Comments on: D Star http://radio.carnagevisors.net/2009/02/22/d-stary/ radio, live transmission Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:02:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Chris Long http://radio.carnagevisors.net/2009/02/22/d-stary/comment-page-1/#comment-40 Chris Long Thu, 26 Feb 2009 05:01:24 +0000 http://radio.carnagevisors.net/?p=137#comment-40 I am highly skeptical of D-Star and the motives of the commercial organisations (principally one radio manufacturing concern) pushing it. The radios are profoundly expensive, have NO DX advantage over analogue (especially sideband), in spite of claims to the contrary - refer the Utah Amateur Radio Group's findings at the url below. As one with a background in broadcasting and high-quality a.m. transmission on 160 metres, I find the audio far from "crystal clear" as some have described it. To me, it sounds like typical highly compressed digital audio - swishy, mechanical, and peppered with compression artifacts of all kinds. On this basis, one starts to think "is this 'the Emperor's New Clothes'", or perhaps just a sales pitch for the gullible and uninformed? Ivy, this website does a great deal to reinforce your misgivings about the audio codec, specifically where people try to apply it to emergency operation with lots of background noise at the transmitting end: http://utahvhfs.org/dstar_codec_behavior.html In America, manufacturers of these radios are offering huge subsidies to amateur radio organisations for the setting up of emergency repeaters, the catch being that they have to use the D-Star system. That is giving many hams, and emergency service people, the jitters. And although the system is nominally an innovation of the JARL, in practice the chips to use it are unavailable, except in the communications transceivers of ONE manufacturer and its associates. The whole thing stinks too much of commercial manipulation to me. I frankly think that anyone who would put over Aust $1000 into buying such a radio - given that inevitable codec and connectivity improvements will quickly render these radios, and possibly the D-Star system obsolete - needs a reality check and possibly a psychiatric examination!!!! All the best, Chris Long VK3AML. I am highly skeptical of D-Star and the motives of the commercial organisations (principally one radio manufacturing concern) pushing it. The radios are profoundly expensive, have NO DX advantage over analogue (especially sideband), in spite of claims to the contrary – refer the Utah Amateur Radio Group’s findings at the url below. As one with a background in broadcasting and high-quality a.m. transmission on 160 metres, I find the audio far from “crystal clear” as some have described it. To me, it sounds like typical highly compressed digital audio – swishy, mechanical, and peppered with compression artifacts of all kinds.

On this basis, one starts to think “is this ‘the Emperor’s New Clothes’”, or perhaps just a sales pitch for the gullible and uninformed?

Ivy, this website does a great deal to reinforce your misgivings about the audio codec, specifically where people try to apply it to emergency operation with lots of background noise at the transmitting end:

http://utahvhfs.org/dstar_codec_behavior.html

In America, manufacturers of these radios are offering huge subsidies to amateur radio organisations for the setting up of emergency repeaters, the catch being that they have to use the D-Star system. That is giving many hams, and emergency service people, the jitters. And although the system is nominally an innovation of the JARL, in practice the chips to use it are unavailable, except in the communications transceivers of ONE manufacturer and its associates.

The whole thing stinks too much of commercial manipulation to me. I frankly think that anyone who would put over Aust $1000 into buying such a radio – given that inevitable codec and connectivity improvements will quickly render these radios, and possibly the D-Star system obsolete – needs a reality check and possibly a psychiatric examination!!!!

All the best,

Chris Long VK3AML.

]]>