|
Cliff,
I very much appreciate your vote of confidence but if a mail-out should occur it should be to Jeff Moore.
Jeff has accumulated enormous experience working with QMX, far, far more than mine. He also has built up a reserve of repair components from salvage.?
No QMX should ever be tossed to the landfill even if you are certain it cannot be repaired. Electronics recycling perhaps, or if you are willing to spend a few bucks on postage, Jeff might be interested in the components, which could help someone else.
JZ KJ4A?
Can I suggest the unit be sent to someone like Jeff Moore or JZ or one of those types to see if the issues can be isolated circuit wise to give some light on the subject?
Hi Julian
My apologies, I have been very busy the last couple of days; I have your email requesting a refund and I will handle that, no problem.?
It does appear likely from your descriptions that you have a fault around the encoder or controls board. I assure you that the controls and controls board ARE included as part of the test procedure for an assembled radio. Unfortunately it is never possible to guarantee that there's no intermittent connection which eludes testing, nor that there is no knock etc during transit.?
I am at a loss to explain?the other issues that you mentioned, regarding computer control of the radio. The symptoms you described are in some aspects categorically impossible for the firmware to produce. If you have USB access to be able to update firmware, then you also have USB access to Audio and Virtual COM serial; it indicates that there is no possible hardware fault in the QMX. If there was a firmware fault regarding Audio or CAT, then others would already have reported it too (particularly in such a serious issue as no CAT control capability at all).
It is absolutely NOT necessary, when upgrading firmware, to do so one version at a time. There cannot be any difference in doing one version at a time, or in doing a jump from say 009 to 014. It's again categorically impossible for the firmware to produce any such difference. A factory reset *should not* be needed, but as there have been some changes to the use of some memory locations, at this early stage in the product firmware there could be some error in defaulted values so on certain firmware upgrades, a factory reset was prudent. You stated that doing sequential firmware updates resolved some issues (USB CAT control) but again, this just cannot happen; I do not doubt you, when you relate the occurences; I can only say that it must be coincidental, some unrelated PC confusion must have been resolved coincidentally with the firmware updates.?
I can only conclude that you had configuration issues on your PC, though you mentioned you already have a perfectly functioning QDX and you clearly know how to operate it competently, so even this is not a very satisfactory explanation.?
Many mysteries...?
Anyway I'm sorry to hear of all the trouble, which should never occur on an assembled unit.?
73 Hans G0UPL?
?
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024, 9:57?PM N3JF < n3jf@...> wrote: This is another update - a slightly more positive one...
As far as the?software/firmware?side of things is concerned...
The hamlib errors seem to have been an issue with firmware updates. When I updated from 1.00.009 to 1.00.014, I went straight from one to the other. I know of no devices which require firmware updates to be performed in order, so figured this was a safe thing to do.
As a test....
I downgraded the firmware to 1.00.009 (the version installed when it arrived) and when I connected the QMX to my new laptop with its fresh installation of WSJT-X, WSJT-X did not throw any errors. Same with the QDX, using the exact same settings in WSJT-X. This is exactly how it used to be... the two radios were completely interchangeable with no need to change the COM port or Audio settings as Windows saw the QDX and QMX as the same radio.
Next, upgraded the firmware to version 1.00.014 by doing sequential updates - updating from 009, to 010, to 011, to 013, to 014 - with a Factory Reset between each update and after the final update.
When I connected the QMX to my computer (new laptop or old desktop, doesn't matter), it was assigned COM 16.
When I connected the QDX to my computer (new laptop or old desktop, doesn't matter), it was also assigned COM 16. This is what I used to see!
Both the QDX and QMX were assigned the same audio device - "Digital Audio Device (QDX Transceiver)".
With the?QMX?attached to the computer, when I ran WSJT-X and set the radio to "QRPLabs QCX/QDX" and the correct COM port (COM 16)...
WSJT-X did not report any errors and the QMX functions correctly.
When I swapped out the QMX for the QDX, WSJT-X continued to function correctly.
So, as far as the software/firmware side of things is concerned, I think that was fixed by doing sequential updates, or at least it fixed a bad update.
Now, that still leaves the hardware issue, which makes the software side irrelevant:
Neither of the first two units had this issue with the dial not working, but the third unit does. It should never have passed the quality control check.
The left dial simply does not work properly.?
In fact... NEITHER of the two dials work reliably! I don't know why I became so fixated on the left dial - probably because CAT control wasn't working and I was trying to switch bands and modes... but, I totally forgot that my initial complaint to Hans on 10/11/23, the day it arrived, was that the RIGHT dial was not responding! I sent him the following link to a video of me receiving it, unboxing it and testing it:
Now that the software/firmware side is working, I just tested both dials again. The right dial has the same issue... it doesn't respond to clicks.
So while I can now use the computer to change bands (it does?not?change modes from CW to DIGI) and operate, I cannot reliably use either of the dials to change modes, bands, or any other function that requires clicking either of the dials.
My next test is to see how sensitive the QMX is compared to the QDX. I remember that the the FT8 waterfall was full of FT8 signals when using the QDX, and much less so when I switched to the QMX.? In fact, in my initial testing after I received the QMX on 10/11/23, I sent an email to Hans on 10/23/23 saying:
"I used my QDX and the waterfall was full of signals. I disconnected the antenna and switched it over to the QMX, made sure it was tuned to 14.074MHz. Same antenna, coax, power cord, power supply, same computer... All I saw were the strongest signals on the band. I switched everything back to the QDX, and the waterfall was full of signals again. I used the QDX for the remainder of the day."
Maybe firmware version 1.00.014 has fixed my QMX sensitivity issue? Guess I'll find out soon enough!
73
|
Thanks Hans,
I appreciate your reply.
"I can only conclude that you had configuration issues on your PC, though you mentioned you already have a perfectly functioning QDX and you clearly know how to operate it competently, so even this is not a very satisfactory explanation."
Just as an FYI, I have three computers:
1) A 12 year-old desktop running Windows 10 Home,
2) A 3-year old desktop running Windows 10 Pro, and,
3) A brand new (7 day old)? laptop running Windows 11 Home.
The new laptop was purchased from the store January 4, 2024 and I completed the setup and installation of the video production software over the next two days. The ham radio apps (WSJT-X, JS8Call, Winlink, GridTracker, N3FJP logger, and VARA HF/FM) were downloaded from their respective websites and installed after the more important software installation was complete, about 01/07/24. The laptop had nothing but Windows 11 Home on it when I bought it, so no previous versions of hamlib or any ham radio software at all.
The QMX was stored in a Tupperware box along with my QDX and all accessories that are required for its use. I hadn't touched the QMX since 10/23/23, when I sent you an email about the poor receiver sensitivity when compared to the QDX.
I took a look at the QMX on 01/05/24 and saw on the QRP-Labs website that here had been several firmware updates since I last looked at the QMX, so I connected it to Desktop #2 and updated the firmware to 1.00.014, but the dial issue remained even after the update. Discouraged that the firmware update didn't fix the problems with the dials, I didn't do any other testing or try WSJT-X etc. I put the QMX back in the Tupperware container with its power and USB cables, and there it stayed, with its brother, the QDX, and the QDX's cables and various adapters.
On 01/08/24, while out doing radio stuff using the QDX, I tried using the QMX on FT8 on the new laptop. I had been using the laptop, WSJT-X and JS8Call successfully with the QDX for several hours before switching over to the QMX, so I expected not to have any trouble with the QMX on digital modes using CAT control, since using the dials was "problematic". That's when I encountered the hamlib errors.
Upon my return home, I connected the QMX to the newer desktop. This desktop had worked with the previous QMX units, the QDX, the LAB599 TX-500, and the IC-7300. Each radio has its own configuration file set up on WSJT-X and JS8Call (the QMX and QDX use the same config file). Since I no longer have an antenna at home, all radios are connected to a dummy load if the PTT button is going to be pressed in any software, even if the software claims that no power is transmitted during a PTT test.
After connecting the QMX to the desktop computer, I started WSJT-X -- the same version and configuration that had worked fine with other QMX radios (and my QDX) and got the hamlib errors... the identical errors I got on the new, never before installed, fresh copy of WSJT-X on the laptop.
I swapped out the QMX for the QDX again and received no errors at all. The CAT test and the PTT test worked for the QDX, but failed on the QMX. The WSJT-X radio configuration was already set to "QRPLabs QCX/QDX".?With the QMX attached to the desktop computer again, I tried all Kenwood HF radios on WSJT-X's radio configurations page and got hamlib errors when testing the CAT... except when set to "Kenwood TS-440S" which resulted in no errors when Test CAT was pressed (button turned green), but which gave hamblib errors when testing the PTT.
Finally, I attached the QMX to the 12 year-old desktop. Again, this desktop was already configured to run the QDX and QMX on WSJT-X and JS8Call and those configurations hadn't been changed or the programs updated since I first received a QDX and QMX in August 2023. WSJT-X spat out the hamlib error for the QMX. I swapped the QMX for the QDX, and got no errors. The same errors for the same QMX, on three different computers, all of which gave no errors for the QDX.
I think from all of this we can ask ourselves four questions:
Question: Was this a configuration error on all THREE computers?
Answer: I don't think so. On all three computers, WSJT-X and JS8Call worked fine on the QDX and had worked fine for other QMX radios.
Question: Is it possible all THREE computers had some random glitch that made hamlib throw errors, but only when the QMX was attached?
Answer: Again, I don't think so. Too much of a coincidence.
Question: Did WSJT-X stop throwing errors after redoing the (all) firmware updates and changing NOTHING on the computers?
Answer: Absolutely!
Question: Is it possible a bad firmware update was the cause of the hamlib errors?
Answer: Most likely... however "categorically impossible" it may seem.
In email I told you that the new Audio functions were all set to Disabled after the initial update to 1.00.014 and factory reset, and that I manually turned them all to Enabled, per the firmware warning and the QRP-Labs website. After reverting to 1.00.009 and going through all the available individual updates back up to 1.00.014, the new Audio settings were all Enabled by default. Maybe that was indicative of a bad firmware update?
As I told you in email on the day I received this QMX, I'd used the problem-free QDX on on FT8 using WSJT-X and the waterfall was full of FT8 signals. Swapping the QDX for the QMX, the waterfall only showed the strongest signals. Upon swapping the radio back to the QDX, all the weaker signals returned. The only difference in the entire setup, was the radio (and USB cable required to connect to the computer. To me, this suggests the receiver in this QMX is not as sensitive as that in my QDX. Whether this true of all QMX and QDX models, I have no idea. I do remember the second QMX I received was totally deaf, right out of the box, except for birdies very few kHz (to those still reading, yes, there's a video of that too, LOL).
So, take all of that? for whatever it's worth to you. I have no reason to lie or make stuff up. I wanted a QMX, I really did. It looks like a really fun radio. But for me it just hasn't been fun. 9 months, and I still can't use it. Each of?the three QMX radios I've received all had different problems, each of which made them unusable.
All the talk about not using LiFePO4 batteries is fine, but LiFePO4 batteries are the current go-to battery technology and most hams in the market for lightweight, long-lasting batteries for POTA/SOTA/general QRP use are going to buy them. Most radios designed for "12V" accept voltages up to about 16V, but not the QMX.
I understand the QMX is new and has teething problems, but I didn't purchase one to be a beta tester. I bought a fully assembled unit so that I wouldn't have to build it, modify the hardware, or diagnose hardware problems. Update firmware? Yeah, sure, no problem. I also understand you getting buried in email... but this has been an ongoing saga and I hadn't heard from you in 3 months.
How do you want to proceed?
73.
|
Cliff,
It seems I should have been clearer and more direct in my reply to you!
There are things that make it impractical for me to offer repair services to others. I do not take in radios for repair.
To those folks who have reached out for help: I would suggest you contact Jeff Moore. He is very talented and well equipped and has amassed an enormous fan base.
JZ
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 7:02?PM N3JF < n3jf@...> wrote: Thanks Hans,
I appreciate your reply.
"I can only conclude that you had configuration issues on your PC, though you mentioned you already have a perfectly functioning QDX and you clearly know how to operate it competently, so even this is not a very satisfactory explanation."
Just as an FYI, I have three computers:
1) A 12 year-old desktop running Windows 10 Home,
2) A 3-year old desktop running Windows 10 Pro, and,
3) A brand new (7 day old)? laptop running Windows 11 Home.
The new laptop was purchased from the store January 4, 2024 and I completed the setup and installation of the video production software over the next two days. The ham radio apps (WSJT-X, JS8Call, Winlink, GridTracker, N3FJP logger, and VARA HF/FM) were downloaded from their respective websites and installed after the more important software installation was complete, about 01/07/24. The laptop had nothing but Windows 11 Home on it when I bought it, so no previous versions of hamlib or any ham radio software at all.
The QMX was stored in a Tupperware box along with my QDX and all accessories that are required for its use. I hadn't touched the QMX since 10/23/23, when I sent you an email about the poor receiver sensitivity when compared to the QDX.
I took a look at the QMX on 01/05/24 and saw on the QRP-Labs website that here had been several firmware updates since I last looked at the QMX, so I connected it to Desktop #2 and updated the firmware to 1.00.014, but the dial issue remained even after the update. Discouraged that the firmware update didn't fix the problems with the dials, I didn't do any other testing or try WSJT-X etc. I put the QMX back in the Tupperware container with its power and USB cables, and there it stayed, with its brother, the QDX, and the QDX's cables and various adapters.
On 01/08/24, while out doing radio stuff using the QDX, I tried using the QMX on FT8 on the new laptop. I had been using the laptop, WSJT-X and JS8Call successfully with the QDX for several hours before switching over to the QMX, so I expected not to have any trouble with the QMX on digital modes using CAT control, since using the dials was "problematic". That's when I encountered the hamlib errors.
Upon my return home, I connected the QMX to the newer desktop. This desktop had worked with the previous QMX units, the QDX, the LAB599 TX-500, and the IC-7300. Each radio has its own configuration file set up on WSJT-X and JS8Call (the QMX and QDX use the same config file). Since I no longer have an antenna at home, all radios are connected to a dummy load if the PTT button is going to be pressed in any software, even if the software claims that no power is transmitted during a PTT test.
After connecting the QMX to the desktop computer, I started WSJT-X -- the same version and configuration that had worked fine with other QMX radios (and my QDX) and got the hamlib errors... the identical errors I got on the new, never before installed, fresh copy of WSJT-X on the laptop.
I swapped out the QMX for the QDX again and received no errors at all. The CAT test and the PTT test worked for the QDX, but failed on the QMX. The WSJT-X radio configuration was already set to "QRPLabs QCX/QDX".?With the QMX attached to the desktop computer again, I tried all Kenwood HF radios on WSJT-X's radio configurations page and got hamlib errors when testing the CAT... except when set to "Kenwood TS-440S" which resulted in no errors when Test CAT was pressed (button turned green), but which gave hamblib errors when testing the PTT.
Finally, I attached the QMX to the 12 year-old desktop. Again, this desktop was already configured to run the QDX and QMX on WSJT-X and JS8Call and those configurations hadn't been changed or the programs updated since I first received a QDX and QMX in August 2023. WSJT-X spat out the hamlib error for the QMX. I swapped the QMX for the QDX, and got no errors. The same errors for the same QMX, on three different computers, all of which gave no errors for the QDX.
I think from all of this we can ask ourselves four questions:
Question: Was this a configuration error on all THREE computers?
Answer: I don't think so. On all three computers, WSJT-X and JS8Call worked fine on the QDX and had worked fine for other QMX radios.
Question: Is it possible all THREE computers had some random glitch that made hamlib throw errors, but only when the QMX was attached?
Answer: Again, I don't think so. Too much of a coincidence.
Question: Did WSJT-X stop throwing errors after redoing the (all) firmware updates and changing NOTHING on the computers?
Answer: Absolutely!
Question: Is it possible a bad firmware update was the cause of the hamlib errors?
Answer: Most likely... however "categorically impossible" it may seem.
In email I told you that the new Audio functions were all set to Disabled after the initial update to 1.00.014 and factory reset, and that I manually turned them all to Enabled, per the firmware warning and the QRP-Labs website. After reverting to 1.00.009 and going through all the available individual updates back up to 1.00.014, the new Audio settings were all Enabled by default. Maybe that was indicative of a bad firmware update?
As I told you in email on the day I received this QMX, I'd used the problem-free QDX on on FT8 using WSJT-X and the waterfall was full of FT8 signals. Swapping the QDX for the QMX, the waterfall only showed the strongest signals. Upon swapping the radio back to the QDX, all the weaker signals returned. The only difference in the entire setup, was the radio (and USB cable required to connect to the computer. To me, this suggests the receiver in this QMX is not as sensitive as that in my QDX. Whether this true of all QMX and QDX models, I have no idea. I do remember the second QMX I received was totally deaf, right out of the box, except for birdies very few kHz (to those still reading, yes, there's a video of that too, LOL).
So, take all of that? for whatever it's worth to you. I have no reason to lie or make stuff up. I wanted a QMX, I really did. It looks like a really fun radio. But for me it just hasn't been fun. 9 months, and I still can't use it. Each of?the three QMX radios I've received all had different problems, each of which made them unusable.
All the talk about not using LiFePO4 batteries is fine, but LiFePO4 batteries are the current go-to battery technology and most hams in the market for lightweight, long-lasting batteries for POTA/SOTA/general QRP use are going to buy them. Most radios designed for "12V" accept voltages up to about 16V, but not the QMX.
I understand the QMX is new and has teething problems, but I didn't purchase one to be a beta tester. I bought a fully assembled unit so that I wouldn't have to build it, modify the hardware, or diagnose hardware problems. Update firmware? Yeah, sure, no problem. I also understand you getting buried in email... but this has been an ongoing saga and I hadn't heard from you in 3 months.
How do you want to proceed?
73.
|
JZ,
I'm sorry for causing you concern. I was only thinking of your troubleshooting ability, not considering the practicality of someone sending you a rig to fix. Mainly just to get a knowledgable person to get their hands on it and see what the issues were first hand, not trying to get answers by working through another person.
I agree that Jeff is the one to go to for repairs.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Cliff,
It seems I should have been clearer and more direct in my reply to you!
There are things that make it impractical for me to offer repair services to others.?I do not take in radios for repair.
To those folks who have reached out for help: I would suggest you contact Jeff Moore. He is very talented and well equipped and has amassed an enormous fan base.
JZ On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 7:02?PM N3JF < n3jf@...> wrote: Thanks Hans,
I appreciate your reply.
"I can only conclude that you had configuration issues on your PC, though you mentioned you already have a perfectly functioning QDX and you clearly know how to operate it competently, so even this is not a very satisfactory explanation."
Just as an FYI, I have three computers:
1) A 12 year-old desktop running Windows 10 Home,
2) A 3-year old desktop running Windows 10 Pro, and,
3) A brand new (7 day old)? laptop running Windows 11 Home.?
The new laptop was purchased from the store January 4, 2024 and I completed the setup and installation of the video production software over the next two days. The ham radio apps (WSJT-X, JS8Call, Winlink, GridTracker, N3FJP logger, and VARA HF/FM) were downloaded from their respective websites and installed after the more important software installation was complete, about 01/07/24. The laptop had nothing but Windows 11 Home on it when I bought it, so no previous versions of hamlib or any ham radio software at all.
The QMX was stored in a Tupperware box along with my QDX and all accessories that are required for its use. I hadn't touched the QMX since 10/23/23, when I sent you an email about the poor receiver sensitivity when compared to the QDX.
I took a look at the QMX on 01/05/24 and saw on the QRP-Labs website that here had been several firmware updates since I last looked at the QMX, so I connected it to Desktop #2 and updated the firmware to 1.00.014, but the dial issue remained even after the update. Discouraged that the firmware update didn't fix the problems with the dials, I didn't do any other testing or try WSJT-X etc. I put the QMX back in the Tupperware container with its power and USB cables, and there it stayed, with its brother, the QDX, and the QDX's cables and various adapters.
On 01/08/24, while out doing radio stuff using the QDX, I tried using the QMX on FT8 on the new laptop. I had been using the laptop, WSJT-X and JS8Call successfully with the QDX for several hours before switching over to the QMX, so I expected not to have any trouble with the QMX on digital modes using CAT control, since using the dials was "problematic". That's when I encountered the hamlib errors.
Upon my return home, I connected the QMX to the newer desktop. This desktop had worked with the previous QMX units, the QDX, the LAB599 TX-500, and the IC-7300. Each radio has its own configuration file set up on WSJT-X and JS8Call (the QMX and QDX use the same config file). Since I no longer have an antenna at home, all radios are connected to a dummy load if the PTT button is going to be pressed in any software, even if the software claims that no power is transmitted during a PTT test.
After connecting the QMX to the desktop computer, I started WSJT-X -- the same version and configuration that had worked fine with other QMX radios (and my QDX) and got the hamlib errors... the identical errors I got on the new, never before installed, fresh copy of WSJT-X on the laptop.
I swapped out the QMX for the QDX again and received no errors at all. The CAT test and the PTT test worked for the QDX, but failed on the QMX. The WSJT-X radio configuration was already set to "QRPLabs QCX/QDX".?With the QMX attached to the desktop computer again, I tried all Kenwood HF radios on WSJT-X's radio configurations page and got hamlib errors when testing the CAT... except when set to "Kenwood TS-440S" which resulted in no errors when Test CAT was pressed (button turned green), but which gave hamblib errors when testing the PTT.
Finally, I attached the QMX to the 12 year-old desktop. Again, this desktop was already configured to run the QDX and QMX on WSJT-X and JS8Call and those configurations hadn't been changed or the programs updated since I first received a QDX and QMX in August 2023. WSJT-X spat out the hamlib error for the QMX. I swapped the QMX for the QDX, and got no errors. The same errors for the same QMX, on three different computers, all of which gave no errors for the QDX.
I think from all of this we can ask ourselves four questions:
Question: Was this a configuration error on all THREE computers??
Answer: I don't think so. On all three computers, WSJT-X and JS8Call worked fine on the QDX and had worked fine for other QMX radios.
Question: Is it possible all THREE computers had some random glitch that made hamlib throw errors, but only when the QMX was attached?
Answer: Again, I don't think so. Too much of a coincidence.
Question: Did WSJT-X stop throwing errors after redoing the (all) firmware updates and changing NOTHING on the computers?
Answer: Absolutely!
Question: Is it possible a bad firmware update was the cause of the hamlib errors?
Answer: Most likely... however "categorically impossible" it may seem.
In email I told you that the new Audio functions were all set to?Disabled?after the initial update to 1.00.014 and factory reset, and that I manually turned them all to Enabled, per the firmware warning and the QRP-Labs website. After reverting to 1.00.009 and going through all the available individual updates back up to 1.00.014, the new Audio settings were all?Enabled?by default. Maybe that was indicative of a bad firmware update?
As I told you in email on the day I received this QMX, I'd used the problem-free QDX on on FT8 using WSJT-X and the waterfall was full of FT8 signals. Swapping the QDX for the QMX, the waterfall only showed the strongest signals. Upon swapping the radio back to the QDX, all the weaker signals returned. The only difference in the entire setup, was the radio (and USB cable required to connect to the computer. To me, this suggests the receiver in?this?QMX is not as sensitive as that in?my?QDX. Whether this true of all QMX and QDX models, I have no idea. I do remember the second QMX I received was?totally?deaf, right out of the box, except for birdies very few kHz (to those still reading, yes, there's a video of that too, LOL).
So, take all of that? for whatever it's worth to you. I have no reason to lie or make stuff up. I wanted a QMX, I really did. It looks like a really fun radio. But for me it just hasn't been fun. 9 months, and I still can't use it. Each of?the three QMX radios I've received all had different problems, each of which made them unusable.
All the talk about not using LiFePO4 batteries is fine, but LiFePO4 batteries are the current go-to battery technology and most hams in the market for lightweight, long-lasting batteries for POTA/SOTA/general QRP use are going to buy them. Most radios designed for "12V" accept voltages up to about 16V, but not the QMX.
I understand the QMX is new and has teething problems, but I didn't purchase one to be a beta tester. I bought a fully assembled unit so that I wouldn't have to build it, modify the hardware, or diagnose hardware problems. Update firmware? Yeah, sure, no problem. I also understand you getting buried in email... but this has been an ongoing saga and I hadn't heard from you in 3 months.
How do you want to proceed?
73.
|
No worries, Cliff! Thanks for the kind words! I will always be glad to lend a hand where I can.
JZ
JZ,
I'm sorry for causing you concern. I was only thinking of your troubleshooting ability, not considering the practicality of someone sending you a rig to fix. Mainly just to get a knowledgable person to get their hands on it and see what the issues were first hand, not trying to get answers by working through another person.
I agree that Jeff is the one to go to for repairs.
Cliff,
It seems I should have been clearer and more direct in my reply to you!
There are things that make it impractical for me to offer repair services to others.?I do not take in radios for repair.
To those folks who have reached out for help: I would suggest you contact Jeff Moore. He is very talented and well equipped and has amassed an enormous fan base.
JZ On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 7:02?PM N3JF < n3jf@...> wrote: Thanks Hans,
I appreciate your reply.
"I can only conclude that you had configuration issues on your PC, though you mentioned you already have a perfectly functioning QDX and you clearly know how to operate it competently, so even this is not a very satisfactory explanation."
Just as an FYI, I have three computers:
1) A 12 year-old desktop running Windows 10 Home,
2) A 3-year old desktop running Windows 10 Pro, and,
3) A brand new (7 day old)? laptop running Windows 11 Home.?
The new laptop was purchased from the store January 4, 2024 and I completed the setup and installation of the video production software over the next two days. The ham radio apps (WSJT-X, JS8Call, Winlink, GridTracker, N3FJP logger, and VARA HF/FM) were downloaded from their respective websites and installed after the more important software installation was complete, about 01/07/24. The laptop had nothing but Windows 11 Home on it when I bought it, so no previous versions of hamlib or any ham radio software at all.
The QMX was stored in a Tupperware box along with my QDX and all accessories that are required for its use. I hadn't touched the QMX since 10/23/23, when I sent you an email about the poor receiver sensitivity when compared to the QDX.
I took a look at the QMX on 01/05/24 and saw on the QRP-Labs website that here had been several firmware updates since I last looked at the QMX, so I connected it to Desktop #2 and updated the firmware to 1.00.014, but the dial issue remained even after the update. Discouraged that the firmware update didn't fix the problems with the dials, I didn't do any other testing or try WSJT-X etc. I put the QMX back in the Tupperware container with its power and USB cables, and there it stayed, with its brother, the QDX, and the QDX's cables and various adapters.
On 01/08/24, while out doing radio stuff using the QDX, I tried using the QMX on FT8 on the new laptop. I had been using the laptop, WSJT-X and JS8Call successfully with the QDX for several hours before switching over to the QMX, so I expected not to have any trouble with the QMX on digital modes using CAT control, since using the dials was "problematic". That's when I encountered the hamlib errors.
Upon my return home, I connected the QMX to the newer desktop. This desktop had worked with the previous QMX units, the QDX, the LAB599 TX-500, and the IC-7300. Each radio has its own configuration file set up on WSJT-X and JS8Call (the QMX and QDX use the same config file). Since I no longer have an antenna at home, all radios are connected to a dummy load if the PTT button is going to be pressed in any software, even if the software claims that no power is transmitted during a PTT test.
After connecting the QMX to the desktop computer, I started WSJT-X -- the same version and configuration that had worked fine with other QMX radios (and my QDX) and got the hamlib errors... the identical errors I got on the new, never before installed, fresh copy of WSJT-X on the laptop.
I swapped out the QMX for the QDX again and received no errors at all. The CAT test and the PTT test worked for the QDX, but failed on the QMX. The WSJT-X radio configuration was already set to "QRPLabs QCX/QDX".?With the QMX attached to the desktop computer again, I tried all Kenwood HF radios on WSJT-X's radio configurations page and got hamlib errors when testing the CAT... except when set to "Kenwood TS-440S" which resulted in no errors when Test CAT was pressed (button turned green), but which gave hamblib errors when testing the PTT.
Finally, I attached the QMX to the 12 year-old desktop. Again, this desktop was already configured to run the QDX and QMX on WSJT-X and JS8Call and those configurations hadn't been changed or the programs updated since I first received a QDX and QMX in August 2023. WSJT-X spat out the hamlib error for the QMX. I swapped the QMX for the QDX, and got no errors. The same errors for the same QMX, on three different computers, all of which gave no errors for the QDX.
I think from all of this we can ask ourselves four questions:
Question: Was this a configuration error on all THREE computers??
Answer: I don't think so. On all three computers, WSJT-X and JS8Call worked fine on the QDX and had worked fine for other QMX radios.
Question: Is it possible all THREE computers had some random glitch that made hamlib throw errors, but only when the QMX was attached?
Answer: Again, I don't think so. Too much of a coincidence.
Question: Did WSJT-X stop throwing errors after redoing the (all) firmware updates and changing NOTHING on the computers?
Answer: Absolutely!
Question: Is it possible a bad firmware update was the cause of the hamlib errors?
Answer: Most likely... however "categorically impossible" it may seem.
In email I told you that the new Audio functions were all set to?Disabled?after the initial update to 1.00.014 and factory reset, and that I manually turned them all to Enabled, per the firmware warning and the QRP-Labs website. After reverting to 1.00.009 and going through all the available individual updates back up to 1.00.014, the new Audio settings were all?Enabled?by default. Maybe that was indicative of a bad firmware update?
As I told you in email on the day I received this QMX, I'd used the problem-free QDX on on FT8 using WSJT-X and the waterfall was full of FT8 signals. Swapping the QDX for the QMX, the waterfall only showed the strongest signals. Upon swapping the radio back to the QDX, all the weaker signals returned. The only difference in the entire setup, was the radio (and USB cable required to connect to the computer. To me, this suggests the receiver in?this?QMX is not as sensitive as that in?my?QDX. Whether this true of all QMX and QDX models, I have no idea. I do remember the second QMX I received was?totally?deaf, right out of the box, except for birdies very few kHz (to those still reading, yes, there's a video of that too, LOL).
So, take all of that? for whatever it's worth to you. I have no reason to lie or make stuff up. I wanted a QMX, I really did. It looks like a really fun radio. But for me it just hasn't been fun. 9 months, and I still can't use it. Each of?the three QMX radios I've received all had different problems, each of which made them unusable.
All the talk about not using LiFePO4 batteries is fine, but LiFePO4 batteries are the current go-to battery technology and most hams in the market for lightweight, long-lasting batteries for POTA/SOTA/general QRP use are going to buy them. Most radios designed for "12V" accept voltages up to about 16V, but not the QMX.
I understand the QMX is new and has teething problems, but I didn't purchase one to be a beta tester. I bought a fully assembled unit so that I wouldn't have to build it, modify the hardware, or diagnose hardware problems. Update firmware? Yeah, sure, no problem. I also understand you getting buried in email... but this has been an ongoing saga and I hadn't heard from you in 3 months.
How do you want to proceed?
73.
|
