Re: [IRCA] Testing New SDR software

[Brett Saylor <bsaylor@xxxxxxxxx>]

You've done a great job of characterizing several of the "down" sides of
SDR's, Barry. I've fallen into the trap of recording the band here at home
far too many times and, now that I've filled several hard drives with
Perseus recordings, I'm reluctant to throw them away in case there might be
a hidden gem or a great opening buried somewhere in the terabytes of data.
And, I do find myself sometimes losing track of time as I step through 100+
TOH's from a single 2-minute wide band recording. But then again, I was
doing single-channel audio recordings like you and Russ for years prior to
getting an SDR and have several gigabytes of un-reviewed MP3 files, too. I
keep telling myself I'll get to them all someday when I'm retired :-)

I also found that I seldom used my phaser after getting an SDR - I was
afraid of screwing up the wideband reception - which I truly believe was a
step backwards. I'll have to train myself to start using it again, even if
it means dedicating another radio to phasing, since some of my best
receptions were as a result of the phaser.

For me, though, there have been two key benefits of the SDR: (1) the ability
to record some outstanding conditions at DXpeditions, the summer beach
house, or even a nearby location using a beverage antenna and listening to
them later at my leisure, and (2) the ability to "visualize" the conditions
on the band (signal strength, modulation, IBOC/interference, multiple
carriers, etc.) that were just theoretical in my mind prior to the waterfall
display of an SDR. I feel as though I have a greater understanding of what's
taking place now that I can both hear and see the station's signal.

I guess the real indication of the impact of SDRs on me has been how seldom
I listen to my "regular" receiver since getting the Perseus - other than
taking it out of the box once or twice a year for a DXpedition, the Drake
spends most of its time in a box in the basement. It makes me sad that my
regular radio isn't used much anymore, and I may end up selling it, but I
never see myself turning away from the SDR path in the future,

Brett Saylor



On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Barry McLarnon <bdm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I haven't jumped on the SDR bandwagon yet, and most of my reasons are the
> same as mentioned by Russ.  Unless you are exceptionally affluent, it's
> hard
> to justify spending that kind of money on a hobby activity.  Aside from
> that,
> there is the apprehension that having an SDR could become a huge time
> waster.
>
> Like Russ, I make extensive use of timed recording.  Virtually every day, I
> record the periods around TOH from just before sunset until at least an
> hour
> after sunrise.  When reviewing the recordings, I listen from a minute
> before
> each TOH until just after TOH, and if it sounds promising, I do further
> listening, especially in the period where stations typically come out of a
> news break.  Just to do a reasonably thorough job of reviewing one day's
> worth of recordings takes a considerable amount of time, and that's for a
> single tuned frequency.  If I had an SDR recording that covers 100+
> channels,
> I can imagine the temptation to check one more, and another after that, and
> maybe just one more... before you know it, you've run out of hours in the
> day, and neglected other important things that you should be doing.  In
> short, too much of a good thing.  Sure, you just need to exercise some
> self-
> discipline to avoid slipping into this trap, and we all know how easy that
> is. :-)  I think SDR's are perfect for expeditions to special listening
> locations where you want to make the most of the limited time available,
> but
> for routine monitoring, having that full band recording capability is a bit
> scary!
>
> Lastly, with 2300+ stations logged from this location, I've heard all the
> easy ones, and many of the not-so-easy ones.  These days, I'm usually going
> after a specific target, which involves careful phasing to null out a pest
> on
> a given channel.  This applies to timed recording as well as live
> listening.
> Since this setup applies to a specific channel, having the capability to
> record many channels at once wouldn't really be much of an asset.
>
> Having said all that, I can still think of a few instances where having an
> SDR would be nice.  The main one would be when there is some very unusual
> propagation happening, which can bring in some new stations without the use
> of phasing.  This is especially true of auroral events, which have been
> exceedingly rare in recent years, but likely will become somewhat more
> frequent as we head towards the next sunspot peak.  The next time one
> happens, I'll probably be kicking myself for not having an SDR to make the
> most of the event.  The SDR would also be useful for GY hunting, to grab
> all
> 6 GY channels at once... but again, there's that time element involved in
> checking the recordings.
>
> Anyway, that's how I see it.  In the long run, though, I'm sure that
> resistance is futile!
>
> Barry
>
> --
> Barry McLarnon VE3JF  Ottawa, ON
>
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx