开云体育

Thanks Geogy

Hi. I didn't publish it - need to solve some issues.

--

Georgy // R2RFE

Just baked firmware with an adaptive notch filter -

I should check and, perhaps, tune some parameters, but seems it works.

?

Just not sure, how to make it available for OEM GUI application. I guess, that total replacement of the manual DNF is not a good idea.

I can, for example, turn it on, if DNF is turned on and center frequency is 100. What do you think?

--

Georgy // R2RFE

Thanks wicknix! I copied Georgy's newest modified BASE 1.1.6 over to /usr/firmware and "downgraded". Things are working better now. You guys are good.

Glad to help, and it’s good to know that you also gained improved RX by using BASE 1.1.6.?

@wicknix - Thanks for the help! With the 1.1.6 BASE, my s-unit “comparison” seems much closer between the x6100 and the g90 now.? I'm actually starting to think that this was probably an “issue” all along, and I just started to notice more.? I'll have to do more testing, but reception without the “PRE” turned on seems much better.? Also, thanks for the tip about running then newer APP with the old BASE.? The UI just looks better.

@John - What i did was installed Xiegu’s latest 1.1.8/1.1.9, then i downloaded Georgy’s original modified 1.1.6 base, ssh’d in to the x6100 and copied the file over to /usr/firmware. Then i just selected 1.1.6 from the list and did the “upgrade” per usual. It will leave the 1.1.9 APP alone and just reinstall/downgrade the BASE.

?

Cheers

?

I have two x6100s. Regardless of whether I use PRE/ATT, the difference between the devices is always 2-3 S-levels. The RF gain is 100 on both devices. The firmware is also the same. Unfortunately, I can't reinstall the firmware on the inferior device because the SD card slot is defective

@wicknix - So, to mix versions, would one install an older version, say APP-1.1.7 / BASE-1.1.6, boot the radio, use the OS to flash the older baseband and then just go back an install the newer "1.1.9" APP leaving the older BASE as is?

I noticed RX was lower on BASE 1.1.7 and BASE 1.1.8 also, which is why i prefer base 1.1.6 (and because 1.1.6’s NR is superior compared to other versions). It RX’s so well i have to turn the RF gain down to about 50-55 for normal use. I do however use APP 1.1.9 (yes you can mix them) for the new UI features of 1.1.9. Might be worth trying and see if you notice a massive RX increase like i did.

Double checked RF Gain and it is at 100, which is where I always run it (which I thought was odd).? I was running App 1.1.9/ Base 1.1.8 when I noticed issues, but also tried App 1.1.8/Base 1.1.7 to see if there is any difference.? Another thing to note if it matters, ever since owning this radio (Sept 2024) I have generally always used the "PRE" (pre-amp I think) in order to hear/bring in signals.? Is this normal?

?

If you BASE firmware is 1.1.7 or 1.1.8 you should set RFG to 100 (not 63). You can check BASE firmware version under system settings -> system info menu.

--

Georgy // R2RFE

Have you reinstalled the firmware? I have
 the same problem but my SD card slot is broken so I can't reinstall the firmware.

I looked at the board but couldn't find any hardware errors.

?

Seems I'm having low "reception" issues with my x6100 lately. ?I decided to do some testing with my g90 and FT8 as a baseline for an incoming signal. Using the same antenna / coax reception on the x6100 is consistently 3 to 4 s-units lower. ?This might explain why recent POTA / SOTA outings have been tough...

I have an email to Radioddity support (vendor), but figured I would ask here if anyone has had similar issues.

Thanks, Rainer, for your spot-on observations! According to the manufacturer, my headphones have an impedance of 25 Ohms and a sensitivity of 121dB/mW. Yesterday, I experimented a bit with attenuators and managed to achieve satisfactory results by connecting the headphones through an attenuator of about -20dB.
Previously, I was using the X6100 with headphones at a volume level of 1–7 (in R1CBU), but now I can comfortably use it at a volume level of 1–30, with a significant improvement in S/N!

Now I'm wondering how much the S/N could be improved on the line between the audio codec and the internal sound card if proper level and impedance matching were applied there.

So I can say that simply using an attenuator in my setup brought very tangible results!

Hi all,

?

there are two points to keep in mind:

?

1) the LM386 is not exactly a low noise / low distortion audio amplifier

2) the perceived signal-to-noise ratio also depends on the sensitivity of the headphone, and partially on its impedance

?

1) S/N is not even specified in the data sheet, distortion is given as 0.2% at 125 mW at 1 kHz and 8 Ohm.

2) Headphones differ widely in sensitivity: I could find 96 dB/mW to 110 dB/mW at 32 Ohm during a quick check of an online distributor. Since we can assume that the noise voltage at the output of the LM386 is fixed by the application (volume control at the input!), the perceived noise level will vary with the sensitivity of the headphone. Another issue is the voltage divider set up if there is a protection resistor at the output of the LM386. Together with the impedance of the headphone it will divide the noise voltage - I own headphones with impedances from 8 to 600 Ohm and sensitivities in the range mentioned.

Hint: if you have to turn the volume waaay down for comfortable listening, you have a headphone with high sensitivity and/or high impedance. To get up the signal in the s/n, an attenuator can be used - this will reduce the noise in s/n and that will improve s/n together with increasing the wanted signal.

?

Greetings,

?

Rainer DG1SMD

?

If so, then you could say that Xiegu did you a favor by motivating you to start working on your TRX Brass! Either way, it's good! :D

On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 01:41 PM, Jarek SP9HGN wrote:

Easier to damage? :D

It is easier to develop a new one (;

Maybe not better, but easier? :) Easier to damage? :D