Category: SDRplay

SDRuno Updated to Version 1.22

The official software package of the SDRplay range of products is SDRuno and it has recently been updated to version 1.22. SDRuno is also compatible with the RTL-SDR.

In addition to some UI improvements for new users, the main changes are pasted below. What's also very interesting is their road map which states that future versions of SDRuno will have frequency scanning capabilities, a remote network streaming server/client implementation and an API for the support of third party plugins. This would improve it's capabilities similar to that of SDR#.

Added
• Support for 1366×768 default layout
• ADC overload detection in AGC off mode
• ADC overload acknowledgment system to avoid lockout condition
• Custom step size for each mode
• Band Button Groups (Ham Lower, Ham Upper, Broadcast)
• Two additional SP1 width presets (2560 and 3840)
• Additional menu option in memory panel to reset column widths (helps when upgrading)
• Scheduled Recording
• Auto update

Changed
• Registry reset now only clears 1.2+ entries
• SP1 Window max size supports 4K displays (3840×2160)
• Small improvements to the memory panel (panel width and field width changes)
• Improvements to the IF output mode
• UTC time fixed to 24 hour format
• Play!/Stop button colour coordinated
• Move MUTE button to make way for VOLUME label
• Moved Squelch value display to the right

Fixed
• Log10 SING error
• Aero support detection to try to prevent rendering issues
• Freezing when switching to HiZ port in gain mode
• Gain “pumping” issue when in gain mode
• Settings panels not displaying properly when “un-minimised”
• Zoomed in frequency scale drag out of bounds bug
• Noise floor measurement bug
• Improved RSP error handling
• Sample rate change causing spectrum display issues
• Device selection bug

Known Issues
• SP2 CWAFC drift issue (Zoom/window size/freq display) – will be addressed in 1.23, workaround for now is to zoom out fully in the SP2 window and then the CWAFC feature will work.
• IF output mode disabled SP1 spectrum mouse clicks – temporary issue until LO is separated from the VFO (see plans below)

Following on from the 1.21 release where we outlined the features for coming releases, we have updated our plans, as shown below. The purpose of publishing this information is to give people an insight to the development plans but it is NOT a guarantee of the exact feature line-up and we cannot give release dates.

1.23 Intermediate update
• Recording of selected signal only (either I/Q or audio) to WAV file format
• Selected signal piped to VAC in I/Q format

1.3 Major update
• Separation of VFO and LO frequency control
• Frequency scanning

1.31 Intermediate update
• Remote client for network based streaming I/Q server applications

1.4 Major update
• Addition of new API for third party plugins

Download link: https://www.sdrplay.com/downloads

SDRuno v1.22 Improved UI
SDRuno v1.22 Improved UI

UPDATE: Mike Ladd from SDRplay has uploaded a video showing what's in the new version.

SDRuno What changed in v1.22

Video Comparison of the Airspy HF+ and SDRplay RSP1A on the FM Broadcast Band

Frequent reviewer of SDR products Mile Kokotov has just uploaded on his YouTube channel a new video where he compares the Airspy HF+ against the SDRplay RSP1A on FM broadcast reception.

At first Mile compares the two against strong broadcast stations, and then later compares them on weak DX stations surrounded in amongst other strong stations. With the strong stations a difference between the two radios is impossible to detect. But with the weaker stations that are surrounded by strong signals the Airspy HF+ has the edge with it's higher dynamic range and sensitivity.

Mile writes:

In this video I am comparing two popular SDR-Receivers (Airspy HF+ and SDRplay RSP1A) on FM Broadcast Band.

I have made few recordings with every receiver with the same antenna trying to set the best SNR = signal-to-noise ratio.

My intention was to ensure the same conditions for both SDR`s in order to make as fair as possible comparison.

No DSP enhancing on the SDR`s was used.

Antenna was Vertical Dipole.

When receiving signals are strong enough, You should not expect the difference between most receivers to be very obvious!

If you compare one average transceiver (which cost about $ 1000 USD) and top class transceiver which cost ten times more, the difference in receiving average signals will be very small too. Almost negligible! But when you have difficult conditions, the very weak signal between many strong signals, than the better receiver will receive the weak signal readable enough, but cheaper receiver will not. Today it is not a problem to design and produce the sensitive receiver, but it is far more difficult to design and produce high dynamic receiver for reasonable price! The Airspy HF+ and RSP1A are very very good SDR-receivers. They have different customers target and have strong and weak sides. For examle Airspy HF+ has better dynamics in frequency range where it is designed for, but RSP1A, on the other hand, has broadband coverage...

Airspy HF+ vs SDRplay RSP1A Comparison on FM Broadcast Band

Video Comparison of the Airspy HF+, SDRplay RSP1A and ColibriNANO on VLF to MF

Over on his YouTube Channel Mile Kokotov has uploaded a video that compares three mid priced SDRs: the Airspy HF+, the SDRplay RSP1A and the ColibriNANO. Each SDR is compared on several ALPHA and NBD morse code stations which exist in his tests from between 14 kHz to 474 kHz. He writes:

In this video I am comparing three SDR-Receivers. I have made few recordings with every receiver with the same antenna and choose the best one (one with the best SNR = signal-to-noise ratio). My intention was to ensure the same conditions for all three SDR`s in order to make as fair as possible comparison. For example, I was set the frequency span displayed on the window to be as same as possible for all three receivers. The vertical axis for the signal stregth, was set to be equal (in decibels) too.Airspy HF+ and ColibriNANO was set to their minimum sample rate (48 kHz). RSP1A was set to minimum sample rate (2 MHz and 8 decimation).

No DSP enhancing on the SDR`s was used except APF (Audio peak filter) on ColibriNANO (I forgot to swith off).

The differences between each receiver as very difficult to detect as only really challenging signal conditions will really set them apart. Mile also added in a comment:

You should not expect the difference to be very obvious! If you compare one average transceiver (which cost about $ 1000 USD) and top class transceiver which cost ten times more, the difference in the receiving the average signals will be very small too. Almost negligible! But when you have difficult conditions, the very weak signal between many strong signals, than the better receiver will receive the weak signal readable enough, but cheaper receiver will not. Today it is not a problem to design and produce the sensitive receiver, but it is very difficult to design and produce high dynamic receiver for reasonable price! The Airspy HF+ and RSP1A are very very good SDR-receivers. They have different customers target and have strong and weak sides. For example Airspy HF+ has better dynamics in frequency range where it is designed for, but RSP1A, on the other hand, has broadband coverage...

SDR Receivers Comparison on VLF, LW and NDB band

NOAA using the SDRplay RSP2 and RTL-SDR for Receiving Weather Balloon Data

NOAA RSP2 setup for Receiving Radiosonde Data
NOAA RSP2 setup for Receiving Radiosonde Data

Over on the SDRplay forums there has been a post by a NOAA engineer showing how they are using SDRplay RSP2 units in the field for tracking their radiosonde weather balloons. A radiosonde is a small sensor package and transmitter that is carried high into the atmosphere by a weather balloon. It gathers weather data whilst transmitting the data live back down to a base stations. You can get data such as temperature, pressure, humidity, altitude and GPS location.

Bobasaurus' coworker launching a weather balloon.
Bobasaurus' coworker launching a weather balloon.

The NOAA engineer on the forum (handle 'bobasaurus') wrote SkySonde, which is the software used by NOAA to decode and plot data from the radiosondes. SkySonde is freely available for public download on the NOAA website. A PDF file showing how to use the SkySonde software with an RSP2 or RTL-SDR can be found here, and the full SkySonde manual is available here. The software consists of a client and server, with the server connecting to the RSP2 or RTL-SDR, and then sending data to the client. Both server and client can run on the same PC.

The hardware setup consists of an RSP2 (can be interchanged with an RTL-SDR), an Uputronics Radiosonde Filtered preamp and a Yagi antenna. Presumably a Yagi and LNA is not completely required, although the receivable range will be less. The RSP2 bias tee is used to power the preamp, and on a V3 RTL-SDR the bias tee should also work.

NOAA appears to use the iMet brand of radiosondes which transmit a Bell 202 signal. Bobasaurus writes that they transmit in the 401-405 MHz range. This video shows an example of such a signal. If you are in the US near an area that launches these iMet weather balloons you should be able to receive them. An alternative piece of software that supports iMet radiosondes is RS. For other radiosondes we have a tutorial that uses SondeMonitor available here.

SkySonde Radiosonde Software
SkySonde Radiosonde Software

Several new SDRPlay RSP1A Reviews

Like the HF+ mentioned in the previous post, the RSP1A SDR was also recently released and has now had enough time in the wild to gather up a few online reviews. If you didn't already know, the $99 US SDRplay RSP1A is a revision of the RSP1. Compared to the RSP1 it significantly improves the filtering and front end design. We have our own review of the RSP1A unit here, and we mentioned some early reviews from other bloggers in this linked post. Below we post some of the new reviews that we are aware of which have come out since our last post.

Robert Nagy

In his video Robery Nagy does a full review of the RSP1A including a 15 minute primer on SDRs. This is great if you want a brief introduction to understanding how SDRs actually work, and what performance measures are important for comparing them. In the second half of the video Robert shows how to use SDRuno and shows the RSP1A in action.

SDRplay RSP 1A Review and SDR Primer

Mile Kokotov

In this video Mile Kokotov demonstrates the HF+ receiving a CW contest in his home country of Macedonia with the RSP1A and a full-size half wave resonant dipole antenna. He writes:

CQ World Wide DX Contest (CW) receiving in Macedonia with SDRplay RSP1A SDR-receiver and SDRuno software on 80m-Band with full-size half-wave (40 meters long) resonant dipole antenna.

Contest conditions are always big challenge to any receiver dynamics. Here you can see only 60 kHz wide frequency spectrum fulfilled with many competitor stations "fighting each other". In addition, there are local radio-station (only 1 km from my place) with huge signal...

RSP1A SDR receiver and SDRuno software - CQ World Wide DX Contest (CW) 2017

The Radio Hobbyist

In The Radio Hobbyist's video on YouTube Rick (VE3CNU) unboxes his RSP1A and shows the setup and download of SDRuno. He then goes are demonstrates reception on various signals.

Introducing the RSP1A

icholakov

In icholakov's video on YouTube he compares the older RSP1 with the newer RSP1A on medium wave and shortwave reception using a dipole in a noisy suburban RF setting. Differences are hard to detect as the signals he tests with are not likely to cause any overloading issues, but the RSP1A does seem to have a slightly less noise.

SDRPlay RSP1A vs, RSP1 comparison

TempestSDR: An SDR tool for Eavesdropping on Computer Screens via Unintentionally Radiated RF

Thanks to RTL-SDR.com reader 'flatflyfish' for submitting information on how to get Martin Marinov's TempestSDR up and running on a Windows system. If you didn't already know by definition "TEMPEST" refers to techniques used by some spy agencies to eavesdrop on electronic equipment via their unintentional radio emissions (as well as via sounds and vibrations). All electronics emit some sort of unintentional RF signals, and by capturing and processing those signals some data can be recovered. For example the unintentional signals from a computer screen could be captured, and converted back into a live image of what the screen is displaying.

TempestSDR is an open source tool that allows you to use any SDR that has a supporting ExtIO (such as RTL-SDR, Airspy, SDRplay, HackRF) to receive the unintentional signal radiation from a screen, and turn that signal back into a live image. This can let you view what is on a screen without any physical connections. If a high gain directional antenna is used then it may be possible to receive images from several meters away as well.

TempestSDR showing what's on the screen via unintentional RF radiation from the monitor.
TempestSDR showing what's on the screen via unintentional RF radiation from the monitor.

Although TempestSDR has been released now for a number of years it hasn't worked properly in Windows with ExtIO interfaces. In his email flatflyfish showed us how to compile a new version that does work.

1. You need to install a 32-bit version of the Java runtime. The 64-bit version won't work with extio's possibly because they are all 32-bit. Also install the JDK.

2. You need to install MingW32 and MSYS and put their bin folders in your Windows PATH.

3. Then when compiling I was seeing a lot of CC command unknown errors. To fix that I just added CC=gcc to the top of all makefiles. I also removed the Mirics compilation line from the JavaGUI makefile to make things easier as we're not using that sdr.

4. Originally my JDK folder was in Program Files. The makefile didn't like the spaces in the folder, so I moved it to a folder without spaces and it fixed the errors.

5. Lastly to compile it you need to specify the ARCHNAME as x86 eg "make all JAVA_HOME=F:/Java/jdk1.7.0_45 ARCHNAME=X86"

After doing all that it compiled and I had a working JAR file. The extio's that are used normally with HDSDR work fine now and I get some images from my test monitor with an rtlsdr.

We tested compilation ourselves and were successful at getting a working program. To help others we've just uploaded a fork of the code with the makefile changes done, as well as a precompiled release ZIP available on the releases page so no compilation should be required to just use it. Note that to use the precompiled JAR you still need to install MingW32, and also don't forget to install the MingW /bin and msys /1.0/bin folders into the Windows PATH. You also do need to have the 32-bit Java runtime installed as the 64-bit version doesn't seem to work. On at least one Win 10 machine we also had to manually add a 'Prefs' folder to the Java path in the registry.

We've tested the software with the ExtIO for RTL-SDRs (available on the HDSDR downloads page) and confirmed that it works. Images from one of our older DELL monitors using DVI are received nicely, although they are a bit blurry. We also tried using an Airspy or SDRplay unit and this significantly improved the quality of the images a lot due to the larger bandwidth. The quality was good enough to make out large text on the screens. ExtIO's for the Airspy are available on this page, and for the SDRplay on the official SDRplay website. Note that for the SDRplay we were unable to go above 6 MHz, and on the RTL-SDR 2.8 MHz was the limit - anything higher on these SDRs did not produce an image possibly due to dropped samples.

To use the software you should ideally know the resolution and refresh rate of your target monitor. But if you don't there are auto-correlation graphs which actually help to predict the detected resolution and frame rate. Just click on the peaks. Also, you will need to know the frequency that your monitor unintentionally emits at. If you don't know you can browse around in SDR# looking for interference peaks that change depending on what the image of the screen is showing. For example in the image below we show what the interference might look like. A tip to improving images is to increase the "Lpass" option and to watch that the auto FPS search doesn't deviate too far from your expected frame rate. If it goes too far, reset it by re-selecting your screen resolution.

Unintentionally radiated RF signal from computer screen shown in SDR#
Unintentionally radiated RF signal from computer screen shown in SDR#

The best results were had with the Airspy listening to an older 19" DELL monitor connected via DVI. A newer Phillips 1080p monitor connected via HDMI had much weaker unintentional signals but images were still able to be recovered. A third AOC 1080p monitor produced no emissions that we could find.

Clear images were obtained with an antenna used in the same room as the monitor. In a neighboring room the images on the DELL monitor could still be received, but they were too blurry to make anything out. Possibly a higher gain directional antenna could improve that.

An example set up with RTL-SDR antenna and monitors
An example set up with RTL-SDR antenna and monitors

Below we've uploaded a video to YouTube showing our results with TempestSDR.

TempestSDR - Remotely Eavesdropping on Monitors via Unintentionally Radiated RF

If you want to learn more about TEMPEST and TempestSDR Martin Marinovs dissertation on this software might be a good read (pdf).

SDRplay RSP1A Reviews from Other Sites

Moments ago we posted our own review of the RSP1A. But other radio bloggers, YouTubers and websites have also recently released reviews. Below is a summary of those other reviews.

SWLing Post Blog

In his post on the SWLing.com blog Thomas has nothing but positive words for the RSP1A, an excerpt reads:

But what of this SDR’s performance? In a nutshell: as of today, I’d contend that the RSP1A will simply be the best SDR value on the market. End of story. There is nothing I know in the $99 price bracket that can beat it.

NN4F.com

In his post NNF gives a quick review of the new unit from the perspective of an average user. He notes that spurious signals that were visible on HF with the RSP1 as now gone, at that the RSP1A is on par with the RSP2, if not better.

HamRadioScience

Here the author of hamradioscience.com compares his RSP1A with the RSP1 and RSP2. He notes better sensitivity with the RSP1A compared to the RSP1, but comparable performance with the RSP1A vs the RSP2. He has also uploaded a video demonstrating a comparison between the RSP1 and RSP1A.

Laboenligne.ca

Over on YouTube user Laboenligne.ca (aka Pascal Villeneuve VA2PV) has uploaded an interview that he did with Jon Hudson of SDRplay. The interview discusses the RSP1A product as well as the development around it.

NEW SDRplay RSP1A 14 bit SDR receiver - Interview with Jon Hudson

A Review of the SDRplay RSP1A

Yesterday the SDRplay team released the $99 US RSP1A, which is a revision of the RSP1A. In this post we present a review comparing its performance against the older RSP1 and the currently selling $169.95 US RSP2. We aim to mainly show demonstrations of improvements that we've found on the RSP1A in areas where we discovered problems on the RSP1 or RSP2.

Discussion of Improvements 

First we present a discussion on the improvements made.

TCXO: The first noticeable improvement is that the RSP1A now comes with a 0.5PPM TCXO. This was one of the main criticisms of the RSP1 as the RSP1 only came with a standard oscillator which can drift as the temperature changes. But as mentioned in our previous review that included the RSP1, the drift was fairly small after warmup due to the good heat dissipation of the large PCB, and the relatively low power usage and thus less heating of the Mirics chips used on RSP units. Nevertheless, a TCXO is a good upgrade and brings it back in line with most low cost SDRs on the market now.

Enhanced RF Preselectors + Notches: Strong out of band signals can overload an SDR causing problems like imaging and reduced sensitivity. Preselectors are RF filters which help to filter out unwanted signals for the band that you are listening to. 

The RSP1 had 8 preselector bands and the RSP1A brings this number up to 12, which is even more than the 10 preselectors on the RSP2. 

In testing we found that the new preselectors certainly do help out a lot. The new 2 MHz low pass and 2 - 12 MHz certainly help to reduce interference from the MW broadcast AM band. Changes in the VHF filters reduce problems from strong broadcast FM and DAB stations. The filters have also been sharpened considerably making the existing filters even more effective. The RSP-1 in some cases suffered quite severely from out of band signal interference, and the RSP-2 made it a bit better, but the RSP-1A solves the interference problem much more.

The new FM/AM and DAB notch filters also do a good job at notching out these often problematic very strong signals.

Preselectors on the RSP1, RSP1A and RSP2
Preselectors on the RSP1, RSP1A and RSP2

Improved LNA Architecture: In the RSP1 the front end LNA could only be turned on or off. Turning it on reduces the noise figure and improves performance, especially at UHF frequencies. The single gain step was problematic as often the LNA could overload on strong signals if turned on. The RSP1A introduces a gain control block which allows the LNA to have variable gain steps.

This new architecture helps to maximise the dynamic range of the RSP1A, thus reducing overloading.

Extended frequency coverage down to 1kHz: The lower limit of the RSP1 was 10 kHz, so really low LF reception is now available on the RSP1A.

Bias-T: Just like with the RSP2, the bias-t allows you to power external devices over the coax cable. Such as remote LNAs, switches etc. Running a good LNA next to the antenna is optimal, as this helps push signals through the coax cable losses.

RF Shielding: Like the RSP2 the plastic case is now spray painted with metallic paint on the inside. This works almost as well as a full metal case to shield from unwanted signals entering directly through the PCB, instead of through the antenna. We do still notice some leakage making its way in through the coax shield, but it is relatively minor with the shielding.

ADC Resolution Increased to 14-bits: The RSP1A uses the same ADC chip as the RSP1, but now has unlocked 14-bit ADC capability for bandwidths below 6 MHz thanks to onboard decimation and oversampling. So now 14-bit data comes directly into the PC if using a bandwidth below 6 MHz. Further decimation can still be achieved within software like SDRuno.

A higher bit ADC can improve dynamic range, meaning that strong signals are less likely to overload the SDR.

We asked SDRplay how 14-bits was achieved with the same chips used by the RSP1 and they explained that it is through oversampling and decimation onboard the chip. They also wrote the following technical reply which is a very good read (collapsed as the reply is quite long, click on "Read the Reply" to expand):

[expand title = "READ THE REPLY"]

The ADCs on the MSi2500 use a sigma-delta topology where a highly oversampled multi-bit ADC uses decimation filtering to provide the desired resolution. As the original spec for the MSi2500 called for 12 bit resolution, the fact that the converter was capable of delivering 14 bits for final sample rates of less than 6.048 MHz was ignored. Working with the Mirics team, we have been able to unlock the extra two bits of resolution that the MSi2500 was always capable of delivering. Using sample rates above 6.048 MHz, the ADC defaults back to 12 bit resolution.

They also explained:

If we take an 8 bit ADC for example, we can expect around 48 dB of instantaneous dynamic range. This will most likely be far lower than that achievable from the RF front end whose dynamic range will be influenced by factors such as noise figure, intermodualtion, cross modulation and synthesizer phase noise (reciprocal mixing). A decent tuner front end should be capable of delivering 65-70 dB of instantaneous dynamic range, which is also roughly what you can expect from a 12 bit ADC. In other words, we believe that in the RSP1, the instantaneous dynamic range of the tuner and ADCs were approximately the same. The limitation that the RSP1 had was because of the single gain step in the LNA, it was not always possible to utilise the available dynamic range in the most effective way. The RSP1A gives much greater (and finer) control over the RF gain and this allows for better alignment of the signal level into the tuner to better exploit the available dynamic range. In our tests in the broadcast FM band, we believe that the RSP1A gives around 10 dB more ‘usable’ dynamic range than the RSP1. In other words, if we combine multiple controlled modulated signals (for RF signal generators), with real weak off-air signals, the RSP1A is capable of handling interferers that are around 10 dB greater than the RSP1. Benchmarking against other products, in our tests, the RSP1A seems to give better performance now than anything else in the same price range, both in terms of sensitivity and in terms of in-band overload performance.

The RSP1 always gave very good sensitivity but in optimising it in this way, we gave up some performance in terms of in-band overload performance. Our objective with the RSP1A was to address this without sacrificing sensitivity. 

Now, going back to the issue of 14 bits vs 12 bits and instantaneous dynamic range. If we increase the ADC dynamic range from 12 to 14 bits, then the ADC dynamic range should no longer influence the performance of the receiver. Indeed, it is our view, that for any receiver that needs to use a tuner as part of the front end (and any receiver that operates across the frequency range of the RSP will have to use a tuner for the foreseeable future), there is little benefit to be gained with ADC resolutions in excess of 14 bits, as to utilise the extra dynamic range that a higher resolution ADC can give, a much higher performance tuner would be required. Tuner technology has come a very long way in the last 10-15 years and the performance of modern integrated devices is actually very good. To get 12 dB of better dynamic range from a tuner is extremely difficult and can really only be achieved by using very much greater levels of power and esoteric semiconductor technologies. One possible area where you might see better performance is where you have multiple strong interfering signals to the extent that the RF gain needs to be turned down to such a level that the ADC quantisation noise effectively limits the noise floor of the receiver. In this case, you ought to see improved performance in 14 bit mode when compared to 12 bit mode, but please note that the improvement may only be a few dBs in the weak signal reception. If the noise floor of the receiver is still limited by the external LNA, then improved ADC dynamic range will give no perceptible improvement whatsoever.

A direct sampling receiver that does not use a tuner should in principle allow greater dynamic range than one that does, but in practice any direct sampling ADC needs some form of external low noise amplification to ensure a reasonable noise figure and the dynamic range (noise, intermodulation performance etc) of this external amplification block becomes a limiting factor. This is certainly true at VHF and above. At HF, as you will be well aware, the receiver noise figure is not really very important because the atmospheric noise floor is so high. In principle, you might therefore think that our best approach would be to bypass the tuner and use the decimated 16 bit performance of our ADCs. This would still give an effective receiver bandwidth of 375 kHz with 16 bit performance. The reality though is that the real dynamic range of signals coming into the antenna is limited by propagation conditions and atmospheric noise. It is rare to find signals that are above the atmospheric noise floor that vary by more than 60 dB. In practical terms, we believe that equivalent performance can be achieved, simply by the addition of RF pre-selection and AM-band notch filters and in this way we avoid some of the other compromises of direct sampling systems.

So, in a nutshell, when transitioning from 12bit mode to 14 bit mode, don’t expect to see 12 dB more dynamic range. In the real world, it doesn’t work this way. This is why 12 bit devices can give quite favourable performance to higher end 16 bit SDRs such as the Elad FDM-S2, particularly when you consider the difference in cost. We fully expect the Elad to be better, but the difference will not be 24 dB or anything close to it.


Without wishing to labour the point about myths and misunderstandings, it is worth adding a bit of clarification regarding the term ‘dynamic range’. This is a much misunderstood term which can mean very different things depending upon the circumstances and type of signal being received. There is also a difference between ‘dynamic range’ and ‘instantaneous dynamic range’. If you ask 10 different radio engineers what they mean by the term dynamic range, you are sure to get more than one different answer! Another important point to note is that ADC dynamic range is NOT the same as receiver dynamic range. When referring to ADCs, the term dynamic range generally refers to the Spurious Free Dynamic Range (SFDR). This is measured using a CW tone and refers to the ratio between the maximum RMS signal that the ADC can handle and the largest spur or level or quantisation noise within the ADC bandwidth. This is a measure of both noise and linearity of an ADC. As a case in point, it is worth noting that a 16 bit ADC may not necessarily have a higher SFDR than a 12 bit ADC despite having a greater resolution. The greater resolution will generally result in a lower level of quantisation noise, but not necessarily a lower level of harmonic distortion and spurs. In a multi-channel/multi-signal SDR system a lower level of quantisation noise is generally helpful, even if the SFDR is not better, but is not guaranteed to give better performance if the weak signal of interest happens to fall on top of an ADC spur. Where a single signal occupies the entire ADC bandwidth, it is ONLY the SFDR that matters and not the resolution or quantisation noise. Sometimes you will hear people refer to the Effective Number Of Bits ENOB. ENOB is related to the SFDR in that it is a measure of the maximum SINAD that can be attained with an ADC at a give sample rate and so is also a measure of both linearity and noise performance. ENOB is actually = (SINAD – 1.76)/6.02
In the ADC subsystem used in the RSP, whilst the ADCs are 12 bit at 8 MHz sampling the ENOB is 10.4 (for both I and Q). At lower sample rates, the ENOB improves and gets closer to the idealised performance of the converter.

In a receiver system as a whole, the term dynamic range will generally be interpreted to mean the difference (in dB) between the minimum discernible signal and the maximum level of signal that can be handled. But this is different from the term instantaneous dynamic range, which generally refers to the difference between the minimum discernible signal in the presence of the largest signal that can be handled at the same time. What this ‘number’ is in each case will depend upon the type of signal. So for example, a receiver with a given noise figure and linearity performance will have a different instantaneous dynamic range when receiving a 8 MHz wide 256-QAM CATV signal than when receiving a FM signal that is a few kHz wide. This is simply because the SINR (Signal to Interference + Noise Ratio) requirement for a given BER for a 256-QAM signal is very different than that required for a FM signal and also the peak to average ratio of the two signals is very different.

[/expand]

PCB Photos

Compared to the RSP1 the RSP1A PCB is significantly more populated due to the additional filter banks.

RSP1A PCB Top
RSP1A PCB Bottom
RSP1A PCB Top RSP1A PCB Bottom

Testing the RSP1A

Below we show some screenshots of tests that we made to compare the three RSP units. We focused on bands where the RSP1 or RSP2 had issues, and try to show how much improvement you can get from the RSP1A.

Medium Wave Broadcast AM Band

In the screenshots below we compare the three SDRs on the broadcast AM band which has some very strong signals. The RSP1 definitely shows signals of overloading and turning the gain down did not reduce the interference shown between 0 - 500 kHz. 

The RSP1A on the other hand does not overload that easily. In the third screenshot we turn the MW notch on half way through the waterfall. The notch does not cover the entire AM band and signals at around 500 - 700 kHz are attenuated less. But turning it on does seem to do enough to solve most imaging problems as will be seen in the next tests.

SDRplay RSP1
SDRplay RSP1A
SDRplay RSP1A (MW Filter ON Halfway Through)
SDRplay RSP2
SDRplay RSP1 SDRplay RSP1A SDRplay RSP1A (MW Filter ON Halfway Through) SDRplay RSP2

Continue reading

SDRuno Updated to Version 1.22

The official software package of the SDRplay range of products is SDRuno and it has recently been updated to version 1.22. SDRuno is also compatible with the RTL-SDR.

In addition to some UI improvements for new users, the main changes are pasted below. What's also very interesting is their road map which states that future versions of SDRuno will have frequency scanning capabilities, a remote network streaming server/client implementation and an API for the support of third party plugins. This would improve it's capabilities similar to that of SDR#.

Added
• Support for 1366×768 default layout
• ADC overload detection in AGC off mode
• ADC overload acknowledgment system to avoid lockout condition
• Custom step size for each mode
• Band Button Groups (Ham Lower, Ham Upper, Broadcast)
• Two additional SP1 width presets (2560 and 3840)
• Additional menu option in memory panel to reset column widths (helps when upgrading)
• Scheduled Recording
• Auto update

Changed
• Registry reset now only clears 1.2+ entries
• SP1 Window max size supports 4K displays (3840×2160)
• Small improvements to the memory panel (panel width and field width changes)
• Improvements to the IF output mode
• UTC time fixed to 24 hour format
• Play!/Stop button colour coordinated
• Move MUTE button to make way for VOLUME label
• Moved Squelch value display to the right

Fixed
• Log10 SING error
• Aero support detection to try to prevent rendering issues
• Freezing when switching to HiZ port in gain mode
• Gain “pumping” issue when in gain mode
• Settings panels not displaying properly when “un-minimised”
• Zoomed in frequency scale drag out of bounds bug
• Noise floor measurement bug
• Improved RSP error handling
• Sample rate change causing spectrum display issues
• Device selection bug

Known Issues
• SP2 CWAFC drift issue (Zoom/window size/freq display) – will be addressed in 1.23, workaround for now is to zoom out fully in the SP2 window and then the CWAFC feature will work.
• IF output mode disabled SP1 spectrum mouse clicks – temporary issue until LO is separated from the VFO (see plans below)

Following on from the 1.21 release where we outlined the features for coming releases, we have updated our plans, as shown below. The purpose of publishing this information is to give people an insight to the development plans but it is NOT a guarantee of the exact feature line-up and we cannot give release dates.

1.23 Intermediate update
• Recording of selected signal only (either I/Q or audio) to WAV file format
• Selected signal piped to VAC in I/Q format

1.3 Major update
• Separation of VFO and LO frequency control
• Frequency scanning

1.31 Intermediate update
• Remote client for network based streaming I/Q server applications

1.4 Major update
• Addition of new API for third party plugins

Download link: https://www.sdrplay.com/downloads

SDRuno v1.22 Improved UI
SDRuno v1.22 Improved UI

UPDATE: Mike Ladd from SDRplay has uploaded a video showing what's in the new version.

SDRuno What changed in v1.22

Video Comparison of the Airspy HF+ and SDRplay RSP1A on the FM Broadcast Band

Frequent reviewer of SDR products Mile Kokotov has just uploaded on his YouTube channel a new video where he compares the Airspy HF+ against the SDRplay RSP1A on FM broadcast reception.

At first Mile compares the two against strong broadcast stations, and then later compares them on weak DX stations surrounded in amongst other strong stations. With the strong stations a difference between the two radios is impossible to detect. But with the weaker stations that are surrounded by strong signals the Airspy HF+ has the edge with it's higher dynamic range and sensitivity.

Mile writes:

In this video I am comparing two popular SDR-Receivers (Airspy HF+ and SDRplay RSP1A) on FM Broadcast Band.

I have made few recordings with every receiver with the same antenna trying to set the best SNR = signal-to-noise ratio.

My intention was to ensure the same conditions for both SDR`s in order to make as fair as possible comparison.

No DSP enhancing on the SDR`s was used.

Antenna was Vertical Dipole.

When receiving signals are strong enough, You should not expect the difference between most receivers to be very obvious!

If you compare one average transceiver (which cost about $ 1000 USD) and top class transceiver which cost ten times more, the difference in receiving average signals will be very small too. Almost negligible! But when you have difficult conditions, the very weak signal between many strong signals, than the better receiver will receive the weak signal readable enough, but cheaper receiver will not. Today it is not a problem to design and produce the sensitive receiver, but it is far more difficult to design and produce high dynamic receiver for reasonable price! The Airspy HF+ and RSP1A are very very good SDR-receivers. They have different customers target and have strong and weak sides. For examle Airspy HF+ has better dynamics in frequency range where it is designed for, but RSP1A, on the other hand, has broadband coverage...

Airspy HF+ vs SDRplay RSP1A Comparison on FM Broadcast Band

Video Comparison of the Airspy HF+, SDRplay RSP1A and ColibriNANO on VLF to MF

Over on his YouTube Channel Mile Kokotov has uploaded a video that compares three mid priced SDRs: the Airspy HF+, the SDRplay RSP1A and the ColibriNANO. Each SDR is compared on several ALPHA and NBD morse code stations which exist in his tests from between 14 kHz to 474 kHz. He writes:

In this video I am comparing three SDR-Receivers. I have made few recordings with every receiver with the same antenna and choose the best one (one with the best SNR = signal-to-noise ratio). My intention was to ensure the same conditions for all three SDR`s in order to make as fair as possible comparison. For example, I was set the frequency span displayed on the window to be as same as possible for all three receivers. The vertical axis for the signal stregth, was set to be equal (in decibels) too.Airspy HF+ and ColibriNANO was set to their minimum sample rate (48 kHz). RSP1A was set to minimum sample rate (2 MHz and 8 decimation).

No DSP enhancing on the SDR`s was used except APF (Audio peak filter) on ColibriNANO (I forgot to swith off).

The differences between each receiver as very difficult to detect as only really challenging signal conditions will really set them apart. Mile also added in a comment:

You should not expect the difference to be very obvious! If you compare one average transceiver (which cost about $ 1000 USD) and top class transceiver which cost ten times more, the difference in the receiving the average signals will be very small too. Almost negligible! But when you have difficult conditions, the very weak signal between many strong signals, than the better receiver will receive the weak signal readable enough, but cheaper receiver will not. Today it is not a problem to design and produce the sensitive receiver, but it is very difficult to design and produce high dynamic receiver for reasonable price! The Airspy HF+ and RSP1A are very very good SDR-receivers. They have different customers target and have strong and weak sides. For example Airspy HF+ has better dynamics in frequency range where it is designed for, but RSP1A, on the other hand, has broadband coverage...

SDR Receivers Comparison on VLF, LW and NDB band

NOAA using the SDRplay RSP2 and RTL-SDR for Receiving Weather Balloon Data

NOAA RSP2 setup for Receiving Radiosonde Data
NOAA RSP2 setup for Receiving Radiosonde Data

Over on the SDRplay forums there has been a post by a NOAA engineer showing how they are using SDRplay RSP2 units in the field for tracking their radiosonde weather balloons. A radiosonde is a small sensor package and transmitter that is carried high into the atmosphere by a weather balloon. It gathers weather data whilst transmitting the data live back down to a base stations. You can get data such as temperature, pressure, humidity, altitude and GPS location.

Bobasaurus' coworker launching a weather balloon.
Bobasaurus' coworker launching a weather balloon.

The NOAA engineer on the forum (handle 'bobasaurus') wrote SkySonde, which is the software used by NOAA to decode and plot data from the radiosondes. SkySonde is freely available for public download on the NOAA website. A PDF file showing how to use the SkySonde software with an RSP2 or RTL-SDR can be found here, and the full SkySonde manual is available here. The software consists of a client and server, with the server connecting to the RSP2 or RTL-SDR, and then sending data to the client. Both server and client can run on the same PC.

The hardware setup consists of an RSP2 (can be interchanged with an RTL-SDR), an Uputronics Radiosonde Filtered preamp and a Yagi antenna. Presumably a Yagi and LNA is not completely required, although the receivable range will be less. The RSP2 bias tee is used to power the preamp, and on a V3 RTL-SDR the bias tee should also work.

NOAA appears to use the iMet brand of radiosondes which transmit a Bell 202 signal. Bobasaurus writes that they transmit in the 401-405 MHz range. This video shows an example of such a signal. If you are in the US near an area that launches these iMet weather balloons you should be able to receive them. An alternative piece of software that supports iMet radiosondes is RS. For other radiosondes we have a tutorial that uses SondeMonitor available here.

SkySonde Radiosonde Software
SkySonde Radiosonde Software

Several new SDRPlay RSP1A Reviews

Like the HF+ mentioned in the previous post, the RSP1A SDR was also recently released and has now had enough time in the wild to gather up a few online reviews. If you didn't already know, the $99 US SDRplay RSP1A is a revision of the RSP1. Compared to the RSP1 it significantly improves the filtering and front end design. We have our own review of the RSP1A unit here, and we mentioned some early reviews from other bloggers in this linked post. Below we post some of the new reviews that we are aware of which have come out since our last post.

Robert Nagy

In his video Robery Nagy does a full review of the RSP1A including a 15 minute primer on SDRs. This is great if you want a brief introduction to understanding how SDRs actually work, and what performance measures are important for comparing them. In the second half of the video Robert shows how to use SDRuno and shows the RSP1A in action.

SDRplay RSP 1A Review and SDR Primer

Mile Kokotov

In this video Mile Kokotov demonstrates the HF+ receiving a CW contest in his home country of Macedonia with the RSP1A and a full-size half wave resonant dipole antenna. He writes:

CQ World Wide DX Contest (CW) receiving in Macedonia with SDRplay RSP1A SDR-receiver and SDRuno software on 80m-Band with full-size half-wave (40 meters long) resonant dipole antenna.

Contest conditions are always big challenge to any receiver dynamics. Here you can see only 60 kHz wide frequency spectrum fulfilled with many competitor stations "fighting each other". In addition, there are local radio-station (only 1 km from my place) with huge signal...

RSP1A SDR receiver and SDRuno software - CQ World Wide DX Contest (CW) 2017

The Radio Hobbyist

In The Radio Hobbyist's video on YouTube Rick (VE3CNU) unboxes his RSP1A and shows the setup and download of SDRuno. He then goes are demonstrates reception on various signals.

Introducing the RSP1A

icholakov

In icholakov's video on YouTube he compares the older RSP1 with the newer RSP1A on medium wave and shortwave reception using a dipole in a noisy suburban RF setting. Differences are hard to detect as the signals he tests with are not likely to cause any overloading issues, but the RSP1A does seem to have a slightly less noise.

SDRPlay RSP1A vs, RSP1 comparison

TempestSDR: An SDR tool for Eavesdropping on Computer Screens via Unintentionally Radiated RF

Thanks to RTL-SDR.com reader 'flatflyfish' for submitting information on how to get Martin Marinov's TempestSDR up and running on a Windows system. If you didn't already know by definition "TEMPEST" refers to techniques used by some spy agencies to eavesdrop on electronic equipment via their unintentional radio emissions (as well as via sounds and vibrations). All electronics emit some sort of unintentional RF signals, and by capturing and processing those signals some data can be recovered. For example the unintentional signals from a computer screen could be captured, and converted back into a live image of what the screen is displaying.

TempestSDR is an open source tool that allows you to use any SDR that has a supporting ExtIO (such as RTL-SDR, Airspy, SDRplay, HackRF) to receive the unintentional signal radiation from a screen, and turn that signal back into a live image. This can let you view what is on a screen without any physical connections. If a high gain directional antenna is used then it may be possible to receive images from several meters away as well.

TempestSDR showing what's on the screen via unintentional RF radiation from the monitor.
TempestSDR showing what's on the screen via unintentional RF radiation from the monitor.

Although TempestSDR has been released now for a number of years it hasn't worked properly in Windows with ExtIO interfaces. In his email flatflyfish showed us how to compile a new version that does work.

1. You need to install a 32-bit version of the Java runtime. The 64-bit version won't work with extio's possibly because they are all 32-bit. Also install the JDK.

2. You need to install MingW32 and MSYS and put their bin folders in your Windows PATH.

3. Then when compiling I was seeing a lot of CC command unknown errors. To fix that I just added CC=gcc to the top of all makefiles. I also removed the Mirics compilation line from the JavaGUI makefile to make things easier as we're not using that sdr.

4. Originally my JDK folder was in Program Files. The makefile didn't like the spaces in the folder, so I moved it to a folder without spaces and it fixed the errors.

5. Lastly to compile it you need to specify the ARCHNAME as x86 eg "make all JAVA_HOME=F:/Java/jdk1.7.0_45 ARCHNAME=X86"

After doing all that it compiled and I had a working JAR file. The extio's that are used normally with HDSDR work fine now and I get some images from my test monitor with an rtlsdr.

We tested compilation ourselves and were successful at getting a working program. To help others we've just uploaded a fork of the code with the makefile changes done, as well as a precompiled release ZIP available on the releases page so no compilation should be required to just use it. Note that to use the precompiled JAR you still need to install MingW32, and also don't forget to install the MingW /bin and msys /1.0/bin folders into the Windows PATH. You also do need to have the 32-bit Java runtime installed as the 64-bit version doesn't seem to work. On at least one Win 10 machine we also had to manually add a 'Prefs' folder to the Java path in the registry.

We've tested the software with the ExtIO for RTL-SDRs (available on the HDSDR downloads page) and confirmed that it works. Images from one of our older DELL monitors using DVI are received nicely, although they are a bit blurry. We also tried using an Airspy or SDRplay unit and this significantly improved the quality of the images a lot due to the larger bandwidth. The quality was good enough to make out large text on the screens. ExtIO's for the Airspy are available on this page, and for the SDRplay on the official SDRplay website. Note that for the SDRplay we were unable to go above 6 MHz, and on the RTL-SDR 2.8 MHz was the limit - anything higher on these SDRs did not produce an image possibly due to dropped samples.

To use the software you should ideally know the resolution and refresh rate of your target monitor. But if you don't there are auto-correlation graphs which actually help to predict the detected resolution and frame rate. Just click on the peaks. Also, you will need to know the frequency that your monitor unintentionally emits at. If you don't know you can browse around in SDR# looking for interference peaks that change depending on what the image of the screen is showing. For example in the image below we show what the interference might look like. A tip to improving images is to increase the "Lpass" option and to watch that the auto FPS search doesn't deviate too far from your expected frame rate. If it goes too far, reset it by re-selecting your screen resolution.

Unintentionally radiated RF signal from computer screen shown in SDR#
Unintentionally radiated RF signal from computer screen shown in SDR#

The best results were had with the Airspy listening to an older 19" DELL monitor connected via DVI. A newer Phillips 1080p monitor connected via HDMI had much weaker unintentional signals but images were still able to be recovered. A third AOC 1080p monitor produced no emissions that we could find.

Clear images were obtained with an antenna used in the same room as the monitor. In a neighboring room the images on the DELL monitor could still be received, but they were too blurry to make anything out. Possibly a higher gain directional antenna could improve that.

An example set up with RTL-SDR antenna and monitors
An example set up with RTL-SDR antenna and monitors

Below we've uploaded a video to YouTube showing our results with TempestSDR.

TempestSDR - Remotely Eavesdropping on Monitors via Unintentionally Radiated RF

If you want to learn more about TEMPEST and TempestSDR Martin Marinovs dissertation on this software might be a good read (pdf).

SDRplay RSP1A Reviews from Other Sites

Moments ago we posted our own review of the RSP1A. But other radio bloggers, YouTubers and websites have also recently released reviews. Below is a summary of those other reviews.

SWLing Post Blog

In his post on the SWLing.com blog Thomas has nothing but positive words for the RSP1A, an excerpt reads:

But what of this SDR’s performance? In a nutshell: as of today, I’d contend that the RSP1A will simply be the best SDR value on the market. End of story. There is nothing I know in the $99 price bracket that can beat it.

NN4F.com

In his post NNF gives a quick review of the new unit from the perspective of an average user. He notes that spurious signals that were visible on HF with the RSP1 as now gone, at that the RSP1A is on par with the RSP2, if not better.

HamRadioScience

Here the author of hamradioscience.com compares his RSP1A with the RSP1 and RSP2. He notes better sensitivity with the RSP1A compared to the RSP1, but comparable performance with the RSP1A vs the RSP2. He has also uploaded a video demonstrating a comparison between the RSP1 and RSP1A.

Laboenligne.ca

Over on YouTube user Laboenligne.ca (aka Pascal Villeneuve VA2PV) has uploaded an interview that he did with Jon Hudson of SDRplay. The interview discusses the RSP1A product as well as the development around it.

NEW SDRplay RSP1A 14 bit SDR receiver - Interview with Jon Hudson

A Review of the SDRplay RSP1A

Yesterday the SDRplay team released the $99 US RSP1A, which is a revision of the RSP1A. In this post we present a review comparing its performance against the older RSP1 and the currently selling $169.95 US RSP2. We aim to mainly show demonstrations of improvements that we've found on the RSP1A in areas where we discovered problems on the RSP1 or RSP2.

Discussion of Improvements 

First we present a discussion on the improvements made.

TCXO: The first noticeable improvement is that the RSP1A now comes with a 0.5PPM TCXO. This was one of the main criticisms of the RSP1 as the RSP1 only came with a standard oscillator which can drift as the temperature changes. But as mentioned in our previous review that included the RSP1, the drift was fairly small after warmup due to the good heat dissipation of the large PCB, and the relatively low power usage and thus less heating of the Mirics chips used on RSP units. Nevertheless, a TCXO is a good upgrade and brings it back in line with most low cost SDRs on the market now.

Enhanced RF Preselectors + Notches: Strong out of band signals can overload an SDR causing problems like imaging and reduced sensitivity. Preselectors are RF filters which help to filter out unwanted signals for the band that you are listening to. 

The RSP1 had 8 preselector bands and the RSP1A brings this number up to 12, which is even more than the 10 preselectors on the RSP2. 

In testing we found that the new preselectors certainly do help out a lot. The new 2 MHz low pass and 2 - 12 MHz certainly help to reduce interference from the MW broadcast AM band. Changes in the VHF filters reduce problems from strong broadcast FM and DAB stations. The filters have also been sharpened considerably making the existing filters even more effective. The RSP-1 in some cases suffered quite severely from out of band signal interference, and the RSP-2 made it a bit better, but the RSP-1A solves the interference problem much more.

The new FM/AM and DAB notch filters also do a good job at notching out these often problematic very strong signals.

Preselectors on the RSP1, RSP1A and RSP2
Preselectors on the RSP1, RSP1A and RSP2

Improved LNA Architecture: In the RSP1 the front end LNA could only be turned on or off. Turning it on reduces the noise figure and improves performance, especially at UHF frequencies. The single gain step was problematic as often the LNA could overload on strong signals if turned on. The RSP1A introduces a gain control block which allows the LNA to have variable gain steps.

This new architecture helps to maximise the dynamic range of the RSP1A, thus reducing overloading.

Extended frequency coverage down to 1kHz: The lower limit of the RSP1 was 10 kHz, so really low LF reception is now available on the RSP1A.

Bias-T: Just like with the RSP2, the bias-t allows you to power external devices over the coax cable. Such as remote LNAs, switches etc. Running a good LNA next to the antenna is optimal, as this helps push signals through the coax cable losses.

RF Shielding: Like the RSP2 the plastic case is now spray painted with metallic paint on the inside. This works almost as well as a full metal case to shield from unwanted signals entering directly through the PCB, instead of through the antenna. We do still notice some leakage making its way in through the coax shield, but it is relatively minor with the shielding.

ADC Resolution Increased to 14-bits: The RSP1A uses the same ADC chip as the RSP1, but now has unlocked 14-bit ADC capability for bandwidths below 6 MHz thanks to onboard decimation and oversampling. So now 14-bit data comes directly into the PC if using a bandwidth below 6 MHz. Further decimation can still be achieved within software like SDRuno.

A higher bit ADC can improve dynamic range, meaning that strong signals are less likely to overload the SDR.

We asked SDRplay how 14-bits was achieved with the same chips used by the RSP1 and they explained that it is through oversampling and decimation onboard the chip. They also wrote the following technical reply which is a very good read (collapsed as the reply is quite long, click on "Read the Reply" to expand):

[expand title = "READ THE REPLY"]

The ADCs on the MSi2500 use a sigma-delta topology where a highly oversampled multi-bit ADC uses decimation filtering to provide the desired resolution. As the original spec for the MSi2500 called for 12 bit resolution, the fact that the converter was capable of delivering 14 bits for final sample rates of less than 6.048 MHz was ignored. Working with the Mirics team, we have been able to unlock the extra two bits of resolution that the MSi2500 was always capable of delivering. Using sample rates above 6.048 MHz, the ADC defaults back to 12 bit resolution.

They also explained:

If we take an 8 bit ADC for example, we can expect around 48 dB of instantaneous dynamic range. This will most likely be far lower than that achievable from the RF front end whose dynamic range will be influenced by factors such as noise figure, intermodualtion, cross modulation and synthesizer phase noise (reciprocal mixing). A decent tuner front end should be capable of delivering 65-70 dB of instantaneous dynamic range, which is also roughly what you can expect from a 12 bit ADC. In other words, we believe that in the RSP1, the instantaneous dynamic range of the tuner and ADCs were approximately the same. The limitation that the RSP1 had was because of the single gain step in the LNA, it was not always possible to utilise the available dynamic range in the most effective way. The RSP1A gives much greater (and finer) control over the RF gain and this allows for better alignment of the signal level into the tuner to better exploit the available dynamic range. In our tests in the broadcast FM band, we believe that the RSP1A gives around 10 dB more ‘usable’ dynamic range than the RSP1. In other words, if we combine multiple controlled modulated signals (for RF signal generators), with real weak off-air signals, the RSP1A is capable of handling interferers that are around 10 dB greater than the RSP1. Benchmarking against other products, in our tests, the RSP1A seems to give better performance now than anything else in the same price range, both in terms of sensitivity and in terms of in-band overload performance.

The RSP1 always gave very good sensitivity but in optimising it in this way, we gave up some performance in terms of in-band overload performance. Our objective with the RSP1A was to address this without sacrificing sensitivity. 

Now, going back to the issue of 14 bits vs 12 bits and instantaneous dynamic range. If we increase the ADC dynamic range from 12 to 14 bits, then the ADC dynamic range should no longer influence the performance of the receiver. Indeed, it is our view, that for any receiver that needs to use a tuner as part of the front end (and any receiver that operates across the frequency range of the RSP will have to use a tuner for the foreseeable future), there is little benefit to be gained with ADC resolutions in excess of 14 bits, as to utilise the extra dynamic range that a higher resolution ADC can give, a much higher performance tuner would be required. Tuner technology has come a very long way in the last 10-15 years and the performance of modern integrated devices is actually very good. To get 12 dB of better dynamic range from a tuner is extremely difficult and can really only be achieved by using very much greater levels of power and esoteric semiconductor technologies. One possible area where you might see better performance is where you have multiple strong interfering signals to the extent that the RF gain needs to be turned down to such a level that the ADC quantisation noise effectively limits the noise floor of the receiver. In this case, you ought to see improved performance in 14 bit mode when compared to 12 bit mode, but please note that the improvement may only be a few dBs in the weak signal reception. If the noise floor of the receiver is still limited by the external LNA, then improved ADC dynamic range will give no perceptible improvement whatsoever.

A direct sampling receiver that does not use a tuner should in principle allow greater dynamic range than one that does, but in practice any direct sampling ADC needs some form of external low noise amplification to ensure a reasonable noise figure and the dynamic range (noise, intermodulation performance etc) of this external amplification block becomes a limiting factor. This is certainly true at VHF and above. At HF, as you will be well aware, the receiver noise figure is not really very important because the atmospheric noise floor is so high. In principle, you might therefore think that our best approach would be to bypass the tuner and use the decimated 16 bit performance of our ADCs. This would still give an effective receiver bandwidth of 375 kHz with 16 bit performance. The reality though is that the real dynamic range of signals coming into the antenna is limited by propagation conditions and atmospheric noise. It is rare to find signals that are above the atmospheric noise floor that vary by more than 60 dB. In practical terms, we believe that equivalent performance can be achieved, simply by the addition of RF pre-selection and AM-band notch filters and in this way we avoid some of the other compromises of direct sampling systems.

So, in a nutshell, when transitioning from 12bit mode to 14 bit mode, don’t expect to see 12 dB more dynamic range. In the real world, it doesn’t work this way. This is why 12 bit devices can give quite favourable performance to higher end 16 bit SDRs such as the Elad FDM-S2, particularly when you consider the difference in cost. We fully expect the Elad to be better, but the difference will not be 24 dB or anything close to it.


Without wishing to labour the point about myths and misunderstandings, it is worth adding a bit of clarification regarding the term ‘dynamic range’. This is a much misunderstood term which can mean very different things depending upon the circumstances and type of signal being received. There is also a difference between ‘dynamic range’ and ‘instantaneous dynamic range’. If you ask 10 different radio engineers what they mean by the term dynamic range, you are sure to get more than one different answer! Another important point to note is that ADC dynamic range is NOT the same as receiver dynamic range. When referring to ADCs, the term dynamic range generally refers to the Spurious Free Dynamic Range (SFDR). This is measured using a CW tone and refers to the ratio between the maximum RMS signal that the ADC can handle and the largest spur or level or quantisation noise within the ADC bandwidth. This is a measure of both noise and linearity of an ADC. As a case in point, it is worth noting that a 16 bit ADC may not necessarily have a higher SFDR than a 12 bit ADC despite having a greater resolution. The greater resolution will generally result in a lower level of quantisation noise, but not necessarily a lower level of harmonic distortion and spurs. In a multi-channel/multi-signal SDR system a lower level of quantisation noise is generally helpful, even if the SFDR is not better, but is not guaranteed to give better performance if the weak signal of interest happens to fall on top of an ADC spur. Where a single signal occupies the entire ADC bandwidth, it is ONLY the SFDR that matters and not the resolution or quantisation noise. Sometimes you will hear people refer to the Effective Number Of Bits ENOB. ENOB is related to the SFDR in that it is a measure of the maximum SINAD that can be attained with an ADC at a give sample rate and so is also a measure of both linearity and noise performance. ENOB is actually = (SINAD – 1.76)/6.02
In the ADC subsystem used in the RSP, whilst the ADCs are 12 bit at 8 MHz sampling the ENOB is 10.4 (for both I and Q). At lower sample rates, the ENOB improves and gets closer to the idealised performance of the converter.

In a receiver system as a whole, the term dynamic range will generally be interpreted to mean the difference (in dB) between the minimum discernible signal and the maximum level of signal that can be handled. But this is different from the term instantaneous dynamic range, which generally refers to the difference between the minimum discernible signal in the presence of the largest signal that can be handled at the same time. What this ‘number’ is in each case will depend upon the type of signal. So for example, a receiver with a given noise figure and linearity performance will have a different instantaneous dynamic range when receiving a 8 MHz wide 256-QAM CATV signal than when receiving a FM signal that is a few kHz wide. This is simply because the SINR (Signal to Interference + Noise Ratio) requirement for a given BER for a 256-QAM signal is very different than that required for a FM signal and also the peak to average ratio of the two signals is very different.

[/expand]

PCB Photos

Compared to the RSP1 the RSP1A PCB is significantly more populated due to the additional filter banks.

RSP1A PCB Top
RSP1A PCB Bottom
RSP1A PCB Top RSP1A PCB Bottom

Testing the RSP1A

Below we show some screenshots of tests that we made to compare the three RSP units. We focused on bands where the RSP1 or RSP2 had issues, and try to show how much improvement you can get from the RSP1A.

Medium Wave Broadcast AM Band

In the screenshots below we compare the three SDRs on the broadcast AM band which has some very strong signals. The RSP1 definitely shows signals of overloading and turning the gain down did not reduce the interference shown between 0 - 500 kHz. 

The RSP1A on the other hand does not overload that easily. In the third screenshot we turn the MW notch on half way through the waterfall. The notch does not cover the entire AM band and signals at around 500 - 700 kHz are attenuated less. But turning it on does seem to do enough to solve most imaging problems as will be seen in the next tests.

SDRplay RSP1
SDRplay RSP1A
SDRplay RSP1A (MW Filter ON Halfway Through)
SDRplay RSP2
SDRplay RSP1 SDRplay RSP1A SDRplay RSP1A (MW Filter ON Halfway Through) SDRplay RSP2

Continue reading