Maker Pro
Maker Pro

SSB

J

joseph2k

John said:
But there's no such simple sorting scheme. A DSP approximation to a
Hilbert transform will give the proper wideband allpass phase shift,
but it's rather compute intensive, too much for a PIC. But even a
smallish FPGA could do it, and then you may as well do the carrier 90
degree shift and the mixing/summing stuff in there as well.

Somebody must have done the entire SSB chain in VHDL somewhere.

John

Just a guess but try opencore.org
 
J

Joerg

Rich said:
USB, LSB, or center? ;-)

I remember reading about SSB in the 1963 Radio Amateur's Handbook (or was
that "Amateurs'?") and it seems that just an ordinary balanced modulator
and sideband filter was either cheaper or easier than the phase-shift
method.

Not im my ham days (70's and 80's). Even at large hamfests it was next
to impossible to find a crystal filter with decent shape factor for
under $100. But I was able to whip up a good phase shifter for under
$10. Of course that's all different in a production setting since
combining (and finding...) the correct capacitor combinations in my
limited stock took half a day.

Mechanical filters were absolute rarities even back then. You had to
come up with some serious dough to lay your hands on one of those. And
then you still wouldn't know whether it had been damaged. I don't
remember but they exhibited some weird pathologies and really did not
like to be bumped around in a trunk.
 
R

Rich Grise

Not im my ham days (70's and 80's). Even at large hamfests it was next
to impossible to find a crystal filter with decent shape factor for
under $100. But I was able to whip up a good phase shifter for under
$10. Of course that's all different in a production setting since
combining (and finding...) the correct capacitor combinations in my
limited stock took half a day.

Mechanical filters were absolute rarities even back then. You had to
come up with some serious dough to lay your hands on one of those. And
then you still wouldn't know whether it had been damaged. I don't
remember but they exhibited some weird pathologies and really did not
like to be bumped around in a trunk.

Well, maybe it was that those guys could afford Collins gear, so a
$100.00 mechanical filter was a drop in the bucket. ;-)

But I seem to recall seeing them in the Allied catalog for way
less than that, albeit for the era, the price might have been
equivalent to $100.00 at today's prices. :)

And I've _always_ wondered what's inside those 2Q4 plug-in
phase shifters!

Cheers!
Rich
 
M

Michael Black

Rich said:
Well, maybe it was that those guys could afford Collins gear, so a
$100.00 mechanical filter was a drop in the bucket. ;-)
But the manufacturer's cost has never been the retail price.
Over thirty years ago, looking for a crystal filter, I contacted
the local Heathkit outlet to check the price of one for one of
their SSB rigs. You could buy the parts for replacement purposes.
The price I was quoted was a significant percentage of the cost of
the rig itself, which is something fairly constant. So the manufacturers
were getting a good price on filters, be they crystal or mechanical,
because otherwise the rigs would be far costlier.
But I seem to recall seeing them in the Allied catalog for way
less than that, albeit for the era, the price might have been
equivalent to $100.00 at today's prices. :)
I suspect you saw the Japanese made mechanical filters, that were
in the catalogs and showed up in some of the early made in Japan
ham equipment, and from the ads I saw (later) seemed relatively
cheap.

Hams also saw Collins mechanical filters because they appeared on
the surplus market, either by themselves or inside surplus eqipment.
And I've _always_ wondered what's inside those 2Q4 plug-in
phase shifters!
Not much. Something like four capacitors and four resistors.
But then, they weren't wideband, they were intended for voice-bandwidth.
And users could get by with a limited suppression of the unwanted sideband.
It was the relatively early days of SSB for amateur radio, and once they
got rid of the carrier, getting rid of the opposite sideband was icing
on the cake. So they could live with not that great opposite sideband
rejection.

And as I said in a previous post, those phasing networks were mostly
seen in transmitters, where the signal they saw could be limited
by a audio filtering (if the voice itself wasn't actually limited
to 300-3000Hz or so), so the phasing network didn't have to deal with
a wide range of signals.

Amateur SSB was dominated by the phasing method in the early days, because
it was doable. Circa 1947, there wasn't much else, and it was relatively
cheap to get a few matched resistors and capacitors. Unless one started
with LC filters at a very low frequency, and then worried about image
rejection as it was heterodyned up to the desired frequency. But the late
forties or early fifties brought the mechanical filter, so that started
changing things. And then the mid to late fifties, hams caught on that they
could use surplus crystals in the 455KHz range to make crystal lattice
filters. There were a lot of crystals lying around from WWII in that range,
because they'd been multiplied up to a desired frequency, and since they
were in FT-243 holders that could be unscrewed, if the frequency wasn't
quite right, one could always grind the quartz a bit.

I think those proceeded the introduction of commercial crystal filters,
but my memory of the details may be wrong.

Then a few years later, they were able to make useful crystal filters
in the HF range, both by hand and commercially, which bumped things up
a notch.

ONce there were filters, commercial or home made, that put the phasing
networks aside.

It was only in more recent years, I guess it's about twenty now, that
phasing was looked at again seriously. SOlid state helped, since
fancier audio phase shift networks didn't come at the cost of more
bulky tubes.

ANd I suspect even more interest has been driven by digital processing.
SOme have used it for the audio phase shift networks, but it just seemed
as commercial interest rose in that area, it was like a pointer saying
"look at all you can do with phase shift networks".

Michael
 
J

Joerg

Rich said:
Well, maybe it was that those guys could afford Collins gear, so a
$100.00 mechanical filter was a drop in the bucket. ;-)

But I seem to recall seeing them in the Allied catalog for way
less than that, albeit for the era, the price might have been
equivalent to $100.00 at today's prices. :)

This was in Europe where stuff from the US is usually more expensive
than here.

And I've _always_ wondered what's inside those 2Q4 plug-in
phase shifters!

AFAIK it was described in an ARRL Handbook from the early 90's. Don't
remember what the phase error on those B&W shifters was but I believe
over 1%. That would be ok but IMHO not much to write home about. In med
ultrasound we had to do better than that.
 
M

Mark Aitchison

The circuit given (after correcting the top left opamp wiring) if rather
similar to phase shifting circuits used for those old quadraphonic (QS?
SQ??) phase-method 4-channel hifi systems decades ago. It will probably
give a bit of amplitude variation through the audio range, but not too
bad (do a spice simulation to check). Is it for voice or "hifi" audio??

Mark A
 
J

Jan Panteltje

Amateur SSB was dominated by the phasing method in the early days, because
it was doable. Circa 1947, there wasn't much else, and it was relatively
cheap to get a few matched resistors and capacitors. Unless one started
with LC filters at a very low frequency, and then worried about image
rejection as it was heterodyned up to the desired frequency. But the late
forties or early fifties brought the mechanical filter, so that started
changing things. And then the mid to late fifties, hams caught on that they
could use surplus crystals in the 455KHz range to make crystal lattice
filters. There were a lot of crystals lying around from WWII in that range,
because they'd been multiplied up to a desired frequency, and since they
were in FT-243 holders that could be unscrewed, if the frequency wasn't
quite right, one could always grind the quartz a bit.

I think those proceeded the introduction of commercial crystal filters,
but my memory of the details may be wrong.

I build a receiver with the XF9A xtal filer (9MHz) early seventies IIRC.
Those were German made Xtal filters, XF9A and XF9B, and less then a hundered
guilders then (came with upper and lower sideband xtal), so that would have been less
then 25 dollars in those days currency.
These were really good filters.
Several designs with these were published ine the Veron amateur radio bulletin around
that time.
My litte receiver was based on one of those, with 2 JFETS as RF pre, a dual gate MOSFET
as mixer, then the XF9A, a JFET source follower, a CA3028 first IF, then one as
balanced mixer / product detector, and a CA3020 audio 'power' amp .... with a transformer
of course.
And varicap tuning.... JFET LO.

ONce there were filters, commercial or home made, that put the phasing
networks aside.

Exactly, too much drift with ECC85 tubes.... hehe.
 
M

Michael A. Terrell

It doesn't matter. The crystal used for the final mixer determined
the mode, not the filter. Of course, this was a SSB filter, not for AM,
so there is no "Center" frequency. A 6 KHz wider filter was used for AM
reception.

Not im my ham days (70's and 80's). Even at large hamfests it was next
to impossible to find a crystal filter with decent shape factor for
under $100. But I was able to whip up a good phase shifter for under
$10. Of course that's all different in a production setting since
combining (and finding...) the correct capacitor combinations in my
limited stock took half a day.


I paid $20 for it, in the original package at the Dayton hamfest in
the early '80s. There were always a few floating around for sale at a
show that size.

Mechanical filters were absolute rarities even back then. You had to
come up with some serious dough to lay your hands on one of those. And
then you still wouldn't know whether it had been damaged. I don't
remember but they exhibited some weird pathologies and really did not
like to be bumped around in a trunk.


These will mil spec, not those Japanese units sold by Lafayette, and
other importers. BTW, its kind of ironic that one of the first US
companies to import boat loads of early Japanese electronics was put out
of business by cheap imported crap, isn't it? :)


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
 
M

Michael Black

Michael A. Terrell" ([email protected]) said:
It doesn't matter. The crystal used for the final mixer determined
the mode, not the filter. Of course, this was a SSB filter, not for AM,
so there is no "Center" frequency. A 6 KHz wider filter was used for AM
reception.
But he's alluding to the fact that in some cases, one could get matched
sets of mechanical filters, one for upper sideband, the other for lower.
The BFO crystal would be in the middle, and never change.

The tradition is normally to have a single filter and switch the BFO
frequency. And in some cases (maybe many?) the filter passband is
assymetrical, so there's a tradeoff there.

And of course, once you have a USB and LSB filter in place, it doesn't
take much more circuitry to allow for independent sideband, ie transmitting
and receiver both sidebands at the same time, but with different information
on each.

Michael
 
R

Rich Grise

But he's alluding to the fact that in some cases, one could get matched
sets of mechanical filters, one for upper sideband, the other for lower.
The BFO crystal would be in the middle, and never change.

The tradition is normally to have a single filter and switch the BFO
frequency. And in some cases (maybe many?) the filter passband is
assymetrical, so there's a tradeoff there.

And of course, once you have a USB and LSB filter in place, it doesn't
take much more circuitry to allow for independent sideband, ie
transmitting and receiver both sidebands at the same time, but with
different information on each.

Is that the basic idea for "stereo AM"?

Thanks,
Rich
 
J

Joerg

Michael A. Terrell wrote:


[...]
These will mil spec, not those Japanese units sold by Lafayette, and
other importers. BTW, its kind of ironic that one of the first US
companies to import boat loads of early Japanese electronics was put out
of business by cheap imported crap, isn't it? :)
Later Japanese electronics were (and are) really good though. I have
several products from Japan Radio Corporation (JRC) here in the lab. Top
notch workmanship. Their circuit design is IMHO not quite as innovative
as in US products but the mechanical quality is better. Then again after
some not-so-good experiences I am not sure at all that the younger
generation of engineers could live up to the level of design skills of
our retired generation. Academia doesn't seem to breed guys like Bob
Pease or Ulrich Rohde anymore. Heck, most can't even solder when they
are handed their degrees.
 
M

Michael Black

Rich said:
Is that the basic idea for "stereo AM"?
NOt originally.

It was so you could send two channels of information, and the real
user would have been military. Send teletype on one channel, and
voice on the other. IN amateur radio, the only time anyone had
the need to talk about ISB (Independent sideband) was for slow
scan tv (which took 8 seconds to build up the picture), where being
able to talk at the same time as sending the picture made sense. Though,
it was never common, since it either required an ISB transceiver (and
none were commercially made for amateur use, so it would have to be
homemade or bought as military surplus), or two complete
commercial transceivers with suitable splitting and summing between
them and the antennas.

As you might recall, there were various schemes for AM stereo. ONe
of the schemes did use ISB, but it wasn't the one that won out.

Michael
 
J

joseph2k

Michael said:
NOt originally.

It was so you could send two channels of information, and the real
user would have been military. Send teletype on one channel, and
voice on the other. IN amateur radio, the only time anyone had
the need to talk about ISB (Independent sideband) was for slow
scan tv (which took 8 seconds to build up the picture), where being
able to talk at the same time as sending the picture made sense. Though,
it was never common, since it either required an ISB transceiver (and
none were commercially made for amateur use, so it would have to be
homemade or bought as military surplus), or two complete
commercial transceivers with suitable splitting and summing between
them and the antennas.

As you might recall, there were various schemes for AM stereo. ONe
of the schemes did use ISB, but it wasn't the one that won out.

Michael
True but the C-QAM standard ia partially compatable. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AM_stereo
 
J

joseph2k

John said:
If you google "fpga ssb" there's lots of interesting stuff, including
other architectures that look better than classic phasing.

Here's one of many:

http://www.microtelecom.it/ssbdex/ssbdex-e.htm

John

Phooey, and i was going to suggest using direct digital translation using a
Spartan 3. He beat me to it with only a Spartan 2. Well no, he
implemented a digital Weaver system, not the same as direct translation.
 
J

John Larkin

Phooey, and i was going to suggest using direct digital translation using a
Spartan 3. He beat me to it with only a Spartan 2. Well no, he
implemented a digital Weaver system, not the same as direct translation.

What do you mean by direct digital translation?

I suppose that an ideal ssb modulator has some impulse response, so
one could map that directly into a single fir filter, given enough
macs.

John
 
J

joseph2k

John said:
What do you mean by direct digital translation?

I suppose that an ideal ssb modulator has some impulse response, so
one could map that directly into a single fir filter, given enough
macs.

John

By doing directly in time domain the equivalent of successive DFT,
translation up frequency, mirror image elimination, and DFT back to time
domain.
 
J

John Larkin

By doing directly in time domain the equivalent of successive DFT,
translation up frequency, mirror image elimination, and DFT back to time
domain.

But that's a batch process, isn't it? Not suitable for continuous
speech. I think there are "rolling" FFT algorithms... I may even have
one around here somewhere.

John
 
K

Ken Smith

[....]
By doing directly in time domain the equivalent of successive DFT,
translation up frequency, mirror image elimination, and DFT back to time
domain.

But that's a batch process, isn't it? Not suitable for continuous
speech. I think there are "rolling" FFT algorithms... I may even have
one around here somewhere.

It is likely that less processing would be needed to do the phase shifters
as a bunch of IIR filters. A DFT needs a lot of multiply-adds
 
Top