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

The bands may be crowded with repeaters, but hams using those repeaters? Not so much!

The Chinese are now selling FM radios for a fraction of what we are used to paying, and DV radios are all Japanese (or American) and not so cheap. D-Star is dominating DV and is somehow proprietary. It may not belong to Icom, but I'm not seeing other radios that use it.

On HF it may not be such a bad model for digital telegraphy modes to be software defined, as a lot of HF operating is done from the shack, and it may be relatively practical to hook up a laptop to your base station rig and type into it. VHF/UHF is a different ball game, and is dominated by mobiles and HTs operating phone. If each brand only supports one type of DV, who will want to invest in it? I don't think we have critical mass. In my area there are maybe three DataStar repeaters you could get into with an HT, and one DMR repeater. A local ham who is a DMR proponent has an HT that does DMR and FM, I think, but it cost him several times the cost of my latest Chinese
HT for access to only one additional repeater. It sounds cool, but I am not seeing how to justify it.

If we had a DV mode that was fully open source and cheap rigs that offered that mode and FM, or even multiple DV modes plus FM, we might have something. If expensive chips are preventing this, this is a roadblock of sorts. There is supposed to be a rig coming out soon that will have DataStar, DMR and FM, but I understand that the DataStar function requires a proprietary Icom PCB in it. Even if Icom don't own DataStar (?) they must be the only people making a board based on the proprietary chip?

And where are the repeaters running any other DV modes? Don't see any around here.

 

Sounds like more of phishing, marketing, and advertising concern. Perhaps just make a survey post.

 

I have not jumped on the digital bandwagon yet because I have not seen any one particular digital mode enjoy relatively universal acceptance. Right now, I can buy an Icom, Kenwood, Yaesu or other brand HF transceiver and know that any of them will do the same USB, LSB, CW, AM or FM and will play nice with each other on the air. Ditto with VHF/UHF FM equipment. I can't say the same for the various digital modes out there. As long as any one digital mode is proprietary to one maker or the inclusion of several digital modes would put the unit effectively out of economical acquisition cost, I'm going to hang back a bit on the digital buy-in. I can't imagine walking around with three handhelds on my belt to make sure I can hit all of the digital modes I may encounter or want to use. ............ Jim K.

 

The biggest issue with various proprietary versions of digital voice (DV) is they can't cross communicate or are interoperable. What do we as Amateurs do when we show up for an event and the repeater is D-star and I have a System Fusion radio? Either someone has to give me a radio to use or I am out of luck and can't communicate. This is a problem in Public Safety communications a we a professional communicators should be able to avoid such pit falls. DV is great for experimenting and daily non emergency use but in a public service event or an emergency analog voice is the way to go until the interoperability issue is settled.

 

...or until amateur equipment starts to support multiple DV modes.

I actually don't see a problem with a group standardizing on a particular mode. But in situations where a call for general volunteers goes out, and there's a risk of not having enough radios supporting the DV flavor du jour...analog voice is going to be the lowest common denominator.

That could change if/when multi-mode HT's become widely and inexpensively available (or, perhaps if the Chinese manufacturers became interested in and agreed upon a single DV mode), and/or if interest in VHF/UHF returned to the point that the repeater subbands were no longer mostly an empty wasteland.

Of course, if the latter happens before the former, I'd expect that there would be a cat-herding exercise to get analog repeaters narrowbanded, rather than getting everybody to switch over to one or multiple DV modes.

It could happen eventually. But for now, I'm not investing in any DV-dedicated equipment until there's a particular reason for me to need such gear. While I'll admit that I haven't monitored the local DMR repeater, I do note that activity on the local D*STAR machines doesn't seem terribly different from what is (or mostly isn't) heard on the analog repeaters, aside from the "Donald Duck" quality of digitized audio.

 

Excellent post. Thank you for the thoughts.

Mike
N2UJN

 

Just because a person drives a classic /antique car doesn't mean he is opposed to a new Lexus....He just prefers to drove the old one....Hal, WB4AEG

 

Hey Hal ! Here I was ready to reply to the jist of the comments on pages 1 and 2, and along comes your succinct post that totally nails it.

What I take from your sentiment is the idea that the "old one" serves the purpose, and that there's not enough incentive to replace or even supplement that old one with the new.

Innovation does not require mass acceptance to be viable. Innovation, as a pursuit, has been contaminated in our hobby by marketing and commerce. If only a few people are using some new form of digital, then the revenue-based model suggests it's a failure, or needs to be promoted more heavily to achieve wider acceptance.

Not true.

 

Experimenting with any mode is part of the amateur experience.

But IMHO, more digital voice modes aimed at amateur radio use is just an example (so far) of a clever new technology hunting for a purpose in the wrong application market. Like offering more versions of Segways ...

Why does a HAM need it, other then to play around a bit? To me it doesn't offer any benefit to the HAM experience.

Unlike some data modes like JT65, DV modes do not appear to offer greater "weak signal" range. DV without enough SNR (ie, power, antenna gain) do not offer better fidelity or throughput.

The aviation industry steadfastly uses AM and SSB for their voice modes for some very good reasons.

Digital voice could be encrypted; but ooops, that's not ever part of the amateur mission, and probably illegal.

OK, digital modes can multiplex data and voice; MAYBE that can have an occasional purpose, ie, EMCOMM. But, that's not the mainstream Ham.

If the VHF-UHF FM voice bands are getting too crowded, switching to DV doesn't offer that much improvement. If expanding the efficiency and bandwidth usable for voice is needed, I have an alternative if not-so-novel and quaint idea - GO TO SSB!

Make small multimode mobiles and HT's, with frequency resolution and stability required for SSB. Convert current FM repeater sites to LINEAR TRANSLATORS; like fixed frequency stationary versions of the popular SSB/CW satellites.

PSK31 is a great innovation to improve bandwidth for data, but hey, its not replacing 170hz shift Baudot for most ham uses. Most HF data DX and contesting is still RTTY. WHY? Because in a conventional sense, PSK is "weird" to tune, hunt-and-pounce (?)

Please explain, why would more HF or VHF-UHF digital voice modes be of benefit to hams? I want to learn ...

73 de John WØPV

 

This is one of those topics that a lot depends on how Rural or Urban, your home QTH, is. For all of the State of Mi, someone can input all of the two meter repeaters and the tones into a radio with two hundred memory slots. Yes there are some duplicate freqs however they are far enough apart that that does not present a problem. Yes I have an Icom that could be outfitted with the D-Star module, however the number of repeaters that are Digi, probably could be counted on your digits toes and fingers, does that level of adoption warrant the purchase of the module, I have not seen the need. Near certain cities there is adoption of Digi. modes, not out here in the woods.

 

Wow, those are a lot of great viewpoints!

N1EN, I think you almost nailed the solution. I don't think the immediate answer is a multi-DV-mode HT. However, it could be possible on the repeater-side right now.

In the original post, I mentioned that the technology already exists to bridge all of these modes! It's already possible to port D-STAR REF01 over to any other internet connected node (EchoLink, Wires-X, etc.). It only requires someone volunteering a server and someone putting in the hours to make the software talk together. When that’s done at a repeater site, ANYONE can get on that repeater using System Fusion, D-STAR, or even analog (via EchoLink) and connect to all of the networks that site supports. Once we see where Yaesu is going with WIRES-X and System Fusion, I think you'll see this capability in a short period of time. I agree with N4ATX, I'm ready for that right now!

Interoperability is a hot topic, and the way many clubs are addressing this, like the one in my area, is by supporting everything: traditional analog, EchoLink, D-STAR, and now System Fusion. Yaesu made it easy for our local club (and MANY others across the country) to get into the System Fusion through their beta test program. (And, the Fusion repeaters can already support both digital and analog so that analog users aren't left out. Why would they do that if they were only interested in selling “proprietary” new gear?)

"Why is this better than analog,” you might ask? Options. Toys. Tools in the toolbox. New ways to do cool new things on our airwaves. Digital radios can do the same voice communications and more, like: sending photos to net control taken from a camera in a hand mic, beaconing your GPS position, not having to give your call sign to net control because it shows up on his radio’s display, quickly sending text files for needed supplies, or the names of people checked into shelters. This scenario does not exclude volunteers using a $40 Chinese radio, but it sure puts to good use the new gear many volunteers are purchasing at prices comparable to what you'd spend on a good smartphone or tablet.

Here's how I envision it: 3 or 4 digital repeaters occupying the same spectrum space as 2 analog repeaters, supporting nearly every digital radio used by hams in our area, and all of them linked into a single reflector along with some EchoLink nodes, all able to support a single RACES or ARES event. Simultaneously. No matter what brand radio you have, you can fully participate with voice and hear everything that’s going on. But if you do have one of the digital radios that supports other options like text messaging or sending photos, then you can also do that, and folks on similar equipment or back at the command station on a PC can all see your pictures or reports with callsign, timestamp, and GPS location, all in real-time. No one is left out.

I read a couple of complaints of audio quality but those people must not have heard the VW mode of the System Fusion radios. Here's a "wee video" on YouTube that does a pretty good job of demonstrating the audio quality: http://youtu.be/-VxoFMF9OTo?t=2m20s
Watch the S-meter -- they're operating at the lowest power settings to demonstrate audio quality on the fringe. No static, no white noise, no repeater dropping in and out.

According to Merriam Webster, proprietary is “something that is used, produced, or marketed under exclusive legal right of the inventor or maker.” As my friend George Thomas, W5JDX, was trying to point out: that’s not a valid description of D-STAR, but does apply to the AMBE chip on which it depends, as well as a dozen other components in your favorite $40 analog radio. Icom cooperated with other manufacturers like Kenwood when D-STAR was in its infancy and they continue to cooperate with a multitude of manufacturers such as the makers of DV-DONGLE and DV-MEGA. The market may not be big enough yet for Kenwood or another manufacturer to jump into D-STAR, but the door is open to anyone who wants to jump in and the cost of the AMBE chip is not a barrier to entry.

There were a couple of people who have praised digital voice on HF, and I agree with them. Another cool thing about both D-STAR and System Fusion is that they both work on HF. The IC-9100 and IC-7100 both support D-STAR on HF, VHF, and UHF, and there is a D-STAR net on HF (http://www.dstarinfo.com/DSTARHFNet.aspx). The new Yaesu FT-991 is expected to support System Fusion on all bands as well.

I feel bad that I actually hesitated to include that last paragraph because it would require I mention specific radios. I don’t want folks to think I’m only doing this because I want to sell stuff, and I was accused of just that on page 1! I love this hobby, and I am proud to get to work in it. I wouldn’t know a quarter of what I’ve learned if it weren’t for the many years talking to hams and manufacturers as a lowly sales guy. But that’s not the role I’m playing right now. I’m a ham with opinions and occasionally some insight on current and future products. I love to share what I can. I thought that’s what forums were for. =P

Carl Jordan, KJ4RYP
GigaParts, Inc.
(866) 535-4442

 

Ahoy

around here

often you can shoot a cannon
up and down six, two, seventy cm and 220
without hitting more than one or two QSOs

there was more action
back in the 60s
on 2 meters AM in Detroit
than there is today on FM

6 heck nobody here wants
to rag chew they are all
sitting waiting for a opening
to exchange grid squares

digital audio is a solution
looking for a problem that does not exist

by the way
to me
innovation does not come from
getting out a credit card and buying
a black box you can't fix
nor understand how it works

with a AM or CW rig or a old tube type SSB xceiver
i have more than half a chance of being able to fix it
with a digital black box if it breaks all i can do
is send it back or throw it in the trash
with all the other disposable modern consumer electronics


mac

 

With all due respect, I must totally disagree with your view. Simply said, the digital world cannot be compared with the analogue world and vice versa. If digital in any electronic / communications genre is to be successful it must be standardized and in the area of digital voice communications that standardization must be world wide.

Since the majority of comments here address the world at 144 MHz and above I will address my comments thusly. As such, I take no "sides" in the issue of what digital audio system is best for ham radio. Rather my view is that having multiple and totally incompatible systems will only make the ham radio community leery to invest in digital at all.

I am not saying that digital is inferior to analogue. Rather, that analogue is "universal" while even "open source digital" requires the use of propriety hardware (in the case of digital voice its the encode/decode IC's) for a given digital voice system to work. That in itself takes away the concept of "universal" ability of every ham to communicate with every other ham as we can today using FM and other analogue formats. And without that universal ability to communicate, what are we? Of what use would we be if we do one day find ourselves in that "when all else fails" situation if we cannot use any brand of radio to talk to any other brand of radio?

Simply said, our ability to continue to universally communicate with one another if and when all ham radio elects to go to digital voice is far more important than any one company staking its future on being dominant in the market. As long as various companies insist on using systems that are incompatible with one another, digital voice will continue to crawl rather than stand as a separate entity to the analog FM it wants to replace.

The bottom line for me: Ill sit this one out, view what happens and continue to chronicle it as I have the evolution of the FM/Repeater world for almost the past half century.

 

Do you mean GPL or LGPL?

How would you get away with including GPL code in DM780 but not release DM780 as GPL?

I suspect a library licensed as BSD or MIT or similar would be okay by not GPL unless you intend to release your product as GPL. The viral nature of it is kind of the whole point of the GPL.

There's lots written about it online and the GPL stuff being in a DLL does not seem to change that. LGPL addresses that situation.

 

I am including a link, that really tells it all. For HF there are many modes of Digi

http://w1hkj.com/FldigiHelp-3.21/Modes/index.htm

Is this the outcome for VHF/UHF FM? when we have many different modes of sending our voice?