Elecraft

K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

Classic

List

Threaded

52 messages Options

123

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

Digital tends to be either perfect armchair copy, or fairly unusable.

It's going to depend a whole lot on how it's encoded, the data rate, and
how much error detection and correction is used.

Bump up the data rate, do some forward error correction and it's likely
to be fairly robust. Some of the methods used by NASA to encode signals
from deep space probes are incredibly robust.

-- Lynn

On 9/18/2015 1:18 AM, brian wrote:
> Is anybody addressing the issue of QRM from other stations? I
> suspect digital will fold -- especially when one is trying to detect
> one out of many or a station immersed in splatter from one or more
> stations.

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Greg Troxel-2

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by Robert Nobis - N7RJN

(trying to be brief and return to being on-topic :-)

Robert Nobis <[hidden email]> writes:

> To a certain extent, I agree with you. I also do not like proprietary
> technologies. However, if you look at the history of ham radio, many
> of the products and technologies we use today started out as
> “proprietary” technologies. Also, much of the history of ham radio is
> based on experimenting and trying new technologies and techniques.

There's a big difference between an implementation that has a patent and
a protocol that has an essential patent such that you may not legally
implement the protocol without a patent license. The problem with all
digital voice modes except FreeDV is the patented and undocumented AMBE
codec.

> At least one of these digital technologies, DMR, is no longer really
> proprietary. There are at least 20 manufacturers of DMR radios,
> worldwide. True, DMR was not originally developed for use by hams,
> but it clearly is a product technology that many hams are now using on
> the VHF and UHF bands, even though I doubt we will ever see DMR on the
> HF bands.

DMR uses AMBE, so it's proprietary, because you (apparently; law is
hard) can't build and sell a DMR radio without a patent license. An
individual ham may not legally homebrew and use a DMR radio without a
patent license. One can't distribute Free Software that implements DMR
on software radio. There are many vendors, and they seem to mostly
interoperate. DMR is much like D-STAR, in that the container protocol
is open or mostly open, but the codec is not. This leads to big
manufacturers paying patent licenses and individuals buying
pre-programmed DSP chips to run the secret code that could have been run
in their regular computer, if not for the patent (e.g., the "DV
Dongle").

If Elecraft wanted to put D-STAR or DMR into the K3/KX3, besides the
work, they would have to get a patent license for the codec. That seems
unlikely - and it would make me unhappy to be indirectly paying for
something that I think doesn't belong in ham radio (well said, Don) and
should not be permitted by the rules.

On the other hand, I suspect that implementing D-STAR with codec2 (VHF),
or FreeDV, would just be implementation work, with no licenses and no
extra hardware. It doesn't seem like there's critical mass yet for that
to make sense, though.

73 de n1dam
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Jerry Moore

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

I'll never knowingly support a proprietary protocol in Amateur Radio.

-----Original Message-----
From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Greg Troxel
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:29 PM
To: Robert Nobis
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

(trying to be brief and return to being on-topic :-)

Robert Nobis <[hidden email]> writes:

> To a certain extent, I agree with you. I also do not like proprietary
> technologies. However, if you look at the history of ham radio, many
> of the products and technologies we use today started out as
> “proprietary” technologies. Also, much of the history of ham radio is
> based on experimenting and trying new technologies and techniques.

There's a big difference between an implementation that has a patent and a protocol that has an essential patent such that you may not legally implement the protocol without a patent license. The problem with all digital voice modes except FreeDV is the patented and undocumented AMBE codec.

> At least one of these digital technologies, DMR, is no longer really
> proprietary. There are at least 20 manufacturers of DMR radios,
> worldwide. True, DMR was not originally developed for use by hams,
> but it clearly is a product technology that many hams are now using on
> the VHF and UHF bands, even though I doubt we will ever see DMR on the
> HF bands.

DMR uses AMBE, so it's proprietary, because you (apparently; law is
hard) can't build and sell a DMR radio without a patent license. An individual ham may not legally homebrew and use a DMR radio without a patent license. One can't distribute Free Software that implements DMR on software radio. There are many vendors, and they seem to mostly interoperate. DMR is much like D-STAR, in that the container protocol is open or mostly open, but the codec is not. This leads to big manufacturers paying patent licenses and individuals buying pre-programmed DSP chips to run the secret code that could have been run in their regular computer, if not for the patent (e.g., the "DV Dongle").

If Elecraft wanted to put D-STAR or DMR into the K3/KX3, besides the work, they would have to get a patent license for the codec. That seems unlikely - and it would make me unhappy to be indirectly paying for something that I think doesn't belong in ham radio (well said, Don) and should not be permitted by the rules.

On the other hand, I suspect that implementing D-STAR with codec2 (VHF), or FreeDV, would just be implementation work, with no licenses and no extra hardware. It doesn't seem like there's critical mass yet for that to make sense, though.

73 de n1dam
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

alsopb

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT

Robust maybe but hardly speedy further out.
Here are some bit rates from HORIZON space craft:
Jupiter Flyby - 35 kbps
Pluto - 2000 bps
http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/Mission/Spacecraft/Data-Collection.php

The bit rate drops to hundreds of bits/second further out.

73 de Brian/K3KO

On 9/18/2015 16:17 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:

> Digital tends to be either perfect armchair copy, or fairly unusable.
>
> It's going to depend a whole lot on how it's encoded, the data rate,
> and how much error detection and correction is used.
>
> Bump up the data rate, do some forward error correction and it's
> likely to be fairly robust. Some of the methods used by NASA to
> encode signals from deep space probes are incredibly robust.
>
> -- Lynn
>
> On 9/18/2015 1:18 AM, brian wrote:
>> Is anybody addressing the issue of QRM from other stations? I
>> suspect digital will fold -- especially when one is trying to detect
>> one out of many or a station immersed in splatter from one or more
>> stations.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2015.0.6140 / Virus Database: 4419/10661 - Release Date:
> 09/18/15
>
>

W1KSZ

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by Stephen Shearer

I fail to see why folks are getting excited over DMR. To me, the audio sounds
Terrible. Perhaps it's just the excitement of being on the bleeding edge.

Similar problems happened with FM when it was narrow-banded. Give me the
Nice sound of a well engineered WB FM audio any day.

Also, who remembers the fiasco with the LA Fire Departments trial with
DMR some years ago.

Digital voice has NO place in a well engineered product such as Elecraft
Produces.

Just one mans opinion.

73, Dick, W1KSZ

-----Original Message-----
From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Walter Underwood
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 9:02 AM
To: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

The D-Star protocol is published and open, but all the radios use a proprietary, licensed voice codec (AMBE). Also, Icom has registered the trademark “D-STAR”.

It would be possible to run D-Star with an open source codec (like Codec2), but it probably would not interoperate with other D-Star radios. Codec2 was developed by Dave Rowe, VK5DGR.

Some people have argued that the proprietary AMBE codec is equivalent to encryption, and not legal for US amateur radio us. I could buy that.

wunder
K6WRU
CM87wj
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)

> On Sep 18, 2015, at 4:49 AM, Stephen Shearer <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> from some reading I have done recently, D-star is an open source from Japan ham community.
>
> I agree, if it's not open, it's not ham radio.
>
> We use FM on 10, 6, and 2 - modes included in the KX3/K3s, maybe the future should include d-star.
>
> 73, steve WB3LGC
>
> On 17-Sep-15 9:28 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote:
>> You have listed 3 digital voice modes that do not talk to each other.
>> Furthermore, I recall that these are proprietary coding schemes.
>> That is not "Ham Radio" in my mind. Ham Radio is "everyone can talk
>> to everyone else", and those digital voice systems where you can only
>> talk to those hams who have purchased the same brand of equipment as
>> you have selected is more like commercial circuits where you want to
>> shut out those who do not 'speak the same language that you do'.
>>
>> I don't think proprietary protocols belong on the ham bands - just my
>> not so humble opinion. Yes, I am also opposed to proprietary data modes.
>>
>> 73,
>> Don W3FPR
>>
>> On 9/17/2015 9:03 PM, Robert Nobis wrote:
>>> Take a look at the digital voice modes that are being used on the
>>> VHF and UHF bands: DMR, D-STAR and Fusion.
>>>
>>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email
> list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to
> [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Robert Nobis - N7RJN

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by Greg Troxel-2

I suspect nearly all commercially manufactured equipment for the ham radio market has some patents associated with the design and technology.

Bob Nobis - N7RJN
[hidden email]

> On Sep 18, 2015, at 09:29, Greg Troxel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> (trying to be brief and return to being on-topic :-)
>
> Robert Nobis <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> To a certain extent, I agree with you. I also do not like proprietary
>> technologies. However, if you look at the history of ham radio, many
>> of the products and technologies we use today started out as
>> “proprietary” technologies. Also, much of the history of ham radio is
>> based on experimenting and trying new technologies and techniques.
>
> There's a big difference between an implementation that has a patent and
> a protocol that has an essential patent such that you may not legally
> implement the protocol without a patent license. The problem with all
> digital voice modes except FreeDV is the patented and undocumented AMBE
> codec.
>
>> At least one of these digital technologies, DMR, is no longer really
>> proprietary. There are at least 20 manufacturers of DMR radios,
>> worldwide. True, DMR was not originally developed for use by hams,
>> but it clearly is a product technology that many hams are now using on
>> the VHF and UHF bands, even though I doubt we will ever see DMR on the
>> HF bands.
>
> DMR uses AMBE, so it's proprietary, because you (apparently; law is
> hard) can't build and sell a DMR radio without a patent license. An
> individual ham may not legally homebrew and use a DMR radio without a
> patent license. One can't distribute Free Software that implements DMR
> on software radio. There are many vendors, and they seem to mostly
> interoperate. DMR is much like D-STAR, in that the container protocol
> is open or mostly open, but the codec is not. This leads to big
> manufacturers paying patent licenses and individuals buying
> pre-programmed DSP chips to run the secret code that could have been run
> in their regular computer, if not for the patent (e.g., the "DV
> Dongle").
>
> If Elecraft wanted to put D-STAR or DMR into the K3/KX3, besides the
> work, they would have to get a patent license for the codec. That seems
> unlikely - and it would make me unhappy to be indirectly paying for
> something that I think doesn't belong in ham radio (well said, Don) and
> should not be permitted by the rules.
>
> On the other hand, I suspect that implementing D-STAR with codec2 (VHF),
> or FreeDV, would just be implementation work, with no licenses and no
> extra hardware. It doesn't seem like there's critical mass yet for that
> to make sense, though.
>
> 73 de n1dam
>

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by alsopb

Given that most QSOs are less than interplanetary distances, and given
that 8 kilobits will probably do for voice, I think we're okay.

73 -- Lynn

On 9/18/2015 9:57 AM, brian wrote:

> Robust maybe but hardly speedy further out.
> Here are some bit rates from HORIZON space craft:
> Jupiter Flyby - 35 kbps
> Pluto - 2000 bps
> http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/Mission/Spacecraft/Data-Collection.php
>
> The bit rate drops to hundreds of bits/second further out.
>
> 73 de Brian/K3KO
>
>
> On 9/18/2015 16:17 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:
>> Digital tends to be either perfect armchair copy, or fairly unusable.
>>
>> It's going to depend a whole lot on how it's encoded, the data rate,
>> and how much error detection and correction is used.
>>
>> Bump up the data rate, do some forward error correction and it's
>> likely to be fairly robust. Some of the methods used by NASA to
>> encode signals from deep space probes are incredibly robust.
>>
>> -- Lynn
>>
>> On 9/18/2015 1:18 AM, brian wrote:
>>> Is anybody addressing the issue of QRM from other stations? I
>>> suspect digital will fold -- especially when one is trying to detect
>>> one out of many or a station immersed in splatter from one or more
>>> stations.
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2015.0.6140 / Virus Database: 4419/10661 - Release Date:
>> 09/18/15
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

alorona

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by ae4pb

I'm sorry, I don't begrudge anybody wanting to experiment with digital voice, but every time I listen to audio clips of DV I am appalled by the sound quality. I have to prefer SSB almost every single time.

The examples on that site of DV with a 20 dB SNR are pretty awful. Thy soun like litte slivrs of ound drop ut of thee sndstream and it drves e crzy.

I wasn't even aware that there was a third letter in the VK5's suffix until I heard the original analog audio.

Why are we so obsessed with occupied bandwidth? I just tuned the entire 20 meter phone band and heard a total of seven stations in that 200 kHz segment. The same goes for 40 at night. Is bandwidth really our biggest problem?

Al W6LX
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

On 9/18/2015 10:24 AM, Al Lorona wrote:
> I'm sorry, I don't begrudge anybody wanting to experiment with digital voice, but every time I listen to audio clips of DV I am appalled by the sound quality. I have to prefer SSB almost every single time.
SSB has been around for decades, and we're pretty good at it, but there
was a time when people said "I don't begrudge anyone experimenting with
SSB, but every time I listen to it, I'm appalled, I'll take AM any day."

I'm not arguing for DV just because it's digital. We should get excited
about DV when it becomes "better" in some way. Just like the adoption
of SSB.

In the meantime, we can experiment.

73 -- Lynn
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Jim Brown-10

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by W1KSZ

On Fri,9/18/2015 10:17 AM, Richard W. Solomon wrote:
> Give me the Nice sound of a well engineered WB FM audio any day.

The problem is that, like AM, especially wide AM, it's a real spectrum
hog. Which is why NBFM is used.

73, Jim K9YC
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Jim Brown-10

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by alorona

On Fri,9/18/2015 10:24 AM, Al Lorona wrote:
> Is bandwidth really our biggest problem?

It is during contests. Or when you're trying to fit in between the many
ragchewing nets masquerading as "emergency" nets. And don't try to make
a SSB QSO on the frequencies that the SSTV crowd has claimed, even
though they are dead when you call.

73, Jim K9YC
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

k6dgw

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

Would HF digital voice be classified as Voice/Image because it started
out as analog voice [and thus be confined to the Voice/Image sub-bands],
or as RTTY/Data because the actual transmitted signal is digital [and
thus confined to the RTTY/Data sub-bands]? Different emission standards
apply to each of the sub-bands.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 50th Running of the Cal QSO Party 3-4 Oct 2015
- www.cqp.org

On 9/18/2015 2:19 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
> On Fri,9/18/2015 10:24 AM, Al Lorona wrote:
>> Is bandwidth really our biggest problem?
>
> It is during contests. Or when you're trying to fit in between the many
> ragchewing nets masquerading as "emergency" nets. And don't try to make
> a SSB QSO on the frequencies that the SSTV crowd has claimed, even
> though they are dead when you call.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

Yes, digital voice is classified as Phone as long as the emission
designator has: "A, C, D, F, G, H, J or R as the first symbol; 1, 2, 3
or X as the second symbol; E as the third symbol." or "B or F as the
first symbol; 7, 8 or 9 as the second symbol [and] E as the third
symbol." - From §97.3c(5)

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 9/18/2015 6:23 PM, Fred Jensen wrote:

> Would HF digital voice be classified as Voice/Image because it started
> out as analog voice [and thus be confined to the Voice/Image sub-bands],
> or as RTTY/Data because the actual transmitted signal is digital [and
> thus confined to the RTTY/Data sub-bands]? Different emission standards
> apply to each of the sub-bands.
>
> 73,
>
> Fred K6DGW
> - Northern California Contest Club
> - CU in the 50th Running of the Cal QSO Party 3-4 Oct 2015
> - www.cqp.org
>
> On 9/18/2015 2:19 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
>> On Fri,9/18/2015 10:24 AM, Al Lorona wrote:
>>> Is bandwidth really our biggest problem?
>>
>> It is during contests. Or when you're trying to fit in between the many
>> ragchewing nets masquerading as "emergency" nets. And don't try to make
>> a SSB QSO on the frequencies that the SSTV crowd has claimed, even
>> though they are dead when you call.
>>
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

Gary Gregory-2

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10

Aah Jim,

Yes, "Emergency Nets" and SSTV, it is stunning how you here a dx station calling, you answer and by being so cheeky, you suddenly get swamped.

We got'em over here too, you folks are not alone.

So glad Elecraft supplied a VFO as standard, unlike a microphone, right Wayne?

Soon as I stop chuckling I can drink my coffee.

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jim Brown" <[hidden email]>
Sent: ‎19/‎09/‎2015 7:20 AM
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

On Fri,9/18/2015 10:24 AM, Al Lorona wrote:
> Is bandwidth really our biggest problem?

It is during contests. Or when you're trying to fit in between the many
ragchewing nets masquerading as "emergency" nets. And don't try to make
a SSB QSO on the frequencies that the SSTV crowd has claimed, even
though they are dead when you call.

73, Jim K9YC
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Jerry Moore

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

What is this microphone thing? Is that a new kind of key?
:p

Jerry Moore
AE4PB, S.N. 010324

On September 18, 2015 7:09:56 PM EDT, Gary <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Aah Jim,
>
>Yes, "Emergency Nets" and SSTV, it is stunning how you here a dx
>station calling, you answer and by being so cheeky, you suddenly get
>swamped.
>
>We got'em over here too, you folks are not alone.
>
>So glad Elecraft supplied a VFO as standard, unlike a microphone, right
>Wayne?
>
>Soon as I stop chuckling I can drink my coffee.
>
>Gary
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: "Jim Brown" <[hidden email]>
>Sent: ‎19/‎09/‎2015 7:20 AM
>To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?
>
>On Fri,9/18/2015 10:24 AM, Al Lorona wrote:
>> Is bandwidth really our biggest problem?
>
>It is during contests. Or when you're trying to fit in between the many
>
>ragchewing nets masquerading as "emergency" nets. And don't try to make
>
>a SSB QSO on the frequencies that the SSTV crowd has claimed, even
>though they are dead when you call.
>
>73, Jim K9YC
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>Message delivered to [hidden email]
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>Message delivered to [hidden email]

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Gary Gregory-2

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

Jerry,

The microphone I mentioned was I guess an inside joke with Wayne, way back when the dark ages got some light, a customer ordered an early k3.

Guess who didn't notice you need to order one?

The look on my face was priceless, for all the rest there's Mastercard right?

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jerry Moore" <[hidden email]>
Sent: ‎19/‎09/‎2015 9:44 AM
To: "Gary" <[hidden email]>; "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>; "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

What is this microphone thing? Is that a new kind of key?
:p

Jerry Moore
AE4PB, S.N. 010324

On September 18, 2015 7:09:56 PM EDT, Gary <[hidden email]> wrote:
Aah Jim,Yes, "Emergency Nets" and SSTV, it is stunning how you here a dx station calling, you answer and by being so cheeky, you suddenly get swamped.We got'em over here too, you folks are not alone.So glad Elecraft supplied a VFO as standard, unlike a microphone, right Wayne?Soon as I stop chuckling I can drink my coffee.Gary -----Original Message-----From: "Jim Brown" <[hidden email]>Sent: ‎19/‎09/‎2015 7:20 AMTo: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?On Fri,9/18/2015 10:24 AM, Al Lorona wrote: Is bandwidth really our biggest problem?It is during contests. Or when you're trying to fit in between the many ragchewing nets masquerading as "emergency" nets. And don't try to make a SSB QSO on the frequencies that the SSTV crowd has claimed, even though they are dead when you call.73, Jim K9YCElecraft mailing listHome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:[hidden email] list hosted by: http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.htmlMessage delivered to [hidden email] mailing listHome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:[hidden email] list hosted by: http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.htmlMessage delivered to [hidden email]
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Phil Wheeler-2

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by Jerry Moore

Yes. Key is mounted on the side of the hand grip
and labeled PTT :-)

Phil W7OX

On 9/18/15 4:44 PM, Jerry Moore wrote:

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4

> FreeDV’s emission designator is 1K20J2E.

That is the *claimed* designator.

> “J3E” is “single sideband suppressed carrier”, “single channel
> containing analog information”, and “telephony”.

It is not J3E ... it is *J2E*.

"J" is single sideband suppressed carrier,
"2" is single channel containing quantized or digital information with
the use of a modulating sub-carrier
"E" is telephony.

FreeDV uses quantized/digital (digitally sampled and encoded) voice
which is modulated onto a series of sub-carriers which are in turn
modulated into a single sideband transmitter.

1K20J2E meets the requirements of 97.3c(5) as a "phone" mode *if* one
ignores the incidental *"text" data"*. There is a valid question
whether the "ID/text" bits ("data frame" in the FreeDV specification)
represents a second "data" channel which would make the FreeDV emission
designator 1K20J7W (SSB, two or more channels containing quantized or
digital information, combination of telephony and data transmission)
which *does not* comply with 97.3c(5) because the third character is
no longer "E".

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 9/18/2015 7:10 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:

> FreeDV’s emission designator is 1K20J2E.
>
> The “1K20” prefix is the bandwidth. “J3E” is “single sideband suppressed carrier”, “single channel containing analog information”, and “telephony”. Totally legal.
>
> http://freedv.org/tiki-index.php?page=FreeDV+Specification
>
> wunder
> K6WRU
> CM87wj
> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
>
>> On Sep 18, 2015, at 3:40 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Yes, digital voice is classified as Phone as long as the emission
>> designator has: "A, C, D, F, G, H, J or R as the first symbol; 1, 2, 3 or X as the second symbol; E as the third symbol." or "B or F as the first symbol; 7, 8 or 9 as the second symbol [and] E as the third
>> symbol." - From §97.3c(5)
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>

Bob McGraw - K4TAX

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

In reply to this post by Jerry Moore

I view that an acceptable digital mode for ham radio has been around
since day one! It's called CW. And at one time, it was required of
all hams to learn to send and receive via the mode.

73
Bob, K4TAX
K3S s/n 10,163

On 9/18/2015 6:44 PM, Jerry Moore wrote:

> What is this microphone thing? Is that a new kind of key?
> :p
>
> Jerry Moore
> AE4PB, S.N. 010324
>
>
> On September 18, 2015 7:09:56 PM EDT, Gary <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Aah Jim,
>>
>> Yes, "Emergency Nets" and SSTV, it is stunning how you here a dx
>> station calling, you answer and by being so cheeky, you suddenly get
>> swamped.
>>
>> We got'em over here too, you folks are not alone.
>>
>> So glad Elecraft supplied a VFO as standard, unlike a microphone, right
>> Wayne?
>>
>> Soon as I stop chuckling I can drink my coffee.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Jim Brown" <[hidden email]>
>> Sent: ‎19/‎09/‎2015 7:20 AM
>> To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?
>>
>> On Fri,9/18/2015 10:24 AM, Al Lorona wrote:
>>> Is bandwidth really our biggest problem?
>> It is during contests. Or when you're trying to fit in between the many
>>
>> ragchewing nets masquerading as "emergency" nets. And don't try to make
>>
>> a SSB QSO on the frequencies that the SSTV crowd has claimed, even
>> though they are dead when you call.
>>
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]

Gary Gregory-2

Re: K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

Good grief

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: "Bob McGraw - K4TAX" <[hidden email]>
Sent: ‎19/‎09/‎2015 11:04 AM
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Digital Voice Mode - our future?

I view that an acceptable digital mode for ham radio has been around
since day one! It's called CW. And at one time, it was required of
all hams to learn to send and receive via the mode.

73
Bob, K4TAX
K3S s/n 10,163

On 9/18/2015 6:44 PM, Jerry Moore wrote:

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

123