4 reasons why we need more digital voice modes (not fewer)

Just my two cents.... A very important reason why it appears that we are behind the times. Take Spread Spectrum modes. These have existed for decades BUT HAMS WERE NOT ALLOWED TO USE THIS MODE ON THE HAM BANDS until just a short few years ago. How can we innovate when we legally can't use a new mode on our frequencies until given permission from the FCC? I am not saying that this is what is happening to every mode or idea we come up with, but it sure does slow down progress and give the illusion that we are behind the curve when we are actually still creating new ideas. We just can't bring them to light as fast as a corporation with big bucks to push permissions through the FCC.

Dean K6DDJ

 

Digital Modes Smack of "1984"

What I think is that we are further diluting the language pool, and that this smacks of "newspeak" from George Orwell's book "1984". If different commercial manufacturers want to create their own proprietary digital modes for security purposes or to garner "brand loyalty", that's fine...Let the companies and agencies that can afford that kind of silliness pay for it.

But there's NO NEED WHATSOEVER for MULTIPLE digital voice modes in the Amateur Radio service. It only further serves to ISOLATE segments of the community, not unite them. I am all about "innovation", but not at the expense of making it harder (and more expensive!) for us to stay in touch. If I need three different brand name transceivers to talk across town, there's something wrong.

73

Steve Robeson, K4YZ
Winchester, TN

 

Steve I am totally in your camp. I do have an Icom 2200 that could be fitted with the D-Star board, however how about a manufactuer building a D-Star, A Yaesu mode and what ever else comes down the pike, all on one board. Then we would have what ever needed to be used. Then we would have the three or four radios someone else mentioned all in one radio.

We would probably need to listin to the FM first to recognoze the mode in use then call up that decoder.

 

This is about it. CW, FM, AM, SSB, and the majority of data modes are open technologies that can be implemented by anybody who wishes. I don't have to care about which radio brand my FM or RTTY or CW contact is using, and the same is true on their end. The current crop of digital voice modes are proprietary to either a single manufacturer, or are patent encumbered, or both. What this means is that there will be different digital voice ghettoes developing across the lands, with one area being an Icom ghetto, another a Yaesu ghetto, or a P25 ghetto, and so forth.

It is difficult for me to understand why any any amateur would choose to communicate with closed technology (I'm also looking at you, PACTOR). If there was some technical advantage to using proprietary digital voice I don't think it would be enough for me, if I lost interoperability with all the equipment that's in operation, but it is difficult to detect much that is useful with digital voice over analog FM.

The most promising digital voice technology in my opinion is Codec2, which is a Free, Open Source digital voice codec that rivals or beats the commercial options. I suspect my next radio purchase will be a HackRF so I can play with Codec2 a bit on the go.

Yaesu and Icom have cornered themselves into their own ghettos, but Kenwood has a great opportunity here to choose Codec2 and perhaps set a trend that will be good for amateur radio.

 

Very sharp observation ND6M, sales people, they are sneaky but this was well spotted, lol. Realy enjoyed your comment. No disrespect Carl. Any way, a few guys I know this side of the planet have delt with GigaParts and they all were happy. No advetising intended.

 

Or do you agree that innovation is an important facet of our hobby?

Carl Jordan, KJ4RYP
GigaParts.com
(866) 535-4442[/QUOTE]

I wholeheartedly agree that we need innovation. The hobby tends to get boring with the same old thing. I had lost interest in HF a few years ago. Then Flex came out with their SDR radios. I bought a 1500 and it has really re-kindled my interest in HF. I had the Icom 880. D-star wasn't for me. The audio quality was poor, the machines would drop offline for no reason etc. I recently purchased a Yaesu C4FM (Fusion) ht. It's fun to play with. The audio is much better than D-Star. The issue is that it is still in its infancy. There isn't a lot of Fusion repeaters online yet. As others have stated to me, give it time. D-Star didn't come online overnight either. I've traveled to different parts of the country and have keyed a few Fusion machines. Usually no one is there. Elecraft came out with some neat kits. The KX-3 has been a lot of fun for remote area and qrp OPs.

What I would like to see is a company like Uniden get together with another radio company (or their own) and build an "All in one" box for the mobile. It would be nice to have a mobile radio single din or double din that could be a retrofit for the stock car radio. In that radio, give it the capability of a dualband transceiver, a scanner and standard am fm broadcast capabilities. What the heck, add in HF as well. It doesn't have to be a 100 watt radio. Leave the option open for add ons. Design it so you can be listening to your favorite am or fm station. If a call comes in on the two way, mute the broadcast and open the two way audio. Make it fully customizable so you can taylor it to meet your needs via software. Add in GPS for APRS and for navigation. I think you can see the possibilities here. No more mounting 4 different radios. In today's vehicles, there isn't a lot of real estate to mount things. There would be licensing to overcome. Like the Uniden Motorola scanner license for trunk tracking.
Add an SD slot or a usb port for upgrades and file transfer capabilities. I wish Yaesu didn't limit the file transfer size on the Fusion radios.
I've brought these ideas up to Uniden and Yaesu but it falls on deaf ears.

What happened to the innovation?

Just another idea..

73 de Don.

 

All my rigs are digital if I use my finger on the dial.

 

I can't buy the arguments. Tried D-Star, didn't like it. I have nothing against Donald Duck, I just don't think I should sound like him.

73, Larry in El Paso, TX

 

Maybe it's time to re-visit linear translators. They have a narrow passband that just amplifies and shifts whatever they receive back out, kind of like the satellites do. You could run nearly any modulation or mode over them regardless of how it is coded or modulated. It just has to fit into the bandwidth of the translator. That way more people might experiment with new modes without having to wait for repeaters to support them.

 

"I would be far more likely to purchase a reasonably priced multimode rig than any dv one.Make SSB more ubiquitous on 2 meters.Better range than digital and excellent spectrum efficiency. SSB mobile 2 meter rigs that are affordable would be fantastic."

ACSB (amplitude compandored side band) was tried in the commercial market a couple decades ago. It was tailored to replace FM for land mobile communication. It fell flat on its face in spite of the fact that it WAS an improvement over conventional sideband. AM (sideband included) has its place in the few situations where the presence of all signals on frequency NEED to be known (eg. aircraft) but, other than in that instance, it has gone the way of the dinosaur and analog FM isn't far behind.
The closest thing to an "open" standard in digital voice is, arguably, P25 despite the need for a copyrighted CODEC. Multiple manufacturers produce the equipment and many good examples of used equipment are available for all but the few who's ego demands that they JUST MUST have a NEW virgin piece of equipment.
As in the beginning of ham interest in FM, let the commercial operators lead the way as they quite successfully did with the original wideband (+-15kc) ham FM and, then, with the (first) narrowband (+-5.0kc) transition. Like it or not, THEY are the TRUE professionals.
Tom

 

"Maybe it's time to re-visit linear translators."

The way that repeaters caught on is that someone, that believed strongly enough in the idea, adapted a commercial repeater to ham use. People liked it and the idea caught on.
The very same thing may well happen if "SOMEONE" were to build and install a terrestrial based translator. I know that I, for one, would be very interested (though, in retirement, I have neither the resources nor the stamina to take on such a project by myself).
That said, with a translator, much more so than with a repeater, the problem of GIGO (garbage in, garbage out) could be much more troublesome if the system were not heavily policed.
None the less, it could be a welcome addition to any ham community.
Tom

 

AM Stereo was left to the consumers ...who opted NOT to consume it

 

"Or do you agree that innovation is an important facet of our hobby?

Carl Jordan, KJ4RYP"

Of course it is. 'Innovation' for the purposes of selling more radio's by 'professionals' (as DGN put it) is neither important nor desirable however. Innovation by a ham or two or twenty with a great idea and a burning desire to bring it to fruition is what we need. TAPR is innovation. Wayne Burdick and Eric Swartz, the whole amateur SDR movement. Joe Taylor(!!!!) Overworked executives in a Japanese boardroom looking for ways to push more VHF radios is NOT innovation.

 

I agree completely. I know there is some lurking distain among some experienced hams for “appliance users,” but to me the appliance users of today often become one of those “two or twenty [guys] with a great idea and a burning desire to bring it to fruition.” Bringing new people into the hobby and then leaving them to figure it out or to remain appliance users wasn’t what I had in mind at all. I think it takes experienced folks like you to Elmer the new guys – teaching them good operating habits and kindling the burning desire to learn and innovate.

 

Thanks, Doc...And THANK-YOU for your Service in the Navy.

73 es Semper Fi

Steve, K4YZ
GySgt USMC(ret'd)