the US alone, plus all the ground stations, plus all the aircraft and ground stations all over the world.  A basic nav/com installed is over $2k a few years back and can run into 5 figures with GPS.  Most aircraft have two.

 

Not a trivial expense for minimal improvement.

 

Gene NG1H

 

From: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io> On Behalf Of Scott Honaker
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 12:26 PM
To: ic7000@groups.io
Subject: Re: [ic7000] So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

 

AM is used by aircraft because the signals can mix.  There is no FM capture effect.  If two pilots call at the same time air traffic control can hear both signals, not just the strongest one.  Transmissions are short and it's critical that all are heard.

Beyond this, as the FCC moves commercial users to narrower bandwidths, AM starts to look attractive again.  AM easily fits in the new (as of 2013) 12.5kHz narrowband channels and can also fit in the future 6.25kHz ultra-narrowband channels.  Digital has become the solution for many but AM (or ACSSB) is still out there and easy to implement.

Scott N7SS


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

rich bassett
 

If your a CBer, this is a great radio!   WOW!  Or I should say "Mercy gud buddy" .     Get two and co-phase them.  

Ne6W


Ranger RCI63FFD4 350 + Watts Modulation 10 Meter Radio



On Wednesday, September 9, 2020, 3:56:21 PM PDT, Mark Krotz <mkrotz@...> wrote:



Put a Collins 32V-1 in your car.


n7mk


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

Bart Lee
 

The wiki says: "... an FM transmitter will cut in and out as it nears the capture threshold of a moving receiver or transmitter as it passes through fresnel zones, thus chopping the speech of the transmitting operator." For car radio FM 88-108 Mhz) this can be known as "washboarding" or "picket-fencing". The air band (to 135 Mhz) is just above the FM band.  I always wondered if AM was the better modulation to avoid this effect?  73 ##
-- -- 
Bart Lee, K6VK ##


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

Donald McRoberts
 

As has already been stated several times, AM is and continues to be used on both civilian and military aircraft bands for voice communications simply because AM permits the receiving party to audibly know when there are multiple transmissions made at the same time. It typically results in a heterodyne tone that alerts the receiving party that while they may hear one of the parties transmitting there were one or more others transmitting too. That gives the ATC operator or aircraft operator the knowledge that they need to ask for other traffic to repeat their transmission. FM on the other hand, as has been mentioned, results the strongest signal getting through most of the time. There may or may not be any indication of the second transmission taking place. This method of deciphering multiple simultaneous AM transmissions has been working for decades with very little problems. Switching to some other transmission mode be it FM or digital would be too expensive and I suspect we'll have AM transmissions for many more decades to come.


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

rich bassett
 

CBer like this radio because it easy to open for 11 meters.   Cbers want the higher power feature and not be limited to just 4 watts AM.  

Since it does not work well on the CB band, Icom considered this a feature.   Real hams on here seem to be somewhat puzzled by the want of a AM radio feature when there are so many better choices.   For the parasitic that is generated on PTT there are some simple things to do, but I certainly would not tell or bother to fix a such a wonderful feature.  There is no issue and is closed.  

Ne6W   Emoji
The Happy Ham!



On Wednesday, September 9, 2020, 10:20:13 AM PDT, Doug Neal <vo1.dwn@...> wrote:



Gentlemen/Ladies
The whole AM issue on SSB radios is just there for a convenience. if you want  to run AM get a rig designed to do it. I have an old Heathkit pair Apachie/Mohawk set aside for AM just in case I ever feel the need. You can't beat plate modulated AM.  If that's your bag.
BTW: CB sports a whole bunch of SSB radios, CBers have been using SSB for years. 
What I can't understand is why the aircraft industry still uses AM. I would think FM would be used in this day and age. Anyone know the answer?
Thanks for reading.
73 ,
Doug 



Sent from my Bell Samsung device over Canada's largest network.


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

D C *Mac* Macdonald
 

Among many other reasons, even ultra narrow band FM
takes up too much spectrum space.
  
73 - Mac, K2GKK/5
Since 30 Nov 1953
Oklahoma City, OK
USAF (Retired) 61-81
FAA (Retired) 94-10



From: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io> on behalf of Doug Neal <vo1.dwn@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 12:19
To: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ic7000] So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?
 

Gentlemen/Ladies
The whole AM issue on SSB radios is just there for a convenience. if you want  to run AM get a rig designed to do it. I have an old Heathkit pair Apachie/Mohawk set aside for AM just in case I ever feel the need. You can't beat plate modulated AM.  If that's your bag.
BTW: CB sports a whole bunch of SSB radios, CBers have been using SSB for years. 
What I can't understand is why the aircraft industry still uses AM. I would think FM would be used in this day and age. Anyone know the answer?
Thanks for reading.
73 ,
Doug 



Sent from my Bell Samsung device over Canada's largest network.


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

D C *Mac* Macdonald
 

FM greatly reduces noise on received signals.  However there is 
factor called "capture effect" with FM where the strongest signal 
will "capture" a receiver almost totally.  As Dallas noted, if there
armore than one AM transmitter on a frequency simultaneously, 
the two (or more) carriers will almost always be slightly different in
RF frequency.  With AM, that difference will be an audio tone that
will signify to a competent operator at the receive site (Air Traffic
Control or other aircrew) that he/she needs to let all know of that
fact and get the interfering aircraft to take turns to get the info
through.

And that doesn't even begin to cover the humongous amounts of
money that it would take to change out ALL the aircraft and ground
equipment in the world simultaneously.
 
73 - Mac, K2GKK/5
Since 30 Nov 1953
Oklahoma City, OK
USAF (Retired) 61-81
FAA (Retired) 94-10
(Ground-to-Air Radio Overhaul Technician)


From: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io> on behalf of Dallas KD4HNX via groups.io <mylastname@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 16:47
To: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ic7000] So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?
 
The Military uses AM UHF comms for the same reason.  You might not understand what the weaker signal(s) said but the heterodyne lets you know there was a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, station in there...



73 Dallas, KD4HNX
Whatever you do, don’t fall victim to “paralysis by
analysis.” Go ahead and buy/build one and start 
tinkering with it. This is a learn by doing hobby.

No politician or scholar assured your freedoms.
A Soldier, Sailor, Marine, or Airman did!


On Wednesday, September 9, 2020, 01:46:33 PM EDT, Gene Horr <genehorr@...> wrote:


Possibly.  Though it doesn’t seem prevent you having to duplicate transmissions.  Often.  Best case seems to be that ATC can tell there was a double.  All they seem to do is keep working with one and let the other pilot call again when the first QSO is over.  If you are lucky when finished they will announce “aircraft calling, please repeat.”  They don’t act like they actually hear both transmissions.

 

That may be the reason given but I suspect the primary (or at least close second) is the cost of having to change out all the coms in a 200,000+ fleet in the US alone, plus all the ground stations, plus all the aircraft and ground stations all over the world.  A basic nav/com installed is over $2k a few years back and can run into 5 figures with GPS.  Most aircraft have two.

 

Not a trivial expense for minimal improvement.

 

Gene NG1H

 

From: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io> On Behalf Of Scott Honaker
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 12:26 PM
To: ic7000@groups.io
Subject: Re: [ic7000] So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

 

AM is used by aircraft because the signals can mix.  There is no FM capture effect.  If two pilots call at the same time air traffic control can hear both signals, not just the strongest one.  Transmissions are short and it's critical that all are heard.

Beyond this, as the FCC moves commercial users to narrower bandwidths, AM starts to look attractive again.  AM easily fits in the new (as of 2013) 12.5kHz narrowband channels and can also fit in the future 6.25kHz ultra-narrowband channels.  Digital has become the solution for many but AM (or ACSSB) is still out there and easy to implement.

Scott N7SS


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

Mark Krotz
 


Put a Collins 32V-1 in your car.


n7mk


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

 

Actually the reason could be that this is old technology and aircraft radios are old technology as well. These things have been around for a long time and the same specifications are used world wide.
Also the channel spacing is pretty close. 
As to being able to hear two signals, not so much, but there it might be possible. The frequency tolerance is .005% if I remember correctly.
It would take a major effort to replace all of these radios with FM and get them all certified, both by the FCC and the FAA.
The typical aircraft general aviation radio would be 760 channel and 10 watts and cost $ 2 - 4000.00.
Sometimes what is there stays simply due to the inertia involved.
Most of the time the transmissions are clear as they are almost always line of sight.
There are SSB HF radios used in over water flights as well, but I would bet few if any CW any more.


Re: So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

Geoff
 

As a professional pilot I can attest to the safety reasoning behind AM in the aviation band. Where it has the most effect is when both transmissions occur when the aircraft are in close proximity to each other working with the same ground receiver. This occurs in ground operations in Class C and D airspace as well when in Terminal Area Control airspace.

Geoff
VK3ZGW


On Thu, 10 Sep 2020, 04:54 Doug VO1DWN, <dneal@...> wrote:
All good answers but I suspect the safety one is the reason, when it comes to the safety of people, money never seems to enter the equation. 
Thanks every body, The aircraft AM thing just occured to me,  and I thought I'd ask, so again thanks for answering.
73 to all
VO1DWN
Doug




Sent from my Bell Samsung device over Canada's largest network.


-------- Original message --------
From: Gene Horr <genehorr@...>
Date: 2020-09-09 3:16 p.m. (GMT-03:30)
Subject: Re: [ic7000] So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

Possibly.  Though it doesn’t seem prevent you having to duplicate transmissions.  Often.  Best case seems to be that ATC can tell there was a double.  All they seem to do is keep working with one and let the other pilot call again when the first QSO is over.  If you are lucky when finished they will announce “aircraft calling, please repeat.”  They don’t act like they actually hear both transmissions.

 

That may be the reason given but I suspect the primary (or at least close second) is the cost of having to change out all the coms in a 200,000+ fleet in the US alone, plus all the ground stations, plus all the aircraft and ground stations all over the world.  A basic nav/com installed is over $2k a few years back and can run into 5 figures with GPS.  Most aircraft have two.

 

Not a trivial expense for minimal improvement.

 

Gene NG1H

 

From: ic7000@groups.io <ic7000@groups.io> On Behalf Of Scott Honaker
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 12:26 PM
To: ic7000@groups.io
Subject: Re: [ic7000] So the whole AM modulation issue is unresolved?

 

AM is used by aircraft because the signals can mix.  There is no FM capture effect.  If two pilots call at the same time air traffic control can hear both signals, not just the strongest one.  Transmissions are short and it's critical that all are heard.

Beyond this, as the FCC moves commercial users to narrower bandwidths, AM starts to look attractive again.  AM easily fits in the new (as of 2013) 12.5kHz narrowband channels and can also fit in the future 6.25kHz ultra-narrowband channels.  Digital has become the solution for many but AM (or ACSSB) is still out there and easy to implement.

Scott N7SS

401 - 800 of 41344