Hamscope 1.2 Reviewed]

[Andre' Kesteloot]

"Andrew J. O'Brien" wrote:

> Hamscope 1.2 Reviewed
> By Andy KB2EOQ
> (this review may be distributed without restriction)
>
> Well, with the CCCC Millennium Multi Digital Mode contest taking place New
> Years Day , what better way to test out KD5HIO's Hamscope.   Hamscope,
> available at http://users.mesatop.com/~ghansen/ , is the latest entry into
> the vibrant Windows based ,soundcard driven , digital radio world.  As the
> most recent entry , the author has found time to incorporate many varying
> digital modes all into one software package.  Most digital software these
> days includes PSK31 and RTTY (TrueTTY, Zakanaka, et al) but Hamscope is only
> rivaled by MixW in the choice of modes that one can select.
>
> Available modes are
>
> BPSK31
> QPSK31
> RTTY
> ASCII7
> ASCII8
> MFSK16
> HFSK16
> CW
>
> Missing are the increasingly popular Throb, the much advocated MTTY, ye olde
> PACKET, MT63,  PACTOR, CLOVER, and the altered versions of PSK and MFSK
> (PSK63/125 and MFSK8/4).  However,  Hamscope is a very full featured program
> and a welcome  addition to the digital ham's repertoire.
>
> Installing Hamscope
>
> Hamscope installed on my AMD K2 500 PC with 64 megs of memory without any
> problems.  Within seconds of  executing the install program,  I had a very
> carefully thought out screen displaying RTTY, PSK31, and MFSK without any
> problems.  The macros are nicely laid out and easy to edit.  They are
> essentially the same in appearance to those in Digipan.  You have 36 macros
> to choose from but . unlike Zakanaka,  not all can be displayed at the same
> time.  Hamscope, like Digipan, requires that you click an arrow to see the
> next bank of macros.
>
> As mentioned earlier, MixW is the only program that has as many modes as
> Hamscope.  However Hamscope is vastly superior to MixW in terms of
> appearance and the general feel of the program.  MixW generally performs
> well (although RTTY is mediocre) but it's help files are very disjointed and
> have caused many a ham to feel frustrated. Hamscope on the other hand,  is
> most pleasing to the eye, and the intuitive computer user will find
> themselves operating the digital world with hardly any need to consult the
> help files.
>
> Okay, so how well does it perform?  I tried CW, MFSK, BPSK31, and RTTY and
> had  generally positive results.
>
> CW works well and I could see no appreciable difference between MixW and
> Hamscope's ability to copy CW.  My unscientific tests indicate the CWGet out
> performs Hamscope and MixW in weak CW conditions,  but no software copies
> weak signal CW very well. .   Hamscope nicely displays both the transmitted
> CW speed as well as the receive speed.   I have sometimes found that CW
> copying software has difficulty with high speed CW but Hamscope copied
> KM5HT's 40 WPM code without problems.  Copying CW was as simple as clicking
> on the vertical trail in the waterfall or on the spectrum display.   The
> word length , dash length and noise threshold can all be easily  changed in
> Hamscope's set-up area.  I did note that there is a noticeable delay from
> when your brain hears  a CW character to when it actually is printed on the
> screen.  At average speed CW, the printed text is usually a character behind
> what has actually been sent.  While this may seem understandable in that the
> computer has to process the received signal, it appears more noticeable on
> Hamscope that other CW packages.
>
> MFSK16:  I really like Hamscope's MFSK.  I have been a STREAM users since
> MFSK's birth but have found the horizontal waterfall in Stream difficult to
> get comfortable with.  It is no doubt psychological, but I found that
> Hamscope's vertical waterfall for MFSK very easy to handle.  The AFC does a
> good job of locking on to a MFSK16 signal , although it does so rather
> slowly...you can see it edging up the band like  someone doing the
> breaststroke.   Missing are the Clock Alignment , Bit Shape, and Phase Scope
> display that Stream provides .  I was unable to determine any performance
> difference with Hamscope of Stream, both had the same  copying abilities ,
> but Hamscope's waterfall had me tuning them in quicker.
>
> PSK31:  AE4JY's core is used for PSK31 just like it appears to be in every
> other PSk31 program these days.  Hence the basic PSK31 performance should be
> the same. The AFC was again a little jerky but it did its job well by
> locking on to PSK31 signals that were nearby.  If between two signals, one
> strong and one weak, the AFC sought out the stronger one each time.  There
> is no tuning or phase scope like the ones you can find in Zakanaka or
> PSK31SBW, I still find such tuning aides useful.   As far as I can determine
> there is no ability to copy more that one PSk31 signal simultaneously,
> Digipan, WinWarbler, Zakanaka and other all have multi-receive capability.
> Hamscope also lacks some of the bells and whistles that Digipan has (search
> feature) and also lacks some of the fancy tricks that Zakanaka's macros can
> perform (rig QSY, passband centering. logging inserts and more).  Overall it
> performed well.
>
> RTTY:  This the mode that I had the most difficulty with.  The first thing I
> noticed was that it appears to default to a setting that requires RTTY to be
> tuned in USB if you want to be able to copy signals.  .  Hamscope displayed
> the RTTY signal very nicely on the spectral or waterfall displays and the
> AFC appears to track nicely,  but I had problems copying even quite strong
> signals. There is no tuning scope like that in MMTTY or Zakanaka.  One S3
> signal on 10 meters would not display any intelligible signals at all but a
> quick flip to Zakanaka with MMTTY's RTTY engine and I was copying the same
> signal,an HB9 station,  CQing with 100% copy.  Hamscope provides the RTTY
> user with a couple of FEC possibilities but I did not attempt to use these
> features.  It certainly does not have the advanced filtering capabilities
> that MMTTY and Zakanaka provides the RTTY users.  I don't anticipate any
> RITTY users giving up that DOS based program for this either.  Perhaps I
> chose a bad day, the HF bands were down quite a bit but Hamscope's weak
> signal RTTY was way below the competition.
>
> Logging:  Hamscope has an ability to interface with YPLOG.  This feature was
> not tested.
>
> Overall:
> A VERY NICE program.  If RTTY performs for you better than it did for me,
> then I would say it is an EXCELLENT program.  The $50.00 to register the
> program (and unlock some of the PTT and Radio PTT features) may seem a
> little steep to those used to the free versions of Digipan, WinPsk
> WinWarbler, Zakanaka, Stream , Logger, and MMTTY.  However if you want them
> all in one package, the $50.00 may be worth it. Hamscope performs as well as
> TrueTTY and MixW which also cost money but Hamscope certainly looks better
> than those two programs.  MixW 2.0 is in beta testing and it may well be
> that MixW will have enough improvements to cause the ham to have much
> difficulty in deciding which program to get.
>
> Please fee free to comment on this article.
> 73 de Andy KB2EOQ
> www.kb2eoq.com
> obriena@&netsync.net
>
> Note:  KB2EOQ is on the Zakanaka and MMTTY help writing teams, some
> conflicts of interest are acknowledged.
> _______________________________________________
> Psk31 WWW Site at http://aintel.bi.ehu.es/psk31.html
> Psk31 list info at: http://aintel.bi.ehu.es/mailman/listinfo/psk31