SDRs are used for military purpose to track drones. For instance, you need to get a notice if some FPV appears in 2-3 kilometers from your position. Using SDR you could also catch video from analog FPV drone to understand where it is flying from and to. FPV drones are using 1.1GHz+ frequencies for video channels. Video channel is usually having a wide bandwidth, up to 20MHz. That is why Fobos SDR is looking great (based on specification) for this purpose, because it has 50MHz bandwidth supported, which is much better than any other cheap SDRs. However, I am not a civilian radio amateur, so I could not tell if Fobos SDR is great for civil purposes.
I think your original video is fair and you approached the device as I, as an amateur radio enthusiast, would have. Given the marketing and specification information that seems to have been a fair and logical approach. Given the information you've been given as an update it's clear this wouldn't be an ideal device for me. This is good to know as I'm a HUGE fan of the rig expert HF analysers. While I'm glad that they've provided this extra information I'm a little bit irked by some of their response as I think much of the issues seem to have stemmed from incomplete and potentially misleading information in the marketing for this very new product. I think you cover this briefly in the video. It sounds from your update that this is an impressive bit of kit but it's important to note the limitations and considerations Vs other products commonly used by amateurs. Even the answer to your question about the audience seems strange to me to be honest in light of some of the later info. Anyway, thanks for making both videos. Very interesting and useful even though I know neither are the sort of content you generally like to make. Given my previously overwhelming positive experience with Rig Expert gear I am hoping that in future they may release a more amateur/HF based product that I would find useful.
Name the comparable SDR? The HackRF is only 32MHz sample rate. The BladeRF is over $500 (way more with a good enclosure), and Ettus gear is much more expensive than that. The LimeSDR only goes to 3.8GHz. Since certain nation state purchasers are happy with the Fobos, I think we can guess that it's the sweet spot for particular applications. Personally, I think it would be fun to add to my cadre of SDRs just for the direct sampling feature. I'm not afraid to add stages in front to compensate for the drawbacks of shere unmitigated power :-).
Good that you give YOUR review of this radio. Because i hate revieuws from people who gets the radio from the vendor or they do a review and get payed by the vendor.
Thank you for the original video, as well as this follow-up. Props to RigExpert for getting back to you in the spirit that they have, it does highlight that they are still "good people" (unlike some other extremely litigious non-ham companies that sells re-badged consumer electronics and dodgy LFP batteries). The fact that they are responding to you directly instead of their solicitor speaks volumes of their integrity. Brilliant, props to all. Regarding the Fobos, this seems to be a very focused product, probably better suited to scientific and military needs rather than general "ham-handed radio enthusiasts" like myself. It's good that there are items like this, I would certainly be looking at something like this further down the road as my radio hobby progresses. Regarding the price of approx £430, this might seem like a lot to some, but keep in mind that high-precision radio equipment can cost many times this amount. Therefore I would say it's fairly priced in my humble opinion, so no criticism from me in this respect. 73, Jan (M7HNK)
LOL, "it's not a full featured HF receiver" while the sales literature just list it as a HF+ VHF/UHF receiver. Come on RigExpert. Just admit it, you blew it on the HF receiver side. I was going to buy one of these because it included HF with the higher frequency coverage but once I saw it's rather dismal performance on HF I decided to pass. If it's not designed to be a HF receiver then DON'T ADVERTISE IT AS ONE! Mike KC3OSD
This is my recent experience with RigExpert. They’re trying hard, but failing to meet consumer expectations. I believe there are legitimate reasons for this, but at the end of the day this shouldn’t have been marketed the way it was and RigExpert is going to refuse to take responsibility.
It still looks like an interesting option for people who are interested in receiving L and S band satellites with that large bandwidth and bit depth. For these applications you have to use narrow band filters anyway. Even from the block diagram it is apparent that the direct sampling HF branch is more of an afterthought.
This looks like an excellent product, I have been into SDR's for 15 years and a EMC technician using high spec spectrum analysers. I think most of the HF problems can be solved with an antenna tuner rather than pass or stop filters as it will reduce other signals from out of band
@@g5vu Not really, you switch the antenna tuner out if you are just scanning the band, if you see an interesting signal you can then switch it in to confirm its not a harmonic
An interesting video. As is often the case, the real problem is in the marketing department. Perhaps try comparing with your pluto plus, it has the same weaknesses with respect to filtering. So does the Ettus USRP. It is a common problem and it really needs someone to come up with an affordable tracking filter bank. Lime did one, the Lime-RFE but it was quite costly, probably because it covered transmit. There latest model is great, but not in the realm of amateur budgets. If you wanted a great SDR, then the CloudIQ would be a good choice, but RF space don't seem to be making them any more. The reason for the 25MHz limitation at HF is because there is only one ADC being used. Just I or just Q, not I and Q. If you were using both in IQ mode it would go to 50 MHz but it doesn't really matter if you are not interested above 25 MHz. Providing baseband access is a good thing, many applications besides radio, just don't sell it as an HF receiver. The blockiness in the waterfall is sort of from the sampling. It is software related. Basically FFT size. The bandwidth you see on the display depends on both sample rate and FFT size. Actually the ratio, so if you are sampling at 50 MHz and your FFT size is say 65,536, each block on the display will represent 381Hz of spectrum - well not quite, but you get the idea. You can focus down with appropriate digital down conversion and decimation rather than zoom into one huge bandwidth.
I wonder how other wide-band, direct-to-ADC HF SDRs like KiwiSDR, RX888 solve the signal mirroring issue. The low sensitivity is just a matter of including a suitable preamp, it was an odd marketing decision not to include one.
Those sdr's use software or fpga to calculate the IQ signal. Using a Hilbert transform. But this halfs your samplerate. So 50 MHz becomes 25 MHz max or 80 MHz becomes max 40 MHz. This also how the radioberry does it for 120 euro 😊
@@hg-sx5nk Well, it seems that the schematics for the KiwiSDR are public... At the antenna input, there are a few components for protection against static electricity and similar, then, there's a low-pass filter with nominal cut-off frequency of 30 MHz, which acts as anti-aliasing filter. After the low-pass filter, there's an amplifier, which produces differential output. After the amplifier, there's another low-pass filter with 40 MHz cut-off frequency, and after that, we have the input into the ADC. Then, there's a 66.666 MHz clock source for the ADC, and I assume (I don't have the energy to read ADC's datasheet in detail), that the sampling frequency is them also 66 MSPS. The edge of the first Nyquist zone then would be at 33.333 MHz, and this would give us 3 MHz for the transition zone of the anti-aliasing filter, before we get into the aliasing territory. It also seems that they might be overclocking the ADC a bit, since the LTC2248 has maximum official sampling rate of 65 MSPS.
50 Mhz "instantaneous band" means "50 mhz of bandwidth in wide-band IF/PAN/SDR-waterfalls"? If so then by nyquist and other sampling rules, a higher sample rate and a very fast througput (USB 3.x latest probably) may be required. I think the company could use more English-native speakers who are RF-experts and or Hams to help with their write-ups.
Perhaps they're applying some ANR to the voice signal in the µSDR software? [11:00] or thereabouts. Good video from you the first time and this time - and I would say that they tried to gently respond to you, although perhaps they didn't watch your full video to see your approach as a naïve user? In my head, Rigexpert makes some good kit, so I was surprised at your test results, especially given the price. I hope that this turns out with good results for everyone: you, the community, and them.
I have a hunch that the "military use" involved HF1 and HF2 inputs from other equipment, not necessarily an antenna. FWIW, if you do use it for HF on your own antennas, use your own LNAs and proper lowpass filters. That aliasing won't happen with effective filtering before the ADC.
SDR++ is working correctly. Remember, with a sampling rate of 50 MHz, and desired signals in the first Nyquist zone, you get signals up through 25 MHz. If you set SDR++ to show spectrum up to 50 MHz, it cannot mathematically distnguish whether the data is the "real" or "mirriored" signals seen in the video. It is like solving a square root: for 4, is the answer 2 or -2? It is both...
So what are you supposed to compare this to? How does it compare to say a HackRF One? That also goes to 6 GHz. But it can transmit and it's 1/3-1/4 the price of the Fobos. It can only do 20 Mhz bandwidth vs 50 Mhz here, but if it's cleaner..
I offer the suggestion to specify more completely what type of spurious signals you are sering on these SDRs. There is a big difference in causes: some due to _saturation_ of the input, and others due to _aliasing_ . It is essential to use sufficient RF filtering to attenuate signals which might otherwise cause aliasing interference.
Although they were polite this time I don't think they have given a convincing defense of their product that justifies its cost. Would not buy this knowing that I would need to spend endless hours messing with add on filters to get rid of Taylor Swift breaking through all over the place! Cheers M7JZW.
I'll wait for version 2 with the appropriate filtering and attenuation on the input. Or possibly a smart competitor will learn from this and come with a better product? External filtering / attenuation is a big burden, alleviating the benefits of small electronics design. 73 from F4LBH
I know it's easily accessible information, but I do wish you'd covered the cost and ship times as well. Also, "It's not really for HF" is a really strange thing to say, because it has not one but two specific HF antenna hookups. If it's not great for HF, why do those even exist? It feels like backpedaling to say that the receiver isn't designed for HF, because looking at the thing I'd get the expectation that it's fantastic for that use. They need to remove both of the dedicated HF ports and add a high pass filter and just not include HF in the feature set, if HF doesn't work well.
I rarely cover costs in my videos, purely because RUclips shows my videos in many countries and the cost can be different depending on exchange rates etc. also, it’s easy to find your local supplier to find out costs and shipping times.
I agree with question number 3. I bet that most people in the general market want a SDR that is low band through UHF with good to excellent performance. Under my opinion I dont see many folks who care above 2000 mhz. I monitor everything from medium wave to 1090 mhz. At the advertised price I am not impressed.
Their responses basically read to me as "it's actually not a complete radio receiver, it's basically just a downconverter (LO+mixer) and sampler/ADC; all other parts (filters, attenuators, etc) need to be added externally"...
I agree with you. I would assume it would be a competitor of sdrplay, but if it only has uhf and super limited hf support, it’s useless for me as I only do HF. Misleading, and seriously poor marketing from a company that in the past has produced very solid products. And the price… Geez!
£100 yes I would purchase it, but over £400, not a chance. The developers should actually engage will highly informative HAMS, some have so much knowledge both professional technical and hobbyist.
It's a question of what expectations are being set. When I see "General Purpose SDR Receiver" (as written on the case), I think "appliance". And I'd assume it's suitable for that purpose as a "receiver". It seems like the reality is that this is "test equipment" if it requires external filters, attenuators and other manual configuration for some particular situation. That's not necessarily good or bad in and of itself, but a potential disappointment when expectations and function are not matching. Perhaps if "HF1" and "HF2" were labeled differently and conveyed as "don't connect this directly to an antenna", there would be less surprise and/or disappointment?
RigExpert just needs to admit to themselves that they designed a product that isn't what people are expecting and doesn't perform like every other SDR. They got so close and completely blew it. I would never buy one of these, especially at whatever the price point is - if it's too high to mention in either of the videos, it's too high! "If you have to ask, you can't afford it."
This seems to fit a small audience,it's a poor design for lower frequencies and tries to catch a SDR owners . It would have been better to narrow down the specs and sell to that particular demographic.
Er... No thanks RigExpert... your antenna analysers work great, but not so much your SDRs... Back to the drawing board for you, and make sure you list the capabilities properly in the marketing/specs time! 😂
They offer the same sampling of SDRplay without the benefit of their support for HF users. Hard pass for Ham Radio users and a big fail for Rig Expert trying to pass off a pigs ear as a shiny new SDR. LIKELY we will see a chinese knockoff by Christmas for $69.95 on Alliexpress 😅😂
SDRs are used for military purpose to track drones. For instance, you need to get a notice if some FPV appears in 2-3 kilometers from your position. Using SDR you could also catch video from analog FPV drone to understand where it is flying from and to. FPV drones are using 1.1GHz+ frequencies for video channels. Video channel is usually having a wide bandwidth, up to 20MHz. That is why Fobos SDR is looking great (based on specification) for this purpose, because it has 50MHz bandwidth supported, which is much better than any other cheap SDRs. However, I am not a civilian radio amateur, so I could not tell if Fobos SDR is great for civil purposes.
Thats awesome, but it should be marketed as such, not as a general SDR receiver as it was.
Hi, your idea and the importance of broadband on a budget will not be clear to everyone.
Good work Mat. We need guys like you to keep companies honest.
The dude praises malahit, which is belarussian.
Well done Mat. A mature and considered response.
Your review was honest and informative. As said many decades ago ; “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!”
I think your original video is fair and you approached the device as I, as an amateur radio enthusiast, would have. Given the marketing and specification information that seems to have been a fair and logical approach.
Given the information you've been given as an update it's clear this wouldn't be an ideal device for me. This is good to know as I'm a HUGE fan of the rig expert HF analysers. While I'm glad that they've provided this extra information I'm a little bit irked by some of their response as I think much of the issues seem to have stemmed from incomplete and potentially misleading information in the marketing for this very new product. I think you cover this briefly in the video.
It sounds from your update that this is an impressive bit of kit but it's important to note the limitations and considerations Vs other products commonly used by amateurs. Even the answer to your question about the audience seems strange to me to be honest in light of some of the later info.
Anyway, thanks for making both videos. Very interesting and useful even though I know neither are the sort of content you generally like to make. Given my previously overwhelming positive experience with Rig Expert gear I am hoping that in future they may release a more amateur/HF based product that I would find useful.
I wish the main stream media was as honest as you are. It would be a better world.
Thanks 🙏
why spend $400 when you can get a comparable sdr for cheaper with the same challenges to overcome, rigexpert flopped on this one
Name the comparable SDR? The HackRF is only 32MHz sample rate. The BladeRF is over $500 (way more with a good enclosure), and Ettus gear is much more expensive than that. The LimeSDR only goes to 3.8GHz. Since certain nation state purchasers are happy with the Fobos, I think we can guess that it's the sweet spot for particular applications. Personally, I think it would be fun to add to my cadre of SDRs just for the direct sampling feature. I'm not afraid to add stages in front to compensate for the drawbacks of shere unmitigated power :-).
£429.95 no thank you very much !!!!!
Good that you give YOUR review of this radio. Because i hate revieuws from people who gets the radio from the vendor or they do a review and get payed by the vendor.
Thank you for the original video, as well as this follow-up. Props to RigExpert for getting back to you in the spirit that they have, it does highlight that they are still "good people" (unlike some other extremely litigious non-ham companies that sells re-badged consumer electronics and dodgy LFP batteries). The fact that they are responding to you directly instead of their solicitor speaks volumes of their integrity. Brilliant, props to all. Regarding the Fobos, this seems to be a very focused product, probably better suited to scientific and military needs rather than general "ham-handed radio enthusiasts" like myself. It's good that there are items like this, I would certainly be looking at something like this further down the road as my radio hobby progresses. Regarding the price of approx £430, this might seem like a lot to some, but keep in mind that high-precision radio equipment can cost many times this amount. Therefore I would say it's fairly priced in my humble opinion, so no criticism from me in this respect. 73, Jan (M7HNK)
Fobos could be aimed at detection of drones and UAV control signals.
LOL, "it's not a full featured HF receiver" while the sales literature just list it as a HF+ VHF/UHF receiver. Come on RigExpert. Just admit it, you blew it on the HF receiver side. I was going to buy one of these because it included HF with the higher frequency coverage but once I saw it's rather dismal performance on HF I decided to pass. If it's not designed to be a HF receiver then DON'T ADVERTISE IT AS ONE! Mike KC3OSD
I suspect the UAF are using it for Drone Warfare Applications
This is my recent experience with RigExpert. They’re trying hard, but failing to meet consumer expectations. I believe there are legitimate reasons for this, but at the end of the day this shouldn’t have been marketed the way it was and RigExpert is going to refuse to take responsibility.
It's clearly a niche product, they just need better clarity in their marketing materials.
It still looks like an interesting option for people who are interested in receiving L and S band satellites with that large bandwidth and bit depth. For these applications you have to use narrow band filters anyway. Even from the block diagram it is apparent that the direct sampling HF branch is more of an afterthought.
This looks like an excellent product, I have been into SDR's for 15 years and a EMC technician using high spec spectrum analysers. I think most of the HF problems can be solved with an antenna tuner rather than pass or stop filters as it will reduce other signals from out of band
Antenna Tuner? Isn't that rather negating the point of an SDR, the ability to look at a swathe of spectrum?
@@g5vu Not really, you switch the antenna tuner out if you are just scanning the band, if you see an interesting signal you can then switch it in to confirm its not a harmonic
Thanks for the update!
An interesting video. As is often the case, the real problem is in the marketing department.
Perhaps try comparing with your pluto plus, it has the same weaknesses with respect to filtering. So does the Ettus USRP. It is a common problem and it really needs someone to come up with an affordable tracking filter bank. Lime did one, the Lime-RFE but it was quite costly, probably because it covered transmit. There latest model is great, but not in the realm of amateur budgets. If you wanted a great SDR, then the CloudIQ would be a good choice, but RF space don't seem to be making them any more.
The reason for the 25MHz limitation at HF is because there is only one ADC being used. Just I or just Q, not I and Q. If you were using both in IQ mode it would go to 50 MHz but it doesn't really matter if you are not interested above 25 MHz. Providing baseband access is a good thing, many applications besides radio, just don't sell it as an HF receiver.
The blockiness in the waterfall is sort of from the sampling. It is software related. Basically FFT size. The bandwidth you see on the display depends on both sample rate and FFT size. Actually the ratio, so if you are sampling at 50 MHz and your FFT size is say 65,536, each block on the display will represent 381Hz of spectrum - well not quite, but you get the idea. You can focus down with appropriate digital down conversion and decimation rather than zoom into one huge bandwidth.
I wonder how other wide-band, direct-to-ADC HF SDRs like KiwiSDR, RX888 solve the signal mirroring issue.
The low sensitivity is just a matter of including a suitable preamp, it was an odd marketing decision not to include one.
Those sdr's use software or fpga to calculate the IQ signal. Using a Hilbert transform. But this halfs your samplerate. So 50 MHz becomes 25 MHz max or 80 MHz becomes max 40 MHz. This also how the radioberry does it for 120 euro 😊
@@hg-sx5nk Well, it seems that the schematics for the KiwiSDR are public...
At the antenna input, there are a few components for protection against static electricity and similar, then, there's a low-pass filter with nominal cut-off frequency of 30 MHz, which acts as anti-aliasing filter.
After the low-pass filter, there's an amplifier, which produces differential output. After the amplifier, there's another low-pass filter with 40 MHz cut-off frequency, and after that, we have the input into the ADC.
Then, there's a 66.666 MHz clock source for the ADC, and I assume (I don't have the energy to read ADC's datasheet in detail), that the sampling frequency is them also 66 MSPS. The edge of the first Nyquist zone then would be at 33.333 MHz, and this would give us 3 MHz for the transition zone of the anti-aliasing filter, before we get into the aliasing territory. It also seems that they might be overclocking the ADC a bit, since the LTC2248 has maximum official sampling rate of 65 MSPS.
I think most of us agree with your review of this product.
There are so much better options than this SDR for ham radio and dx-listening
I will stick to my SDRplay thank you.
50 Mhz "instantaneous band" means "50 mhz of bandwidth in wide-band IF/PAN/SDR-waterfalls"? If so then by nyquist and other sampling rules, a higher sample rate and a very fast througput (USB 3.x latest probably) may be required. I think the company could use more English-native speakers who are RF-experts and or Hams to help with their write-ups.
Perhaps they're applying some ANR to the voice signal in the µSDR software? [11:00] or thereabouts. Good video from you the first time and this time - and I would say that they tried to gently respond to you, although perhaps they didn't watch your full video to see your approach as a naïve user? In my head, Rigexpert makes some good kit, so I was surprised at your test results, especially given the price. I hope that this turns out with good results for everyone: you, the community, and them.
I have a hunch that the "military use" involved HF1 and HF2 inputs from other equipment, not necessarily an antenna. FWIW, if you do use it for HF on your own antennas, use your own LNAs and proper lowpass filters. That aliasing won't happen with effective filtering before the ADC.
SDR++ is working correctly. Remember, with a sampling rate of 50 MHz, and desired signals in the first Nyquist zone, you get signals up through 25 MHz.
If you set SDR++ to show spectrum up to 50 MHz, it cannot mathematically distnguish whether the data is the "real" or "mirriored" signals seen in the video. It is like solving a square root: for 4, is the answer 2 or -2? It is both...
Don't know about you all, but to see "It's not really for HF" & the Fobos literally has 2 HF antenna ports is somewhat bizarre...
A good video. Much respect.
I could see this being useful for monitoring trunked systems.
So what are you supposed to compare this to? How does it compare to say a HackRF One? That also goes to 6 GHz. But it can transmit and it's 1/3-1/4 the price of the Fobos. It can only do 20 Mhz bandwidth vs 50 Mhz here, but if it's cleaner..
I have the same question. Another candidate to compare is Pluto, which doesn’t even allow to tune to HF. Isn’t this product is in its own class?
I offer the suggestion to specify more completely what type of spurious signals you are sering on these SDRs. There is a big difference in causes: some due to _saturation_ of the input, and others due to _aliasing_ . It is essential to use sufficient RF filtering to attenuate signals which might otherwise cause aliasing interference.
Although they were polite this time I don't think they have given a convincing defense of their product that justifies its cost. Would not buy this knowing that I would need to spend endless hours messing with add on filters to get rid of Taylor Swift breaking through all over the place! Cheers M7JZW.
Agree!
Thank you for an honest review.
I'll wait for version 2 with the appropriate filtering and attenuation on the input. Or possibly a smart competitor will learn from this and come with a better product? External filtering / attenuation is a big burden, alleviating the benefits of small electronics design. 73 from F4LBH
Red Pitaya are about to release.
Ouch ! I like the coverage at the top end, but seeing their response to video one tells me to watch and wait..
It has not one, but two, hf antenna ports but it's not 'really' for hf?
You should make a little radio scanner that can do all the bands and DMR and the P25 and do recording and also transmit for GMRS thank you
I know it's easily accessible information, but I do wish you'd covered the cost and ship times as well.
Also, "It's not really for HF" is a really strange thing to say, because it has not one but two specific HF antenna hookups. If it's not great for HF, why do those even exist? It feels like backpedaling to say that the receiver isn't designed for HF, because looking at the thing I'd get the expectation that it's fantastic for that use. They need to remove both of the dedicated HF ports and add a high pass filter and just not include HF in the feature set, if HF doesn't work well.
I rarely cover costs in my videos, purely because RUclips shows my videos in many countries and the cost can be different depending on exchange rates etc. also, it’s easy to find your local supplier to find out costs and shipping times.
Another example of marketing "the colouring in department " taking charge of development. They only hear key words in the meetings.
I agree with question number 3. I bet that most people in the general market want a SDR that is low band through UHF with good to excellent performance. Under my opinion I dont see many folks who care above 2000 mhz. I monitor everything from medium wave to 1090 mhz. At the advertised price I am not impressed.
Their responses basically read to me as "it's actually not a complete radio receiver, it's basically just a downconverter (LO+mixer) and sampler/ADC; all other parts (filters, attenuators, etc) need to be added externally"...
As long as I can hear Andy G0SUM QRP station & the big AWV station of an afternoon I’ll be happy.
Sending love to Svetlana’s in the Ukraine
I agree with you. I would assume it would be a competitor of sdrplay, but if it only has uhf and super limited hf support, it’s useless for me as I only do HF. Misleading, and seriously poor marketing from a company that in the past has produced very solid products. And the price… Geez!
£100 yes I would purchase it, but over £400, not a chance. The developers should actually engage will highly informative HAMS, some have so much knowledge both professional technical and hobbyist.
"We built it for a specific military use, and it's priced as such. But it CAN be used for other stuff." Yeah, still slimy marketing. I'll pass.
Oh my... RigExpert are not having a good day do they... Grasping at straws...
I would not be a subscriber here if I did not trust your review. With that said, I will not buy based on your review.
Ukrainians use them for drone detection.
It's a question of what expectations are being set. When I see "General Purpose SDR Receiver" (as written on the case), I think "appliance". And I'd assume it's suitable for that purpose as a "receiver". It seems like the reality is that this is "test equipment" if it requires external filters, attenuators and other manual configuration for some particular situation. That's not necessarily good or bad in and of itself, but a potential disappointment when expectations and function are not matching.
Perhaps if "HF1" and "HF2" were labeled differently and conveyed as "don't connect this directly to an antenna", there would be less surprise and/or disappointment?
RigExpert just needs to admit to themselves that they designed a product that isn't what people are expecting and doesn't perform like every other SDR. They got so close and completely blew it. I would never buy one of these, especially at whatever the price point is - if it's too high to mention in either of the videos, it's too high! "If you have to ask, you can't afford it."
I wouldn't pay £400 for that.
This seems to fit a small audience,it's a poor design for lower frequencies and tries to catch a SDR owners . It would have been better to narrow down the specs and sell to that particular demographic.
you need more fft
It was at maximum setting...
So buy a expensive SDR reciever, so you can spend even more on seperate filters? Nah.
Who are Rig Expert? It is clear that the authors are not native English speakers.
no more RE products for me
Why the Ukrainian flag at the background?
RigExpert are definetely not experts in this case - they have failed big time no matter the price tag...!!!
Er... No thanks RigExpert... your antenna analysers work great, but not so much your SDRs... Back to the drawing board for you, and make sure you list the capabilities properly in the marketing/specs time! 😂
They offer the same sampling of SDRplay without the benefit of their support for HF users. Hard pass for Ham Radio users and a big fail for Rig Expert trying to pass off a pigs ear as a shiny new SDR. LIKELY we will see a chinese knockoff by Christmas for $69.95 on Alliexpress 😅😂