New FlexRadio 6000 Announced

[W3RSW]

Why?

Good stuff on ENOB.  Such "posturing" is what drove the space race, put USA on the moon and spelled the end of the USSR.  Say did you all see the first private launch from Cape Kennedy this morning?

Perhaps here's one of the more authorative drivers for some of Flex's turnabout.  None other than Phil, N8VB
-Related to the ENOB thread and interesting.  Also the vaunted Sherwood list is mentioned.

Following is all quoted from the QS1R yahoo board.
"
--- In qs1r@yahoogroups.com, George Works <worksg@...> wrote:
> Flex used to respond to questions on their reflector about direct
> sampling by saying that it had some benefits, but so did their analog
> filtering approach. But I suspect that their heart wasn't really in this
> response because Flex went direct sampling on their premier 6000 series
> product.
> George, PJ5/KJ6VW

Hi George,

Well, it's all more about posturing for marketing purposes these days than
dealing with reality.

I remember certain Flex Radio people arguing that Direct Sampling would never
approach the superior dynamic range of the QSD/audio ADC approach. It seems
like Flex has now changed their tune on that claim. I also remember a specific
Flex radio associate, that should have known better because of his background,
claiming that the ADC in the direct sampling receivers would be subject to
severe overload when all the signals within in the bandwidth of the ADC
magically added together to exceed the ADC clipping level. What he
forgot/missed was that in the real world signals on the bands are not
synchronous and do not add together like he was implying. Superposition does not
work that way. That scenario is only possible with synchronous signals
generated in the laboratory.

Flex Radio purchased a QS1R a few years ago to play with, so maybe their
experience with it helped to change their minds about direct sampling in
general. Also, the Perseus surpassing the Flex-5000a on Sherwood's receiver
list also opened some eyes I am betting.

73 Phil N8VB
"

[WA1GFZ]

Flex had nobody to design the direct sampling for them. There is more to that story.
The smart thing they did was to add additional filtering up front.
I do see my A/D saturate from heavy static. It is usually time to disconnect the antenna. I also see the noise floor jump up when there is a strong local signal. A good tunable preselector will be a big help. A Harris, Collins or Cubic prepost selector is the balls for a front end. I use a dual 13 filter Racal on my dual RX set up. When I get hermes the tunable Cubic will get pressed into service.
Direct sampling drops the parts count but you need to use good hardware to take advantage of the software. Flex put some real horsepower behind the A/D but I think they could have used a better A/D.
GIGO.
I think there needs to be a few more A/D bits before the analog guys are left in the dust. We seem to be stuck at 16. All the shuck and jive in the FPGA doesn't get you there,,,,yet. 

[W1AEX]

There have been some interesting "back and forths" between quite a few Flex owners and several of the Flex hardware/software engineers regarding the selection of the obsolete TMS320C6A8167 C6-Integra DSP rather than the TMS320DM8167 DaVinci DSP. As it turns out, this is due to confusion with a prototype design they worked with and the wrong information was put into the product brochure specs. In fact, the units now being built use the TMS320DM8167 DaVinci DSP.

Additionally, the matter of 16-bit ADC resolution rather than 24-bit as in the 5000A has been vigorously questioned in the technical forum. Several Flex engineers have gone through the math with the skeptics and are now referring them to the Amtel documentation which walks through the use of decimation and oversampling to increase dynamic range. The link they are supplying for the skeptics is here:      

http://www.atmel.com/Images/doc8003.pdf

One of the Flex engineers has said that they are enjoying the discourse and are willing to answer any questions. Anyone can join the Flex Reflector and swing away:

http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/index.html

They've also indicated repeatedly that they doubt anyone will be disappointed with any independent lab tests the 6000 series might be subjected to. Should be interesting to see what the independent tests turn up, but more important to me is whether or not the rack handles can be purchased in chrome rather than black.

Rob W1AEX

[WA1GFZ]

Interesting Rob, I wonder how the first release will work.
Will it be bug infested or work clean.
If it is clean then it will be fair to charge for software upgrades.
I think this will be very interesting to watch over the next couple years.

[K6JEK]

Do any of you Flexers know if they went with their plan to re-write the software in Erlang?

[k4kyv]

Yet another "Last radio you'll ever need!"

Kind of like la der des ders, "the last of the last", IOW the war to end all wars, 1914-1918.

Wait till some proprietary chip craps out 5 or 10 years from now, and they inform you that the part is "discontinued".

The way they list the price at $3999, $5999 and $6999 instead of $4K, $6K and $7K says it all. This tells me it is closer to the realm of "consumer" electronics than to that of amateur radio. At least they don't add that 9/10¢ at the end the way gas stations do.

I have to say they do sound pretty good on AM when adjusted correctly, and I like the way W9AD can operate his remotely from Mexico and sound exactly the same as he does when in ILL (I could never get away with doing that here at my QTH; lightning would wipe the thing out before the first month went by).  I have heard some on the air that, if the op had told me he was using a converted BC transmitter I would have believed him. But still, I could buy several ready-to-convert BC rigs plus spare parts and tubes, and a couple of 75A-4s or R-390s, and still have enough of my $7K left over to purchase the hardware to build an effective antenna.

[K1JJ]

One thang can be said about the SDR and Flex radios in general...

To become really proficient using one, it takes hundreds of study hours. One has to master the software, hardware and operating skills.

Sure, we could JS it and just get on the air by feel -  or we can do what Rob/W1AEX has done and spend several years diving DEEP into everything these rigs are capable of... and it's a lot.

Then there's Frank who eats and sleeps the hardware to the point of being expert in the leading edge of TX and RX ham use.

Some of us may discount the skills required to get really good at learning the deepest parts of the technology, but as one who has built up an HPSDR rig here, I was on the hairy edge of confusion most of the time -  and find working on the big AM tube rigs to be easy in comparison.  SDR stuff requires a whole new set of computer skills that are normally not used with a business/pleasure PC.

They may not be running heavy iron, but an SDR AMer who has FULLY mastered his rig sure gets my respect....  

T

[WA1GFZ]

Tom,
You went through the learning curve so know how it feels. It is great that the gang is there to help. The smart guys who help us dumb guys really get my respect.  Guys like Phil Harman and Joe Martin etc make ham radio fun.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

If it is clean then it will be fair to charge for software upgrades.

Notice the $199 charge for software upgrades and support for 1 year. Not for me
Flex must think they are zuckerburg.

Is this the same "GFZ"??

[W3RSW]

Yeah, you'd never know it. 

He's 009 now.
160 MHz ave.
DDCville.

[WA1GFZ]

Yes it was Pete, and based on the past, the Flex rigs came out with many software bugs.
So if Flex ships a clean product and charges for new features it is fair but if you have pay to clean up bugs it is a rip off.

[WA1GFZ]

Rick,
Gaggleville

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Yes it was Pete, and based on the past, the Flex rigs came out with many software bugs.
So if Flex ships a clean product and charges for new features it is fair but if you have pay to clean up bugs it is a rip off.

I agree. If a feature is advertised as being in the rig, and that feature doesn't work as described, and a software upgrade (bug fix) is required to make it do was it was advertised to do, you shouldn't have to pay for it. However, if the feature is enhanced, or updated to include some additional functionally, that should fall under the payment category.

[WA1GFZ]

So based on their track record would you think the first year should be free??

[KF1Z]

The first year IS 'free'.

======================

One (1) year SmartSDR™ software update and FlexAdvantage™  technical support contract for the FLEX-6000.  This provides for a year of SmartSDR software updates and FlexAdvantage technical support for the FLEX-6000 family of software defined radios.


NOTE: This is not required for new radio purchases as it is included in the purchase price of the FLEX-6000.  You can however purchase multiple years of SmartSDR updates and FlexAdvantage technical support if you so desire.

[WA1GFZ]

Don,
Your tax dollars have contributed to the design of this radio so your only option is to not pay for it twice.

[W3RSW]

Frank,
Margareritaville
.hey, at least we can sing it.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Frank,
Margareritaville
.hey, at least we can sing it.

but not spell it.

[W3RSW]

That's what my IPad put in, seriously . 

hmm, infallible machine driven to drink.

[kb3rdt]

Flex Radio's are good sounding radio's...

But why some echo?

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Flex Radio's are good sounding radio's...

But why some echo?

HUH??

[K6JEK]

Flex Radio's are good sounding radio's...

But why some echo?

HUH??

Was a common problem with 1000's. I think maybe flaky connectors or some such. It's been a long time.

[W1AEX]

But why some echo?

Ah yes, the infamous echo. One of the quirks is that if a station hasn't paid attention to proper grounding, particularly with the computer that is handling the DSP chores, RF feedback will be induced into the process at some point. With the newer rigs it's frequently the firewire cable that's the point of ingress. At any rate, the RF feedback and the transmitted signal will differ by the amount of latency present in the computer, so you end up with the infamous echo effect. Proper bonding throughout the station resolves this, but lots of hams seem to struggle with the concept.

Sure, we could JS it and just get on the air by feel -  or we can do what Rob/W1AEX has done and spend several years diving DEEP into everything these rigs are capable of... and it's a lot.

Tom, that's very high praise, but my level of understanding is microscopic compared to Frank, Pete, and others around here. I'm just really good at faking it!

Rob W1AEX

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Ah, now my brain is working. We jumped from the Flex 6000 allllll the way back to the SDR-1000. There were many issues back in "the good old days" with the SDR-1000 cabling, grounding, and latency. Echo, as a result of latency due to poor computer processing, can be a big problem with some of older computers. As Rob points out, even with the newer machines proper grounding, shielding, etc. are very important in keeping the RF out of the circuitry to eliminate the echo effect. I tried running my Flex on a Dell (bought in 2000). The echo effect was so bad, it sounded like I had a 60's car reverb in the audio chain. The only thing missing was the bouncing springs effect when you drove over a rough road.