Same thing happens with a “real” signal. The S-meter is taken from the audio circuit since there is no IF, and it definitely varies with the volume. Honestly, I don’t find it useful, other than the fact that we all seem to be obsessed with S-meters, nor is it needed. My experience with this radio is you can either read signals or not. When I tested mine I could hear a signal down to -130 dBm, although to actually copy the signal it would have to be a bit more. That works out because the typical “quiet” noise floor is ±-108 dBm, especially on the lower bands.

73,

Charles -NK8O

Wow!

I admit I've never been much of a QRPer or kit builder. I'm here
because I bought a U3S to use as a beacon exciter when I got into
2200m and 630m.

BUT... I've been looking for an affordable 10m SSB transceiver to
pair with a 'loaner' 23cm transverter. This might be an attractive
option for that PLUS give me a backup (albeit low power) when my
main rig eventually dies, PLUS give me a rig I can use portable
which is something I now lack and sometimes wish I had. With so many
potential uses I don't think I'll be able to resist this one. :-)

Don't worry Hans. Even though I am an experienced builder (mostly
from scratch) I promise to read and follow the step by step
instructions! ;-)

Paul

I should explain: Increasing volume level also increases the S-meter reading.
So far I am just using a signal generator and attenuator. Not sure what happens with "real" signal, coming from the antenna.

How does one accomplish a feat such as this???

BY using the available technology wisely.? Many things have happened since the
"old days" the biggest is raw computing power from the 32bit systems on a chip.
The other big event is DDS got cheap and the newer NCO like the SI570 and
Si5351 proved to be both useful and suitable for RF applications.? We are not tied
VFOs that wanted to drift and crystals that if we really wanted a specific frequency
were expensive so we built with common mass manufactured frequencies.? Add
to that the availability to fast CMOS switches 4053 and others and we get increased
flexibility in old architectures and invites new ways to achieve them.? SMT parts?
are a doorway to more in less space as well as improved performance.

When you roll that whole thing into a ball you get capability that is very low cost
and built on software that can be improved unlike soldered parts.

Doesn't hurt to be attentive to the small details that can corrupt even a good design.
This is a very good design with the spare no details approach.

Allison

Hello all. Just finished assembly and adjustments of a QCX-40. Set the S-meter ON and noticed that the volume control interacts with the S-meter reading.
Just would like to ask if this is normal behaviour.
Thanks.
73 de VE3MIZ

I haven't yet had a chance to watch the video but I wonder if Hans has
made available a pdf of his presentation?

I didn't or should I say I have not yet purchased a QCX. When they were
first introduced I waited while others had their chance to get theirs as
I as usual already had many projects on the go and felt I could do
without yet another for a while. Now that Hans has caught up with demand
for QCX and this new one is on the horizon, I hesitate on the QCX as
this new one would be better suited to my needs with respect to it's
digimode receive capability.

Interesting times indeed as someone already noted.

cheers, Graham ve3gtc

There are some interesting facts about the value of this radio. ?For example, the HW-16 from Heathkit, from what I found, was $99.95 USD in 1971. (It was released in 1967.) It was a 3 band radio, 80-40-15 meters, and transmitted in about 250 KHz of those bands. ?The radio was CW only, although there was an add-on box to expand the capabilities. ?Translated into 2018 dollars and accounting for inflation, that represents a cost of about $619.10.

The HW-8 came on the market in 1976 at a cost of $139.95. ?This was a four-band radio, CW only for 80-40-20-15 meters. ?Technical aspects of the radio set aside, compare to the proposed 10 band QSX and the cost of a complete radio, all bands, all modes, with built-in digital mode capability. ?The adjustment for inflation of the HW-8 brings the price up to $621.64 USD. ?Compare that to the proposed cost of the QSX, complete with case, not to mention parts count, at $150 USD. ?The differential is almost $472.

I am totally gobsmacked.?

73,

Charles - NK8O

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:29 AM, John AE5X wrote:

10-band will be about $150

How does one accomplish a feat such as this?? I am so looking forward to an official announcement from Hans once he stops shivering at the thought of the initial order volume.

From the video (for those who don't have time to watch):

• 24-bit SDR architecture
• The QSX40 will initially be a monoband (40m) CW/SSB/digital transceiver
• A future filter module will allow 10-band operation (10-160m, including 60m)
• Monoband version will cost (about) $75; 10-band will be about $150 (including optional enclosure)
• Two mic jacks: Android/iPhone type and RJ45
• USB jack for direct keyboard and CAT control
• CW, PSK31 and RTTY decoding w/o computer
• Built-in sound card for FT8 and other digimodes
• SMD parts are pre-installed
• 90 page very detailed and illustrated manual
• Built-in test equipment for alignment
• Drilled, punched and labeled enclosure will be an option

Who will be the first to work WAC and DXCC with this? I throw down the gauntlet...!

--

Previous customers get first shot..especially those who built the QCX80, as compensation for the agony of T1!
--
de K2TL.. since 1964

开云体育

Yes, Hans says in the video it will eventually cover 10 bands, 10-160m with a plug in filter board.
Clearly another winner, amazing!

73s Ted

开云体育

Watch the video. ?The answer is YES, 160m though 10m.

Q answered at 4:40 - 10 bands eventually - that's great!