RE: Remote shacks and software. It seems like we hams are extremely software adverse, quite the opposite of the rest of the tech universe. When it comes to remote control we hams will go to incredible lengths to avoid having to come up with an original software solution. And the default for remote control is just using the same software, only without access to the physical radio. The authors of most of the software assumed it would be used in front of a radio, so actually controlling the VFO from the program is an afterthought. As I look over at my MIDI keyboard controller, my Shuttle Contour jog wheel and iPad, all superior (and inexpensive, compared to the Maestro) interface options, I have to wonder just why having to cobble together 10 different proprietary and insecure software components is necessary. This should have been solved years ago.
We hams could build control surfaces using Arduino or Raspberry Pi SBCs with all the switches, displays and encoders we need. Or just adapt MIDI control devices. Even if you're only going from one end of the desk to the other, imagine having access to all your favorite knobs without needing to dive into the menus. Or tunneling your iambic key to the hiltop site using MIDI over IP. Sure, it would probably have to deal with a lot of buffering and latency so might not be the best solution for contesting, but all the more reason to set up high bandwidth HAMNET nodes in your area. We already have a good VoIP solution with Allstar. We could probably have a better one if we would stop bickering about HTs too.
I had some hope that Icom might be better at remote control than they are, but the seem to be going backward. Windows only, no API, mystery to reverse engineer. Not at all ham friendly. With their current track record I'm not even considering their SHF radio, even though it is 100% remote controlled.
Ready - I wouldn't paint all of Amateur Radio with such a broad "extremely software adverse" brush. There are a LOT of Amateur Radio operators who are now fully onboard with software defined receivers / transceivers and fully remoted... a lot of SDRs don't HAVE any knobs / switches, etc. Example - LimeSDR Mini 2 - just a circuit board with antenna and USB, so by definition, it's remote operated. My nostalgia for the Maestro control panel is simply because I'm of a generation that the Maestro looks like my concept of a radio - I'm happy typing on a keyboard, but (in my opinion) it's not an optimum control panel for something with as many "things to adjust" as a radio. As to APIs, one of my points of admiration of FlexRadio is that because their radios evolved directly from the Software Defined Radio paradigm, FlexRadio GETS issues like remote operation via Ethernet / TCP/IP, and APIs. Other Amateur Radio manufacturers still think that a radio is a physical box with control panel, and thus, no, they don't completely get all the implications (and capabilities) of software defined radio. But, they will, because if they don't, the manufacturers that do get it will rapidly evolve past those "physical box with control panel" manufacturers - think iPhone versus Blackberry.
I noodle around with software synthesizers and audio composition software. I can get complete emulators of some of the classic 1980s synths, virtual modular systems and just about anything you can dream up. They all have GUIs but they also all can respond to MIDI instructions. There are VST plugins and virtual audio routers and physical devices that do nothing but send encoder data to the software. I can mix and match I/O modules, incorporating real audio hardware, and if it can be MIDI controlled, added to the sequencer datastream.
Radio manufacturers point out that ham radio is a limited market and therefore they don't want to put a lot of R&D into it. I understand. But in a price-sensitive market where it is very hard to get users to change brands due to familiarity with the interface, it seems like all this stuff should be modular. The shack in a box is a nice idea but also full of compromise. It gets even more difficult when you start to add on amplifiers, SO2R or even operate a DX station split -until you learn how to do it on your particular transceiver, which probably involves sub menus if you don't program one of the precious user function keys. Meanwhile I can load up Logic Pro with the settings for my Akai MPK to control Cherry Audio virtual synths in an infinite number of ways, and control recording audio tracks with my iPad in the bedroom "studio." It all works together because it is designed to work together. Even something simple like the breath control function on my electronic wind instrument can be assigned to adjust anything, as long as it speaks MIDI. 99% of the time it will control volume but the fact that it isn't limited to one knob one function means anything else can happen too. So adjusting volume can also change filter bandwith, for example.
The bulk of the amateur radio operators that spend at least an hour per week (typically a net) are lacking in the deeper understanding on how the "radio" electronics work, let alone understand the software or how propagation works. I am not even talking about those who have a license but never operate a radio. The focus of the article is about the "electrical" engineering and not the software engineering of amateur radio. It was a huge shame when school radio clubs were shuttered in the 1960s for "budgeting" reasons. Nobody to act as an elmer for fresh young minds has led to a world where those older than my 62 years scoff at being an elmer to others. I have taught Tech and General classes since I was 33 and am still elmering new people, from the new Tech in their late 60s down to a 14 year old in Manhattan. Dust off the books, watch some technical videos and SHARE the knowledge with those who need it. That is how we look forward towards the future.
Charles - you and I are of the same vintage, so I understand where you're coming from. I did not experience Amateur Radio clubs in schools, until I went to tech school. Agreed that we're not seeing as much in person mentoring as we used to, but 1) it IS happening, and 2) much of it has migrated to electronic one-to-many versions, most notably on YouTube, and more recently, TikTok. There's an incredible amount of easy-to-digest material out there - training on basic electronics, and every individual subject you can think of. Antennas - yep. HF basics - yep. VHF / UHF operations, including repeaters, DMR, mobile - yep. And best, all of that is covered by multiple individuals so you can get a diversity of opinions until you're able to grasp it. Our generation learned by sitting in a classroom, on a schedule, combined with "cracking the books". These new generations are taking advantage of technology and different learning styles. Different? Yes. Not as good as in person mentoring? Perhaps, but that's not for our generation to decide.
I appreciate the information you provide in ZR. I was quite interested in the section: Beware “Signal Enhancement Setting” on Windows 10. I just purchased VARA and set it up on my Windows 10 and IC-7100 digital station, and tried it on Windows Express with both VARA-HF and VARA-FM, both of which worked great, VARA-FM at 9600 baud, without my having to do anything to Windows 10 to make them work. The enhancement setting did not appear on my ASUS laptop so this was a non-issue. In fact, I have had far less trouble setting up digital comm on Windows than on a Raspberry Pi. I participate in two weekly Winlink nets, and I find myself using Winlink Express on Windows 10 rather than PAT on Pi OS and Raspberry Pi because it is much more reliable and consistent. I think the Windows bashing is a little much, and rather annoying to me when it works so well for me. Thanks for pointing out the possible problem but let's not assume that it is a universal issue.
Bill - Thanks for the feedback. In my opinion, this article wasn't a "bash" of Windows. NS7C did point out that that setting only appeared on a particular new Dell PC and it wasn't present on a different manufacturer's PC. My mention of the numerous audio settings causing issues for Amateur Radio data communications on Windows is from personal, long experience with Windows, and thus not a "bashing" of Windows (which I define as griping about Windows with no personal basis).
RE: Remote shacks and software. It seems like we hams are extremely software adverse, quite the opposite of the rest of the tech universe. When it comes to remote control we hams will go to incredible lengths to avoid having to come up with an original software solution. And the default for remote control is just using the same software, only without access to the physical radio. The authors of most of the software assumed it would be used in front of a radio, so actually controlling the VFO from the program is an afterthought. As I look over at my MIDI keyboard controller, my Shuttle Contour jog wheel and iPad, all superior (and inexpensive, compared to the Maestro) interface options, I have to wonder just why having to cobble together 10 different proprietary and insecure software components is necessary. This should have been solved years ago.
We hams could build control surfaces using Arduino or Raspberry Pi SBCs with all the switches, displays and encoders we need. Or just adapt MIDI control devices. Even if you're only going from one end of the desk to the other, imagine having access to all your favorite knobs without needing to dive into the menus. Or tunneling your iambic key to the hiltop site using MIDI over IP. Sure, it would probably have to deal with a lot of buffering and latency so might not be the best solution for contesting, but all the more reason to set up high bandwidth HAMNET nodes in your area. We already have a good VoIP solution with Allstar. We could probably have a better one if we would stop bickering about HTs too.
I had some hope that Icom might be better at remote control than they are, but the seem to be going backward. Windows only, no API, mystery to reverse engineer. Not at all ham friendly. With their current track record I'm not even considering their SHF radio, even though it is 100% remote controlled.
Ready - I wouldn't paint all of Amateur Radio with such a broad "extremely software adverse" brush. There are a LOT of Amateur Radio operators who are now fully onboard with software defined receivers / transceivers and fully remoted... a lot of SDRs don't HAVE any knobs / switches, etc. Example - LimeSDR Mini 2 - just a circuit board with antenna and USB, so by definition, it's remote operated. My nostalgia for the Maestro control panel is simply because I'm of a generation that the Maestro looks like my concept of a radio - I'm happy typing on a keyboard, but (in my opinion) it's not an optimum control panel for something with as many "things to adjust" as a radio. As to APIs, one of my points of admiration of FlexRadio is that because their radios evolved directly from the Software Defined Radio paradigm, FlexRadio GETS issues like remote operation via Ethernet / TCP/IP, and APIs. Other Amateur Radio manufacturers still think that a radio is a physical box with control panel, and thus, no, they don't completely get all the implications (and capabilities) of software defined radio. But, they will, because if they don't, the manufacturers that do get it will rapidly evolve past those "physical box with control panel" manufacturers - think iPhone versus Blackberry.
I noodle around with software synthesizers and audio composition software. I can get complete emulators of some of the classic 1980s synths, virtual modular systems and just about anything you can dream up. They all have GUIs but they also all can respond to MIDI instructions. There are VST plugins and virtual audio routers and physical devices that do nothing but send encoder data to the software. I can mix and match I/O modules, incorporating real audio hardware, and if it can be MIDI controlled, added to the sequencer datastream.
Radio manufacturers point out that ham radio is a limited market and therefore they don't want to put a lot of R&D into it. I understand. But in a price-sensitive market where it is very hard to get users to change brands due to familiarity with the interface, it seems like all this stuff should be modular. The shack in a box is a nice idea but also full of compromise. It gets even more difficult when you start to add on amplifiers, SO2R or even operate a DX station split -until you learn how to do it on your particular transceiver, which probably involves sub menus if you don't program one of the precious user function keys. Meanwhile I can load up Logic Pro with the settings for my Akai MPK to control Cherry Audio virtual synths in an infinite number of ways, and control recording audio tracks with my iPad in the bedroom "studio." It all works together because it is designed to work together. Even something simple like the breath control function on my electronic wind instrument can be assigned to adjust anything, as long as it speaks MIDI. 99% of the time it will control volume but the fact that it isn't limited to one knob one function means anything else can happen too. So adjusting volume can also change filter bandwith, for example.
One can dream, anyway...
The bulk of the amateur radio operators that spend at least an hour per week (typically a net) are lacking in the deeper understanding on how the "radio" electronics work, let alone understand the software or how propagation works. I am not even talking about those who have a license but never operate a radio. The focus of the article is about the "electrical" engineering and not the software engineering of amateur radio. It was a huge shame when school radio clubs were shuttered in the 1960s for "budgeting" reasons. Nobody to act as an elmer for fresh young minds has led to a world where those older than my 62 years scoff at being an elmer to others. I have taught Tech and General classes since I was 33 and am still elmering new people, from the new Tech in their late 60s down to a 14 year old in Manhattan. Dust off the books, watch some technical videos and SHARE the knowledge with those who need it. That is how we look forward towards the future.
Charles - you and I are of the same vintage, so I understand where you're coming from. I did not experience Amateur Radio clubs in schools, until I went to tech school. Agreed that we're not seeing as much in person mentoring as we used to, but 1) it IS happening, and 2) much of it has migrated to electronic one-to-many versions, most notably on YouTube, and more recently, TikTok. There's an incredible amount of easy-to-digest material out there - training on basic electronics, and every individual subject you can think of. Antennas - yep. HF basics - yep. VHF / UHF operations, including repeaters, DMR, mobile - yep. And best, all of that is covered by multiple individuals so you can get a diversity of opinions until you're able to grasp it. Our generation learned by sitting in a classroom, on a schedule, combined with "cracking the books". These new generations are taking advantage of technology and different learning styles. Different? Yes. Not as good as in person mentoring? Perhaps, but that's not for our generation to decide.
I appreciate the information you provide in ZR. I was quite interested in the section: Beware “Signal Enhancement Setting” on Windows 10. I just purchased VARA and set it up on my Windows 10 and IC-7100 digital station, and tried it on Windows Express with both VARA-HF and VARA-FM, both of which worked great, VARA-FM at 9600 baud, without my having to do anything to Windows 10 to make them work. The enhancement setting did not appear on my ASUS laptop so this was a non-issue. In fact, I have had far less trouble setting up digital comm on Windows than on a Raspberry Pi. I participate in two weekly Winlink nets, and I find myself using Winlink Express on Windows 10 rather than PAT on Pi OS and Raspberry Pi because it is much more reliable and consistent. I think the Windows bashing is a little much, and rather annoying to me when it works so well for me. Thanks for pointing out the possible problem but let's not assume that it is a universal issue.
Bill - Thanks for the feedback. In my opinion, this article wasn't a "bash" of Windows. NS7C did point out that that setting only appeared on a particular new Dell PC and it wasn't present on a different manufacturer's PC. My mention of the numerous audio settings causing issues for Amateur Radio data communications on Windows is from personal, long experience with Windows, and thus not a "bashing" of Windows (which I define as griping about Windows with no personal basis).