[hpsdr] Question re: RX attenuator

[Dr Ulrich Rohde]

Hi , John 

You are correct , the A/D converter noise is 20 dB and the architecture and gain Distribution is key !

Ulrich

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

Am 29.10.2012 um 07:37 schrieb John Marvin <jm-hpsdr at themarvins.org>:

> ***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
> 
> Phil,
> 
> I don't know if I can construct a "totally convincing" argument. I'm a software engineer who dabbles in hardware with just enough knowledge to be dangerous. :)
> I originally thought that I was not overloading the ADC on my Hermes, but then discovered that it was occasionally "going into the red". Enabling the -20 db attenuator eliminated any issues there.  However, Looking at the wideband input, my guess is that I would probably be OK with just 6db of attenuation. So I originally thought the argument was obvious, i.e. I would be unecessarily throwing away 14 db of signal on the low end in order to avoid the distortions introduced by overloading the ADC. But then I looked a little deeper and noticed that the noise figure of the LTC6400-20 is only around 6db, whereas the noise figure of the ADC is much higher (Larry Gadallah was claiming something on the order of 25-30db). So, given that the difference in noise figures is about the same as the attenuation level, theoretically (and I may be completely wrong about this), I'm not losing anything near the noise floor because anything that gets shifted below the noise floor of the LTC6400-20 (which then has a 20db gain) would have been lost by the ADC anyway. Note, I do semi-pro recording as one of my other hobbies, and it just doesn't feel right to attenuate the signal more than necessary to avoid clipping.
> 
> What about people who have levels that still overload the ADC with the -20 db attenuator enabled? If the cause of the problem is known and fixed (i.e. a local high power AM radio station) then the right solution would be to insert an appropriate filter. But if the interference is intermittent or just happens to show up at the wrong time it might be nice to have the option of adding up to another 11 db of attenuation. That would lead to loss of useable signal, but depending on the situation that may be better than having to live with the distortion introduced by overloading the ADC.  It's always nice to have more tools available to solve problems.
> 
> Anyway, perhaps I haven't convinced you. Maybe someone else can make a better argument.  Just out of curiosity, are there any reasons not to do this, other than it takes time away from doing something else that may be more useful? I'm just wondering because some day I'd like to play around with FPGA programming, and this looks like it might be a relatively simple first project.  I may never get to it, and I'm not likely to get to it anytime in the near future, but just wanted to know that if it isn't done by anyone else whether or not the change would be accepted if it was done correctly by me.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> John
> AC0ZG
> 
> On 10/28/2012 4:57 AM, Phil Harman wrote:
>> 
>> It would indeed be possible to implement 1dB attenuation steps over a 31dB range for Hermes.  If you can construct a *totally convincing* argument as to why this is necessary then you are in with a good chance of having it implemented in the future :)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> HPSDR Discussion List
> To post msg: hpsdr at openhpsdr.org
> Subscription help: http://lists.openhpsdr.org/listinfo.cgi/hpsdr-openhpsdr.org
> HPSDR web page: http://openhpsdr.org
> Archives: http://lists.openhpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-openhpsdr.org/

 1351493749.0