I too shall be delving into the world of Dstar with a NW Radio dongle currently on its way.
However, HF SSB is and always will be my preferred method.

My experience with DStar.

To be honest, it is little different than Echolink/IRLP/Allstar, like it or lump it. I need not explain the benefits of the other VOIP's. They all have some merit. Save that DStar provides some assurance from the 21'st Century problem of abusers and those who prefer to spoil our hobby.

The fact is that many of the inner city repeaters are frequently subject to abuse. Paradoxically, DStar is in a way, reminiscent of how it used to be before the idiots who became tired of smashing windows in bus shelters and got their kicks instead causing problems to many users on a repeater, with their cheap imported radio in many cases.

In particular, Ian, G4ZPZ invested a fortune in GB3PZ. I spent countless hours on technically getting PZ up and running. The vulnerability of analogue repeaters are such that in this case it only took one elderly licenced ham with a mental health problem and one permanently drunken unlicensed station to cause the PZ user base to abandon PZ in droves.

Finally, those who churn out the same one sentence criticism of DStar without elaboration do not deserve a reply, similar to those who moaned about SSB v CW years ago. To those who are concerned about DMR or DStar, I ask if you are aware that in many cases in the UK it is possible to talk with both modes through the 'Bridge' kindly provided by Dave M0AUT? This provides an amicable marriage of DMR and DStar users. As you may imagine, it is popular among UK users.

And no, I don't accept that the equipment is too expensive. Take a look at thow much we had to pay in the 1970's for commercial kit or use converted taxi radios (Happy Days) Well in excess of the cost of DMR/DStar kit now.

Try it. You may just like it.

73
Graham
G4HFG / W4HFG

OK.. finally jumped onto the D Star wagon. Not intentionally I might add... I just bought a ID5100 because I wanted a dual band, dual watch radio with a fast scanner... and the price was right.

Well... One thing is immediately obvious to me.. no one seems to be using it as a radio mode in my area. I can leave the radio scanning set to DV for days and it will not stop once. Everyone is using the internet it would seem, which isn't radio and is pointless.

I've done some tests with local stations just to see if it works, and my god.... the sound quality is terrible.


Either I'm doing something incredibly wrong, or you lot are easily pleased.

LOL, best prepare for a shitstorm

Bring it on.

If no one's using it as a radio mode, then it's a load of useless bollocks.

It's the same here.
I checked around, on receive, when I first had the 7100.
It seemed to be all internet linked, not even straight repeater, and terrible audio, even on strong signals.
I've never bothered to TX.

You're not far from me so direct shouldn't be a problem, if you have a Yagi.
We can give it a try if you want.
I'd be interested in doing some more fade margin checks, with a known signal rather than an unknown quantity.
My initial ones seened to indicated FM was more resilient but, since others seem to disagree, I'd like to do further checks.

Cheers

Tony

No beams up at the mo. Nearly bought another one last week, but our local club has a project coming up, so I'll support that, and build one. Tbh... most of my energy is being put into sourcing parts and designing a symmetrical matching unit at the moment, so I can get a decent HF antenna up... but the thought of a lightweight beam and a FT857... and some exercise is starting to look appealing

I must confess I'm disappointed in D-Star... not just the audio, which I'll get into in a moment, but the lack of use as a mode of operation radio to radio. I knew D Star's party trick was connectivity, but I always assumed it was an extra... another feather in it's cap, not its raison d'être! Why would anyone buy a RADIO, then just use it to connect to the internet? Sorry, but baffled by this. I know this is a D Star forum... so it's just an irrelevant comment bound to result in "If you don't like it, sod off" and fair enough... I get that, but why's no one using it via the RADIO??

Now then... audio. I'm sorry... it just sucks, plain and simple. It makes everyone sounds like an underwater robot. It just does. It's not even CLOSE to the quality the same people can produce using FM. To market it as "Crystal clear" audio is bordering on a trade descriptions infringement. I just reckon some people are just suffering from confirmation bias, or they're deaf!

I can't see that it does nothing that couldn't be done with FM.
All the functions could be done with out of band data streams.

Still, each to their own.

Cheers

Tony

Only benefit "radio" wise with DV that I have found it to offer me is that of a cleaner audio when working weaker stations, whereas the background noise of the FM transmission would reduce the signal received. Other than that it has no real benefit for us being a digital communication mode.

The audio quality of DV modes may be viewed differently by different generations.

If you've been brought up in the mobile phone era, you're used to a permanently silent background and the audio quality degrading as signals fade, or there is multi-path.

Those (like myself) who spent their formative years on analogue are used to the noise coming up as the signal fades, but the audio quality degrading. My other half can't make head nor tail of SSB, yet it sounds perfectly fine to me. Maybe that is down to over 40 years of listening to it.

I got into DMR because I thought it was high time I tried something totally new, and I had plenty of locals who were experienced with it. At the outset I really struggled to tolerate the audio, but I seem to be getting more tolerant of it lately. Maybe my tired old brain is becoming used to the 'mobile phone' type of fading effects.

One thing is for sure though (well two actually). Firstly, some peoples voices seem far more suited to the DMR codec than others. I only use DMR to talk to the locals. Some of them sound quite natural, while others sound 'different'. The Motorola 4600 I have allows you to adjust the audio profile on receive. Different people sound better on different settings, but its such a pain using the panel buttons to switch AF profiles I've given up bothering. Its a pity you can't link AF profiles to people in the rig's database list.

Secondly, while some rigs seem to sound better than others, every single person I've spoken to using one of those local 'hotspot' gadgets sounded awful. It hasn't been many so maybe I've been unlucky.

Well it's not pointless bollocks and if it is why have so many radios been sold with the option of dstar or fusion? It is not for everyone and I agree some audio is terrible but I generally find most conversations satisfactory.
Tell you what it beats listening the white noise on vhf and uhf
I see it as a nice little add on to the rest of my radio tinkering, horses for courses I guess.

Wot Mark said ^^^

I had DStar for ages. Using RF it was completely dead apart from the odd bit here and there on GB3RF.

It would appear it's all on the internet... and that's not radio, so not for me I'm afraid. I flogged the radio.

Why does no one use it over the radio?

Because sometimes RF is a no go from a location due to electrical smog and it's the only thing left that is remotely amateur radio.

Which would explain why SOME never use it via RF, but it doesn't explain the almost total lack of RF based DStar or Fusion... repeaters aside. I just think it's a shame is all. It seems the default position is internet use, not radio.

After all, the description of this forum is "Interested in Digital Radio? General Digital Radio Tips and advice"... Not Internet Radio. DV is just a mode. One that would be interesting is was more widely used over the radio.