I love the signalink and that is one reason, I always did digital with
another sound card anyway. Some of the MARS digital modes need such a tight
processor clock they require a signalink, or rigblaster pro with the built
in sound card because the majority of internal ones in the computer just
aren't accurate enough. They are for what they do but for some digital mode,
you do see the difference in the accuracy. I would never go back to using
computer internal sound cards for digital modes but I'd never probably spend
the money for a rigblaster pro either. Signalink is more than good enough
for me.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Forst" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: SignaLink USB Versus RIGblaster Pro
> That's interesting. The internal sound card offered by either unit is
> the answer to keeping screen reader audio from going out over the air.
> The internal sound chip in the 590 suits my needs, so my SL USB is
> currently relegated to my 480.
>
> 73, Steve KW3A
>
> On 6/26/2014 1:25 PM, John Miller wrote:
>> The rigblaster pro has an internal sound card, the only one in the
>> rigblaster line that does. I can say being in MARS where digital is very
>> common, it's split 50/50 locally as to who has each unit and some have
>> both
>> to compare and play with and I don't think for most people there is an
>> advantage to the rigblaster over the other one unless there is something
>> very specific you want to do with it the signalink really won't do.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Steve Forst" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 12:47 PM
>> Subject: Re: SignaLink USB Versus RIGblaster Pro
>>
>>
>>> Not sure there is a "correct" answer. What is it that you need/want to
>>> do?
>>>
>>> I think the Pro is about 3 times the price of the SL. The SL has an
>>> internal sound card, and I'm not sure about the Pro, but I don't think
>>> it does.
>>>
>>> The SL has 1 USB cable to the PC and a cable to the ACC jack of the
>>> radio. From what I understand, the Pro has a number of conecctions for
>>> various in's and out's. Things like FSK keying, CW keying, PTT. If
>>> you need these things, great, otherwise just more cost and complexity.
>>>
>>> Again, it all boils down to what you want it for.
>>>
>>> 73, Steve KW3A
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/26/2014 9:48 AM, Richard B McDonald wrote:
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which of these is "better"? I am especially interested in how these
>>>> two
>>>> interfaces differ when used with the Kenwood TS-2000.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>>
>>>> Richard KK6MRH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
|
