DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=btinternet.com;
  h=DKIM-Signature:Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MIMEOLE:X-Antivirus:X-Antivirus-Status;
  b=El+aB37hv1tWzd4eQwmyL6ydCNqUXFcDpuiQ4YUumfdh7TJH7Oi3LjfhYMt2aL4+RzyBdvd0yYlOXzHyCbYlyTm9EIDQziz+QG00PAQspgDB5PbKYl3fQVBNXnzBMS+vdpC1w0oydt4gJe1VjRnMBhylx92We0DXnS3GWDVvPjU=  ;
Message-ID: <006b01cb7857$f564e870$4001a8c0@lark>
From: "Alan Melia" <alan.melia@btinternet.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <4CCAED49.6030007@o2.ie> <4CCC2277.9040801@o2.ie> <045201cb7844$ca1df020$0201a8c0@Clemens04>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 18:04:01 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: Re: LF: RFspace SDR-IQ
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Hi Clemens, you seem to impute that there are no shortcommings in dire=
ct
sampling!
 :-))    I suspect there are, but they are just "different".  You may=
 be
right about the units mentioned, but it is just as easy to make a poor=
ly
preforming DSP radio as to make a poor analogue one. We are in danger=
 of
being conditioned to accept that "digital" is the magic dust that solv=
es all
problems......it is definitely not so!

Having said that, the performance of some units is quite remarkable an=
d I do
own a couple very good conventional receivers.

Alan G3NYK

----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Clemens Paul" <cpaul@gmx.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: LF: RFspace SDR-IQ


> Tony,
>
> the most important difference between SDR-IQ/-IP(from RF Space)
> or Perseus and the $200 SDR on
> http://www.lazydogengineering.com/LD-1A_SDR.html
> is that  the latter is no direct sampling receiver.
> It uses a downconverting technique with a number of shortcomings,e.g=
.
> phase noise of the LO and others.
> I would go for a direct sampling SDR like those e.g. from RF space=
 or
> Perseus.
>
> 73
> Clemens
> DL4RAJ
>
> ----- Original Message -----=20
> From: "Tony" <ei8jk@o2.ie>
> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: LF: RFspace SDR-IQ
>
>
> > Thanks guys.
> >
> > You have just tipped the balance for me and I shall be placing an
> > order
> > for one on Monday morning.
> > It's about time I joined the 21st century, but it will be
> > interesting to
> > compare it to my beloved FT 102 rx.
> >
> > Tony, EI8JK.
> >
> >
> > On 29/10/2010 16:50, Tony wrote:
> >> Hello group.
> >>
> >> Has anyone any experience with this SDR ?
> >> It looks interesting and I'm a bit tempted, especially as it work=
s
> >> full spec down to 500 Hz and "usable" to 100 Hz.
> >> But as I have never used an SDR, I haven't got a clue if it's any
> >> good
> >> or not.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------=
------
------
>
>
>
> Eingehende eMail ist virenfrei.
> Von AVG =FCberpr=FCft - www.avg.de
> Version: 9.0.864 / Virendatenbank: 271.1.1/3226 - Ausgabedatum:
> 10/29/10 20:34:00
>
>