Steve, there are apparently trade-off's that must be made to appease the nit
pickers who hang 'round here. They find some little thing "wrong" and carp
on it until it becomes a huge problem. Then Ten-Tec will make some software
/ firmware "update" to appease them but the side effect of the update may
well be to create other problems or to exacerbate something else to the
extent it becomes a problem.
The only complete solution to the problems of the day would seem to be for
the rig to have no shared circuits in the signal paths. This means the
transmitter and receiver can be contained within one box and can share
frequency determining circuitry (except local oscillator frequencies which
are explained below) but otherwise be independent signal paths. That will
eliminate the time delays of the switching between receive state and
transmit state.
I have a vague feeling that the trickiest problem encountered is the slight
shift in the local oscillator when going from the transmit state to the
receive state. In my Triton, for instance, the local oscillator shifts from
9,000.000 to 9,000.750 MHz. The Triton can shift this local oscillator's
frequency faster than a rig can shift a PLL synthesized local oscillator.
In general, it would seem that there might be a couple of ways to handle the
needed shift in local oscillator frequency(ies):
1. use independent, continuously running local oscillators, shield them
adequately, and switch their outputs on and off as needed.
2. use VHF frequencies for the PLL local oscillator so the lock times would
be quicker, then use a frequency divider to get down to the needed IF
injection frequency.
With the Omni VI+ there was a hue and cry about a "micro-chirp." I surmise
the issue was the rig's going into the transmit state before the local
oscillator had stabilized. To correct this problem, I surmise that Ten-Tec
introduced a slight delay in the switching so the transmitter would not be
enabled until the local oscillator had stabilized. I'm talking out of my
hat but believe this may have had the negative effect on QSK that you note
with version 1.03.
There are lessons in all this.
1 The human ear is an extremely effective detector of micro-chirps, etc.
2 There are some really picky people in the world who demand perfection.
3 Ten-Tec is sensitive to customer's reporting and endeavors to please.
4 Perfection is not possible (even for Ten-Tec).
5 Sometimes the "cure" is worse than the "problem" was.
6 From a manufacturer's standpoint it makes sense to make a rig, fill it
with epoxy and sell it. If people are not satisfied with it, they can buy
your version II filled with epoxy. Likewise your version III... When users
report problems, smile nicely at them and make a note of their complaint.
Use your accumulated notes in the advertising for the next version of your
rig so that you can report all the "enhanced features."
For every person on this reflector who seems so unhappy with the performance
of a rig, there are probably a thousand who are using the same rig and are
just as happy as clams. We see what we look for... If we look for
problems, we'll find them (see #4 above). If we look for on-the-air
contacts, we'll find those, too. (Look in the archives for the story of the
medical school student's buying the stereo for his dad.)
So for truly picky people, my suggestion for happy operating is to choose
one of the following:
A. Switch from CW to SSB, a much more forgiving mode.
B. Instead of CW, consider use of AOL's Instant Messenger.
C. If insistent on staying with CW, then either copy code with a computer or
a telegraph sounder and keep the receiver's speaker volume turned all the
way down. The telegraph sounder is a truly capital idea ! ! You'd be
amazed at how relaxing it is to operate using just a sounder and a cootie
with no sidetone -- no tones, no static, no microchirp... pure pleasure !
73, Mike N4NT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com>
To: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>
Cc: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 10:19 PM
Subject: [TenTec] Omni VI+ firmware rev.
This is getting interesting. He checked and his 6+ has rev 1.02. Again, mine
is 1.03. Then I found this in the archives:
http://lists.contesting.com/archives/html/TenTec/2001-09/msg00106.html
So it appears that maybe they screwed up the keying inorder to reduce the
chirp. I will find out for sure Sunday. I plan to exchange his chip for mine
and see what happens.
If anyone else out there knows anything about this, please chime in!
Steve N4LQ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 10:11 PM
Subject: Re: TT Re: TT RE: [TenTec] FQR and QRQ 6+ REV
> I don't recall the rev numbers of both chips, but I did ask Ten Tec about
> it, and the numbers I quoted them, were the latest for the Plus. Still
don't
> have my Plus back yet.
>
> Tom
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com>
> To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 9:39 PM
> Subject: TT Re: TT RE: [TenTec] FQR and QRQ 6+ REV
>
>
> > Tom:
> > A local here just picked up an older 564, 6+ . We are comparing notes.
His
> > has logic rev 1.0 and mine has 1.03. Wonder what the difference is?
> > FURTHERMORE....We tested his at 75 WPM and it sounded fine AND he had
full
> > QSK working at that speed.
> > This reminds me so much of the Orion's QSK and how it went away with the
> > later rev.
> > Wonder which version your 6+ has?
> >
> > Steve N4LQ
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>
> > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 9:00 PM
> > Subject: Re: TT RE: [TenTec] FQR and QRQ
> >
> >
> > > That's certainly true Steve. You sure do have that Plus doing
excellent.
> > And
> > > when you were sending to me at 100 wpm, I did break you with one dot!!
> > What
> > > you had going last night was a heck of a lot better than my Omni 6!!
> > >
> > > Tom - W4BQF
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "n4lq" <n4lq@iglou.com>
> > > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 1:21 PM
> > > Subject: TT RE: [TenTec] FQR and QRQ
> > >
> > >
> > > > There is another thing that I seldom see mentioned in all of this.
> Sure,
> > > > some rigs will send 80-100 wpm and yes they will do this in QSK mode
> BUT
> > > > will you be able to hear a beaker while sending? The Orion I had
would
> > > > certainly send 42 WPM in QSK mode but was totally deaf to anyone
> trying
> > > > to break in. Not until you dropped down to about 15 wpm could you
> > > > actually make use of it's so-called QSK.
> > > > Last night, we ran test on the Triton IV, 544 digital. It sent
> excellent
> > > > cw at 100 wpm with full/working/real/live QSK and it does this with
no
> > > > artifacts like clicking or thumping, just nice, smooth, wide-open
QSK!
> > > > Now that's what I call a real CW rig. So my point here is: It does
not
> > > > matter if a rig has QSK or not unless you can hear a breaking
station
> at
> > > > whatever speed you are running. Not only does it not matter but a
rig
> > > > that is deaf while in QSK mode is a total FAKE QSK RIG. Yes, an FQR.
> > FQRs
> > > > are everywhere these days.
> > > > N4LQ
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
> > > > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > > > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:39:23 -0600
> > > > Subject: RE: [TenTec] ORION QRQ Performance
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > The Orion can send CW over 42 wpm, but it starts changing
> > > > > > character timing
> > > > > > about 42 wpm and gets worse as you increase above 42 wpm.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Okay. That's what I thought you said. Thank you.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Don't try to make 68 wpm a hard and fast rule...MY Omni 6
> > > > > > will not send
> > > > > > copyable CW above 68 wpm...others are +/- (I only get to
> > > > > > operate mine, not
> > > > > > yours!!)
> > > > >
> > > > > Again, I understood this correctly, too. Thanks for clarifying.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > The Corsair 2 and the IC-781 will run full QSK at CW speeds
> > > > > > over 100wpm.
> > > > > > Others may, but I don't test them, I use them if they are
> > > > > > on my desk.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am a user, not a test department!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tom - W4BQF
> > > > >
> > > > > Wow. Tom, I am certainly not calling you a liar, but there are
> things
> > > > > in this statement that I simply cannot believe.
> > > > >
> > > > > I hope this message has been clarifying for many folks.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Al W6LX
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TenTec mailing list
> > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|