Digital Voice Software Released

[g4tut]

Digital Voice Software Released

A new version of the Digital Voice software FDMDV is now available.

FDMDV allows you to transmit and receive Digital Voice simply by hooking up your PC to a standard HF SSB transceiver.

The key advantage of FDMDV is that it's transmitted bandwidth is less than half that of SSB, just 1.1 kHz.

The new version FDMDV 1.2 along with updated documentation can be downloaded from http://n1su.com/fdmdv/








Don't wait all week for the news! (http://www.southgatearc.org/)
Amateur Radio News - updated daily - 365 days per year

Get our News Headlines for your Website:
http://www.southgatearc.org/rss/index.htm

Send Us Your News Items:
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/your_news.htm

[KA5LQJ]

Good Afternoon (as it's 6 am here),

I'm all in favor of all modes of communication on Amateur radio. Each has it's place for those of us who wish to use them: cw, am, fm, atv, psk-31, rtty, etc. My concern arises from the fact that most of this new software that is being written, is only for users of MICRO$OFT.

There are those of us who refuse to bow down to the Evil Troll King of Redmond, WA and it's business model. It seems to me, in my humble opinion, that if a new project is to be undertaken to start or contiune a digital mode, that it would be written in the other O/S's (Mac, Unix, Linux, etc.), as well. Unless one were to write a program and charge for it's usage, it should be free to be modified for the betterment of the software.

Now, having said that, I must say, I don't have the intelligence to program in any computer language, so I don't have a dog in this fight, LOL! However, if I could, I would be more than glad to do this for others. ;) :)

I'm not condeming anyone who wishes to use any band nor mode. I would LOVE to have a ham station and antenna farm that allowed me to monitor everything from dc to light and talk on all amateur bands in ALL modes, but I just don't have the $$$$ or land, LOL!

I don't mean to sound like a troll, trying to start a ruckus, I just had a legitimate question.

Now, as to the issue of non-ham, robot stations being allowed on the amateur radio bands for monitary gain, I'm certainly against that.

Respectfully submitted,
73,

Don/KA5-LQJ

[Note: All e-mauls (flames) will be promptly put out by the Shreveport Fire Department, a Class 1, Fire Division]

[n0xas]

And shall I, as an operator who prefers CW, complain when a new SSB rig is introduced? I have a Timex-Sinclair kicking around in my garage somewhere. Shall I complain that the author of FDMDV didn't take the time to port the program to that as well? No, I don't think so. If I want software for the Timex-Sinclair, or some other systems for which there is no software to do what I want, I suppose I'll either have to write it myself (even if that means learning to program) or resign myself to the fact that there just isn't any.

Come on, seriously. I dislike Micro$loth as much as the next guy, but the simple fact remains that the vast majority of computer users globally (and this INCLUDES most hams) use Windoze. That's why most of the software you see is written for that platform. If the Macintosh ruled the world, or Linux had taken over the desktop, you'd see Windows users left in the dust. there are some very simple reasons that hasn't happened, but that's beside the point. Looks like you'll need to learn to write your own, port what's out there or just deal with it.

[W4INF]

Is anyone using it? What frequencies can I find it on? Do I need two laptops, one for encode and one for decode?

Im looking at the manual now, but more information would be helpful, there site has little information.

Andrew

[KI6MWS]

Alright Don you rukus starter!:rolleyes:...


I second the motion for Unix/Linux versions 1st. Then, if the monopolizers want in with a better product, step up. Just momentarily grabbing the rukus torch to say that I'm tired of paying for stuff that's rushed, doesn't work, needs endless updates, and obsoletes on itself so I have to pay all over again. Whew! That felt better...

Go OPEN SOURCE:D

[n5rfx]

Do I need two laptops, one for encode and one for decode?


Andrew,

You need two sound cards. One sound card is for mic and speaker audio (analog), the other sound card is for audio (digital) to and from the radio.

FDMDV is an offshoot of WinDRM (http://n1su.com/drmdv/docs/1.1/)and the setup is similar. There is the Digital Voice Net (http://n1su.com/drmdv/) and here is a link to suggested frequencies (http://n1su.com/aor-ard-9800.html). Several digital voice and digital file transfer modes use the same frequencies.

73,
Mark N5RFX

[kc4wms]

Come on, seriously. I dislike Micro$loth as much as the next guy, ... If the Macintosh ruled the world, or Linux had taken over the desktop, you'd see Windows users left in the dust. there are some very simple reasons that hasn't happened, but that's beside the point. Looks like you'll need to learn to write your own, port what's out there or just deal with it.

send me the source code, we'll port it to Linux , once there any good Mac programmer can make it run on OSX. :eek:


May the Source be With You!

73 all de kc4wms

[KJ4AUR]

Agree, I would go as far as to say if you're using amateur radio services for digital modes the specification for the application should be clearly published and/or the source code should be provided. Despite what the Microsoft apologists would have you believe the world does not run on Microsoft.

[ab1ga]

Can anyone tell me what the intellectual property status of the MELP-1400 codec is?

I seem to remember that the original MELP was free only to NATO and the US Government, the primary funding sources for the development. I would assume that rights to MELP 1400 would be similar.

[K0RGR]

It's a really bad idea announcing anything new here on "you_can't_do_that_on_ham_radio.com' .

The ink isn't even dry on the CRT screen yet, and you've already got 6 negative posts and one asserting that what you're doing is completely illegal!

[ab1ga]

It's a really bad idea announcing anything new here on "you_can't_do_that_on_ham_radio.com' .

The ink isn't even dry on the CRT screen yet, and you've already got 6 negative posts and one asserting that what you're doing is completely illegal!



'RGR:

Were you by chance referring to my post? If so, please note that asking a question is not asserting anything.

I do have concerns about intellectual property claims surrounding MELP and its derivatives; the fact that everything BUT the MELP DLL is available from the N1SU web site directly gives me reason to believe that there may be some legal impediments in place.

To me it makes sense to ask such questions in the same section where the availability of the software was announced, i.e. where I might most likely find a correct, authoritive answer. Novelty is not an excuse for license.

[k7mhi]

I am so upset that you did not write this for os2warp it is totally unacceptable that you work hard and try to share your fun with people who listen to leo laport and have the lack of decency to include os2warp. I sir will not use your product. I will however go back to my google mail account on my Macintosh with my iphone and blog about this.

is it just me or is qrz full of a bunch of old grumpy people that complain a lot? I just gont get it.


for the people that do use windows i enjoy your software and think its fun and cool thanks for sharing.

[n5kbp]

I am so upset that you did not write this for os2warp

Ahhh OS2 Warp now there was an OS.
N5KBP

[K4SGT]

I have to say that this project interests me a lot. I really like digital voice and I am looking forward to giving this project a go. I would love to see this thing with multi-platform support as stated by earlier posters. I am a linux geek and out of the seven computers that I have you will find that they all run a different flavor. I can run this program VIA virtual machine (and I intend to) but I would love to see it go native to Linux and show up in the major distribution repositories like so much other quality ham radio software. If I was further along in my computer science degree I would love to lend this support...but since I am just a wanna-be for now, I'll just have to wish. Maybe in a couple of years when I can contribute some quality code I can help. Thanks for your work in advancing digital voice!

Barry
K4SGT

[KB5DRJ]

My Macs run both OSX and Windows, so guess I'll take it either way! An OS without any software is not the best choice so I like to keep both options available to me. :)

David KB5DRJ

[KJ4AUR]

I am so upset that you did not write this for os2warp it is totally unacceptable that you work hard and try to share your fun with people who listen to leo laport and have the lack of decency to include os2warp. I sir will not use your product. I will however go back to my google mail account on my Macintosh with my iphone and blog about this.

is it just me or is qrz full of a bunch of old grumpy people that complain a lot? I just gont get it.


for the people that do use windows i enjoy your software and think its fun and cool thanks for sharing.

It's unreasonable to expect the software author to write their software for every OS variant out there, however, it's perfectly reasonable to request that the specification and optionally the source code be published. With the specification this would enable additional programmers to adopt this mode and write software for the respective OS.

No one is shaking their fists at the software author for writing Win32 software. If you write software which uses Amateur Radio frequencies the specification should be published so there is not an OS niche target.

Consider the converse, what would your reaction be if I wrote digital mode software that was Linux only, refused to publish the specification and/or source code, and then condemned anyone who dare complain asserting that Win32 is a legacy OS and you can play using my toys or go home. Bear in mind that said software would use the same frequency allocations you're entitled to but you would have no way to decode such communication unless you ran the OS I required you to.

[n5rfx]

it's perfectly reasonable to request that the specification and optionally the source code be published.

I know the author of FMDV has said that an essential part of fdmdv is not his code. "This code was handed to me on a trust basis, with the permission to use in fdmdv. It's not up to me to go open source with it."

The source code for MELP is available at this site (http://maya.arcon.com/ddvpc/melp.htm). I am not sure what the state of the licensing issue is at this time.

73,
Mark N5RFX

[k7mhi]

It's unreasonable to expect the software author to write their software for every OS variant out there, however, it's perfectly reasonable to request that the specification and optionally the source code be published. With the specification this would enable additional programmers to adopt this mode and write software for the respective OS.

No one is shaking their fists at the software author for writing Win32 software. If you write software which uses Amateur Radio frequencies the specification should be published so there is not an OS niche target.



im just making a point that the 15 replies saying I WANT LINUX dont you think the author knows that there is more then windows. who are all the people that wine (pun) about no linux compatability to a developer that obviously programs windows. last time i checked anyone who is a solid developer is aware of linux

I personaly released software on here and all people bi*ched about was why isnt this in a open platform.

because im a windows programmer, i dont know linux I live in a windows word it pays my bills why would i spend the hours to learn when its of no value to me.

btw i was kidding about OS2 i was making a point sarcastically.

Consider the converse, what would your reaction be if I wrote digital mode software that was Linux only, refused to publish the specification and/or source code, and then condemned anyone who dare complain asserting that Win32 is a legacy OS and you can play using my toys or go home. Bear in mind that said software would use the same frequency allocations you're entitled to but you would have no way to decode such communication unless you ran the OS I required you to.

I would boot up linux on a dual boot or vm and have no qualms if it was good software. if it wasnt then i wouldnt miss it. be serious VM technology is 100% free now and the majority of people in the world own or stole a copy of windows, so i really see no reason for all the complaining about which OS is better or why a author should be condemned if they choose to go OS specific.

look at the prior post n5rfx he has a golden point. people arnt stupid they know there is other then windows but there is likely a good chance that they know only how to do what they did. I am just VERY SICK of always seeing people release ideas and software and this web site has members that just want to point out (like we didnt know) I run linux so this is no use to me.

we get it, we got it back when you learned how to install ubuntu 4 years ago with a youtube video and that you have 11 computers running it. my argument is not your choice but that you feel that people who dont think the world runs on linux need to have 15 posts telling them that they are "in the dark" lets give feedback like cool app i dont like this, not FU bill gates.

[KJ4AUR]

I can appreciate your frustration, my participation in this thread wasn't to go "Boo hiss, Windows is horrible" or "Boo, hiss, this software is Win32 only" but rather urge developers to publish specification or source code which would benefit the Amateur community as a whole. Let the burden of system programming fall on those that run the OS and publish OS agnostic specification. Consider the fact that many of us running Linux, inclusive of myself, do not have Win32 systems nor have the desire to bring one up, even in a VM, to utilize this software. Why should I be burdened with licensing fees and unacceptable EULA restrictions so I can decode this mode of communication? I have no interest in bring inferior software which consistently pose a security risk online in a VM.

Was YouTube even around four years ago?

[n1dvj]

Hmm, a self-proclaimed computer no-nothing blast MicroSoft and Gates.

Sounds like one of the religious right that blast books and movies without reading or seeing them.

I'm sorry, I have no respect here!

Still, the MicroSoft issue IS a valid debate, but let's put the blame for lack of software where it really belongs. The developers.

I mean, if they weren't so stupid and lazy they'd realize that to be fair they HAVE to develope for linux. (Oh, don't forget about TRS-DOS 1.3! or I'll scream discrimination!)


Uh-oh, here comes a serious point though... If development for some of these programs were to be done in Delphi, I wonder how tough it would be to run them through Kylix and actually have a program that would work under linux? Has anyone done it that can actually state with some authority what it takes to convert a program to linux?

Mike

[n1dvj]

... once there any good Mac programmer can make it run on OSX.

Well, right there's your problem!

[n0xas]

There's no regulatory requirement for the source code or DLLs to be released, but there IS a regulatory requirement that the method of coding be made public - it has to be something that is documented so that transmissions are not obscured, and can be received and decoded/monitored. If the encoding scheme is published, it's possible (in theory at least) to be able to decode and monitor. The regs don't say it has to be easy, or free.

As an aside, I don't think you're going to get ANY of this to work in a VM, at least not on a live audio stream. My experience has been with servers running in VMs, not desktops. I haven't played around with trying to dedicate sound hardware to a VM, so I'm not 100% sure -- but I'd be surprised if it worked.

[n5rfx]

There's no regulatory requirement for the source code or DLLs to be released, but there IS a regulatory requirement that the method of coding be made public - it has to be something that is documented so that transmissions are not obscured, and can be received and decoded/monitored.
The reg says that "an amateur station transmitting a RTTY or data emission using a digital code specified in this paragraph may use any technique whose technical characteristics have been documented publicly," DA 95-2106 is the R&O that established this requirement, and it points to the technical descriptions of CLOVER, G-TOR, and PACTOR as an example. Those can be found here (http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/techchar/).

FDMDV is not a RTTY or Data emission, so there is no requirement to document the technical characteristics. The technical characteristics however have been published.

73,
Mark N5RFX

[vp9ks]

Ahhh OS2 Warp now there was an OS.
N5KBP

Don't look now, my friend, but OS2 WARP is not dead yet. I service the Datacard Sigma 9000 credit card embossers for a living, and they all run OS2 WARP!! The newer ones run V 4.51 which is much less forgiving when the operator shuts down by just hitting the power switch, and those quick on/off reboots drive it (and me) crazy! I have had to completely reinstall OS2 and the card production software because of that. And don't get me started on getting it to log on to a Windows 2000 network!!!!

[WA5BEN]

It's unreasonable to expect the software author to write their software for every OS variant out there, however, it's perfectly reasonable to request that the specification and optionally the source code be published. With the specification this would enable additional programmers to adopt this mode and write software for the respective OS.

No one is shaking their fists at the software author for writing Win32 software. If you write software which uses Amateur Radio frequencies the specification should be published so there is not an OS niche target.

Consider the converse, what would your reaction be if I wrote digital mode software that was Linux only, refused to publish the specification and/or source code, and then condemned anyone who dare complain asserting that Win32 is a legacy OS and you can play using my toys or go home. Bear in mind that said software would use the same frequency allocations you're entitled to but you would have no way to decode such communication unless you ran the OS I required you to.

There is absolutely no law, regulation, or reason that requires that any transmission be readable by every ham -- or every listener. Nor is there any law, regulation, or reason that any mode be non-proprietary. If one chose to make such an idiotic rule, one would actually prohibit EVERY new mode.

The standard is simple: One may not use any encryption or cipher that is intended to obscure the content or meaning. One is free to use any mode that falls within bandwidth and (very archaic) symbol rate limits, so long as an apparatus for receiving or algorithm or method of receiving is available.

If you must buy or build a new radio, a new modem, a new device, or a different computer or OS; that is the cost that you must bear if -- and ONLY if -- you want to use that mode. If a user license is required, you must bear that cost, also if -- and ONLY if -- you wish to use the mode.

If you do NOT wish to use the mode, you need do nothing.

Absolutely NOTHING is required to be public domain. In many cases, any requirement to place something in public domain would have TOTALLY PREVENTED any use by amateur radio of technologies that are common today. Many, many new inventions have been released for either FREE or very low license fee use by amateurs for which large license fees are / were charged to companies and governments.

Why on earth would anyone spend hundreds or thousands of man-hours to develop and test a new invention, and then turn around and give it away ? Perhaps those of us who have no need to hold a job (or those who are living in the rarified world of academia) can afford to do that; but most of us must actually WORK for a living !

I have a pretty simple license statement on my NVIS tool. It basically says that if you use a single copy of it for non-commercial purposes, it is free. If you distribute it or use it for commercial purposes, you must pay a negotiated fee. I spent WAY over 200 hours developing and refining that tool.

[nd4z]

:):)I am wondering why 2 diferent sound cards have to be used for the Digital Audio? Is it possible to use the orignal sound card in my desktop for 1 of them and a Signal Link USB adaptor with built in sound card for the 2nd one?
Is there a lot of activity with digital audio with this software at present? Is it compatable with other digital audio systems like the AOR type stuff?
As for all the comments on MAC,Linux and other OS platforms, it would be nice if you guys would take all that crap and argue on another thread,and leave this one open for discussion for those hams who want tech details on how to make it all work. If you don't like the normal windows platform that most of us use, you should consider buying the AOR package that has been working great for this application for some time now. I myself would like to experment with the free software to see if it is worth while gettig into. I think by spending so much time bickering about the OS is counter productive and takes time and space away from oter hams who want to spend time learing about HF digital ssb communication.
73 to all,
Rick ND4Z

[n5rfx]

:):)I am wondering why 2 diferent sound cards have to be used for the Digital Audio? Is it possible to use the orignal sound card in my desktop for 1 of them and a Signal Link USB adaptor with built in sound card for the 2nd one?
The Signal Link USB adapter with built in sound card can be used as the interface to your rig and the original sound card can be used for the E&M (ear and mouth) interface.
Is there a lot of activity with digital audio with this software at present? Is it compatable with other digital audio systems like the AOR type stuff?
It is not compatible with the AOR DV units. AOR uses the AMBE VOCODER, FDMDV uses MELP.

73,
Mark N5RFX

[KA5LQJ]

Gentlemen:

My original post was not to start a bruhaha about the different computer O/S's nor to take away time for the healthy technical discussions that go on this forum. I guess I was looking for the Perfect World, in which when a ham radio computer program was written, it also would be taken and ported to the other O/S's as well.

I have absolutley nothing against anyone being paid for their time & services in porting software, as long as it works. I won't go into M$'s buggy software or charging a LOT of money for their upgrades. If someone writes a program and it works, I'll recommend it, even if it cost money,

Now, I do use other modes: CW, AM, SSB, & FM. I recommend you at least TRY them as well. This hobby has vast areas of interest: contesting, rag-chewing, ATV, satellite, QRP, etc.

For those of you were were offended by my post and thinking I was "rude", I can only humbily apologize. Yes, QRZ does have a Computer & Software forum. But the G4TUT's post was not in that section, it was here and I was merely expressing my humble opinion. Y'all have expressed yours as well and I appreciate all the input I've received from this.

Thank each of you for your time & wisdom :D

Respectfully submitted,
73,

Don/KA5-LQJ

[nd4z]

In most other internet forums,when one changes the original content of a post into a different subject it is considered "Thread Jacking". And it is generaly not accepted. A better way to do it is to start one's own thread on the subject matter and not take away the authors original intent of his post.
73 to all,
Rick ND4Z:D