Dipping my toes into the blogsphere…73 de NT7S
Hopefully your design is on schedule.
Long story, but the bottom line is people are now picky about who links to their site as it can affect their Google Search status. I’ve had people ask me to not link them — crazy , my site enjoys a top 5 , page 1 Google ranking for the search word “QRP”, but who am I to argue?
I’m now only linking websites by permission. Is it okay if I link your site
Thanks and 73
Hi Todd, I sent you a reply via email, but wasn’t sure if you got it. If not, let me know!
Fine to see that you are still active. I dropped you an email recently but unfortunately did not get a reply.
Is there a chance to get into contact on how to deal with the contents of the qrpedia site I had contributed to?
As I read it is off line at the moment.
All the best regards, 73, Dieter DL2BQD
I came across your blog while searching for info on direct conversion receivers. It’s interesting reading. I’ve been unable to find a path to a list of all you entries other than the left and right “arrows” at the bottom of each blog post. Is there a page with all the links on one page?
Thank you for your work on the Si5351. I hope to follow you.
The jitter on the Si5351 is 10X that of the Si570. I hope you have
an Si570 vfo. The K5BCQ kit is a good economical way to get one.
It would be helpful to measure the noise in your receiver running
first with the Si5351 then with the Si570. Is there a big difference
in the noise?
I looked at your claims about the jitter and from what I can see the difference isn’t quite that stark. The datasheets claim RMS jitter of 0.65 for the Si570 and 3.5 for the Si5351, so about 5x difference.
However, I haven’t seen any measurements of phase noise, which is probably a bit more revealing our our use case. I do have a Si5351A Breakout Board out to KF5OBS so he can do a phase noise measurement, which should be very interesting.
Just from a qualitative perspective, the Si5351 probably won’t be the choice for a high-performance rig (the Si570 sounds great for that with such a low jitter), but I think it will be perfectly fine for a casual-use or portable type rig. I can’t hear an excessive amount of noise in my receiver, and there is a very noticeable difference between having the antenna disconnected and connected.
I’m fairly confident that the Si5351 will be useful in quite a few radio applications.
I can’t find any contact info in the site so forgive me for using the comment section. I’m Algen, I work with engineering website EEWeb.com and would love to do an exchange of website links (with your website: http://nt7s.com/) and feature you as a site of the day on EEWeb (you can see an example here http://www.eeweb.com/websites/multirotor-usa). Is this of interest to you?
Hope to hear from you soon.
Algen Dela Cruz
That sounds interesting! Please contact me at milldrum at gmail dot com with the details.
Jason, I tried to download your paper log pdf but it says it is a bad link and I find nothing in your media directory where the link points. Do you still have the paper log pdf available?
Sorry about that broken link, I’ll try to correct it tomorrow.
Well this is embarrassing. I seem to have totally lost that file in my recent site migration. I don’t have any trace of it in my backup. Sorry about that.
Jason, I recently purchased your Si5351 breakout board from Etherkit. You need to know that the header pins supplied do not fit in the board – pins too large or holes too small. Fortunately I had a strip of pins that DO fit. They are gold plated, with tin plated solder tails. I can send you a photo showing the difference in size. I do not have a micrometer, unfortunately.
Ben Bangerter, K0IKR
I apologize for the problem in getting the header strip to fit correctly into holes on the board. I have not changed the spec of the headers that I use, nor the hole size on the board, so I was surprised to hear of your problem. I double-checked the current headers pins that I have in stock to see if they fit in the current PCB material and they do indeed fit as expected. I suspect there may have been a manufacturing defect with the PCB that you receive, as a random sampling of a few of the PCBs currently in stock here are just fine.
If you’d like to discuss this further or if there something I can do to make it right for you, please email me using the Etherkit contact form and I’ll continue the conversation via email.