View Single Post
  #3   Report Post  
Old September 9th 07, 02:31 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
Steve Steve is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,324
Default Software Defined RadioReceivers (SDR) - Why Choose . . .

On Sep 3, 5:37 am, RHF wrote:
Software Defined RadioReceivers (SDR) - Why Choose . . .

Note - I am really 'only' interested in AM/MW
and Shortwave Bands 500 kHz to 30 MHz so
Wide-Band Receivers are off-the-list.
.
First the Flex-Radio SDR-1000 Receiver (only)
is no longer being made and so is off-the-list.http://www.flex-radio.com/Products.a...io_my_next.php
.
* WinRadio WR-G303e Receiverhttp://www.grove-ent.com/303E.html
Technical Specificationshttp://www.grove-ent.com/G303ETECHSPECS.htm
.
* Ten Tec RX-320D Shortwave Receiverhttp://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/commrxvr/0321.html
Specificationshttp://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/commrxvr/0321spec.html
.
* WinRadio WR-G313e HF Receiverhttp://www.grove-ent.com/WR313E.html
Technical Specificationshttp://www.winradio.com/home/g313e-s.htm
.
QUESTIONS :
.
Do you own one of these SDRs ?
.
Why Did You Buy An SDR ?
.
Would You Buy An SDR Again ?
-IF- Not Why Not ?
.
Any other SDRs out there that should be considered ?
.
YOUR OPINION THE PROS AND CONS :
.
Name Three Things You Like About Your SDR.
.
Name Three Things You Don't Like About Your SDR.
.
NOTE - Not interested in a Flame War - Just Tell Your Story
and let the other guy tell his.
.
ABOUT - Software Defined Radio/Receivers (SDR)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software-defined_radio
.
SDR Forum Website =http://www.sdrforum.org/
.
ARRL - Software Defined Radio/Receivers (SDR)http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/sdr.html
.
DX Zone - Software Defined Radio/Receivers (SDRhttp://www.dxzone.com/catalog/Technical_Reference/Software_Defined_Ra...
.
FCC Rules on Software-Defined Radios (SDR)http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resou...hitepaper.html
.
.
i want to know ~ RHF
.
.
. .


I have a Ten Tec 320D receiver. It's a tremendous value. Nothing else
currently being made--at least that I'm aware of--will give you the
bang for the buck that this thing does.

That said, it's not for everyone. There are people who will never be
comfortable attaching their receivers to a computer in any way. To
some extent I'm one of them. If I'm DXing, in particular, and trying
to receive a signal that's very weak or faint, I will (for obvious
reasons) not use a receiver that it attached to my computer. Still,
the 320D is a fine receiver and I've had a lot of fun with it. And of
course, the advantage of the computer connection is the huge selection
of filters that some software packages make available as well as the
excellent noise reduction that's available in software such as RxPlus.
And if you want to decode SSTV, HF fax, PSK, and other digital modes
then a 320D is just the ticket.

It's also interesting to have a choice between competing software
control programs because moving from one to the other is literally
like moving between different receivers. In that sense, when you buy a
320D, you're getting as many receivers as there are control programs.

Of course, in order to use the noise reduction or decode SSTV signals
the audio from the receiver has to be processed through your
computer's soundcard. This means you end up listening to the radio
through the speakers for your computer, and this, in my opinion,
stinks. I've tried updating my soundcard by buying a fancy one from
Turtle Beach and it definitely helps, but nothing's going to sound as
good as just listening to the receiver itself attached to a good
external speaker. Or so it seems to me. The 320D also lacks
synchronous detection, which means it's not for someone who's
primarily interested in program listening.

The 320D will decode DRM broadcasts. I've never used mine for this and
am not sure why anyone would. Maybe I'll try it one day, before DRM
disappears, just so I can say I did it.

I guess my position is this: I wouldn't want the 320D to be my only or
primary receiver, but I've had tons of fun with it and am extremely to
have it. And it really is an incredible value. That this receiver
costs less than an Eton E1 is just astounding to me. But that's the
advantage of the "black box" approach, I guess. You don't have to pay
for the big, noisy backlit display and all the little knobs that can
fall off, and only pay for the stuff that counts.

The 320D is also built like a tank, and as we all know, metal beats
plastic everytime.

Steve