WARNING!! This is a partly-baked post. :)
An discussion taking place in the LinkedIn Amateur Radio Enthusiast group is attempting to answer the question, “EchoLink or D-STAR?” These are, of course, two quite different technologies, but it got me to thinking about how people choose technologies like this, why there are a number of differing systems out there for amateur radio communication over the Internet, and what constitutes “success.”
With that in mind, I’m just going to throw out a couple of ideas:
- If the measure of success is the number of users, then EchoLink would seem to win hands down. Just as I was collecting my thoughts, I had a chat with Ralph, AA8RK, on a local repeater (W8UM-R on EchoLink, btw). When he got home, he did some legwork and discovered that there were more than 5,500 users and repeaters linked to EchoLink and not quite 1,800 repeaters linked to IRLP. Does that make EchoLink more successful than IRLP?
- Someone in the discussion on LinkedIn noted, “As of today there are 511 [D-STAR] repeaters that are on line, and 264 that exist but are not on the network for some reason.http://dsync.dstarusers.org/.” He called that a “large user base.” That doesn’t sound like a large user base to me.
- One ham looked down his nose at EchoLink, commenting, “Echolink has horrible audio and too many lids, kids and space kadettes.” He noted that he runs several AllStar Link nodes. I wonder how many people he actually talks with via those nodes. There are no statistics on the AllStar Link website as to how many users there actually are.
- I’ve always been amused with some hams’ obsession with audio quality. This is ham radio, not high-definition stereo, after all. D-STAR was also dinged for poor audio quality.
So, I’m not really sure what to make of all this–I told you that this was only a partly-baked post. It seems to me that at this point, EchoLink is clearly the winner, with perhaps IRLP second. D-STAR and AllStar Link seem to have a devoted following, and that’s good, but access is either limited or expensive or both.
What do you all think?
Danny says
It is comparing apples and oranges. D-STAR users cannot communication peer to peer over the internet like EchoLink can. Also D-STAR requires special hardware, EchoLink does not. D-STAR computer users must connect to another repeater or reflector (conference in EchoLink terminology) to converse with other users. D-STAR numbers cannot be measured by counting repeaters as there are hundreds, if not thousands, of D-STAR hotspots around the world and no way to really quantify them. D-STAR has a start up expense associated with it, EchoLink does not. D-STAR does not require internet for use either, Echolink does. Hard to compare what is better, based in quantity or price. having used both, I much prefer D-STAR for voice quality plus, on RF, D-STAR is a narrow band mode.
John Hays says
Actually, you can communicate peer-to-peer using callsign routing. You don’t even need to know which repeater the other station is on.
Yohei, N8YQX says
Comparing EchoLink and D-Star is apples and oranges comparison, but…
For the end user, I think the winner is very clear: D-Star. Current D-Star radios can access Echolink systems, but not vice versa.
From system builder standpoint, EchoLink has better coverage, but D-Star clearly has more potential (voice+data, end-to-end digital connection, ability to selectively call up another ham with just call sign, etc).
If ham radio is just means to an end, EchoLink is the winner, but cell phone has both beat by a mile (better practical coverage, higher data rate, much higher population coverage, etc). However, one aspect of Ham radio is technical advancement, and clearly D-Star is technically advanced over EchoLink.
My vote’s for D-Star.
By the way, I don’t know what people are talking about when they say D-Star sound quality is bad. I’ve had QSOs where the S-meter didn’t even register, and it sounded fine. If it was analog (FM) at the same signal strength, I would have trouble pulling out the QSO.
Guy Simmons G4DWV says
To me , they are not ham radio. But there again, I think that spotting is cheating.
Dave, N8SBE says
From my viewpoint, neither.
DMR (aka MotoTRBO) takes the crown IMO, for any number of reasons. For a nice Google Maps mashup of DMR repeaters, see http://www.dmr-marc.net/ and click on the Networked Repeaters link at the top of the page.
There are many manufacturers of DMR-compatible equipment, as opposed to the Icom (or Yaesu, if you want to talk about CF4M “Fusion” technology) monopoly, which applies downward price pressure in a competitive market.
I got a nice $180 UHF DMR handheld, the CS700, from CSI, here: http://www.connectsystems.com/products/top/radios%20CS700.htm
Programming cable is $5, and the programming software is free. Hytera and others make compatible radios, and there is a ton of surplus Motorola and other commercial gear on the surplus market (beware of programming issues, though, as the Motorola software requires a $350 3-year license — find a ‘ham friendly dealer to program your radio for you).
DMR is used by a ton of commercial entities, such as company facilities and security, churches, etc., etc. First responders, such as police, fire, etc. use P25.
The ham DMR network is set up in local, statewide, regional, national, and language-specific areas (think an English world-wide talkgroup, that includes Australia, New Zealand, the US, England, etc., etc.)
And yes, audio quality IS important for digital modes. The CODECS in digital radios only have so much dynamic range, and if you overdrive them, they become indecipherable. One of the reasons that DMR networks will NEVER add Echolink or IRLP nodes to them is because the audio from the analog networks is all over the map, and they can’t control it downstream to make it work effectively.
There is a ‘livestream’ link on the DMR MARC page, so you can listen (with a suitable browser) to one or more of the talkgroups.
Yohei, N8YQX says
Did you know Kenwood also has a D-Star radio?
http://www.rigpix.com/kenwood/tmw706s.htm
Ok, so it’s just rebadged Icom radio, but my point is that Icom doesn’t have a monopoly on D-Star. It’s an open standard that anyone can implement. The CODEC is proprietary, but anyone can purchase an IC with the CODEC built in, so there’s no need for licensing. I commend Icom for taking a chance on an open standard, when they could have developed their own proprietary system.
Now, I can’t get the straight answer on Yaesu’s Fusion technology, but I believe that is purely proprietary technology, and I guess they have a monopoly.
I think DMR is a cool technology, but I really can’t get behind it until someone (doesn’t have to be the big three) comes out with an amateur version of DMR (having an VFO, no license for the software, etc).
Bob K0NR says
Dan,
I think DSTAR vs Echolink is a false choice…similar to “which is better: CW or SSB?”
For better or for worse, we have a number of digital voice and internet-enabled technologies present in the amateur radio world. This is “for worse” because it fragments out collective energies, essentially creating overlapped and incompatible systems. For the better, we have multiple technology choices.
To define success, I have to go back to the Universal Purpose of Amateur Radio: To have fun messing around with radios.
See http://www.k0nr.com/wordpress/2011/03/the-universal-reason/
73, Bob K0NR
Dan KB6NU says
I know what you mean about it being a false choice. From a technical viewpoint, it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison. But, hams are choosing between the two all the time. They’re asking themselves whether the extra functionality they get with D-STAR is worth it, or whether they can make do with something like EchoLink to do something similar.
As far as having multiple choices, that’s a good news/bad news kind of thing, isn’t it? Don’t you think it would be a bad thing if we only had one type of Internet-connected radio in the amateur service?
Mike KM4FMK says
With younger new hams coming in all the time, most of us raised around home computers and “free” software, we can expect more and more new options and technologies to use with or compliment ham radio. The major companies are trying to hold on with their own proprietary systems like D-star. The free open source options like Echolink seem to be leading the way with younger hams since it is more in keeping with the open free aspect of ham radio (and open source like Linux), instead of closed proprietary systems that raise the price of transceivers. With that comes some of the inexperience associated with lids and new hams, which some of the older generation long time hams tend to gripe about, forgetting that they were once new hams many moons ago.
When we can get on the air locally with a $35 Baofeng HT, is a far cry from the expansive build your own or high dollar cost associated with radios in generations past. Echolink allows a newly licensed ham to get on the air (maybe not locally) for absolutely no money, no radio purchase needed, no cost outside what they paid for the testing fee. I really see these newer open technologies like Echolink to go a lot further and become much more widely used, versus the closed systems like D-Star will remain small niche options, possibly picked up by some local clubs.
Bruce Macdougall says
Well stated. Open technology tends to become the standard in most industries. I’m about to retire from the industrial control industry and have fun with my brand new General license. for networked control systems, the open Ethernet/IP standard has become the dominant protocol set. Even Siemens ProfiNet is not 100% open.
KK7KKO (Soon to be W7BTM)
Eric 4Z1UG says
I am a devoted Allstar follower. http://www.allstarlink.org. I love that it is open source, its community is technical and efforts to use the Beaglebone Black microcomputer is lowering the bar to entry. See Doug’s (WA3DSP), step by step tutorial on how to assemble an Allstar node at: http://crompton.com/hamradio/BeagleBoneBlackAllstar/
Allstar makes a full duplex link to the network allowing the ability for break-in and control of the local and remote “nodes”, even when the other guy is talking. If you have a duplex mobile or base, then the conversation is full duplex. The technology and interface does encourage the use of radios to connect to the network rather than computers and smart phones. However, if the node radio is properly set up, it will transfer exactly the radio signal sent to it. I like that it is HIFI and try to encourage users of FM repeaters to try to always be full quieting with a properly adjusted rig. Of course, if the hams are local to me, I am happy to let them come to my bench to set up their rig properly.
73,
Eric 4Z1UG
http://www.qsotoday.com
John (K7VE) says
A better count of D-STAR gateways can be found here http://ircddb.net/ and a single gateway may have multiple repeaters attached. (ircDDB is actually the bigger network — the other site only list Icom based systems).
D-STAR and System Fusion are both open specifications with published protocols that use embedded callsigns. They both use variants of the AMBE Vocoder (as do DMR, P-25, etc. which have additional proprietary licensing requirements, contrary to evangelistic claims http://www.motorolasolutions.com/US-EN/Technology_Licensing/Standards-Based+Licensing/DMR+Essentials+Licensing+Program). All of these digital radio protocols and technologies are markedly different than Echolink, IRLP, Allstar, and other VOIP systems that simply replace a telephone line with voice over IP to link up systems.
All are worth learning and experimenting with, but users should understand the differences and realistically present them and not merely hype one over the others.
I have 2 homebrew D-STAR repeaters http://k7ve.org/blog/2010/06/converting-the-kenwood-tkr-820-to-use-with-d-star/ and am in the process of bringing up a Yaesu Fusion System repeater (a great buy for clubs right now — replace your current, ancient FM repeater, and get both FM and Fusion).
A low cost option for operating on the D-STAR network from your computer is http://nwdigitalradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/DV3000UDS.pdf
— John
John (K7VE) says
A user base, is all of the users, not just the registered ‘nodes’.
Andrew says
The audio quality of echolink has to do with how well and how much time someone takes to PROPERLY MATCH the audio sources between the radio and the soundcard, and properly setting the audio levels! I have echolink on my repeater and by listening to it you wouldn’t know it. IRLP interfaces with a soundcard also. I’ve heard nodes on IRLP, echolink, and Allstar that sound absolutely terrible. There are a lot more users on echolink, but the larger the user base the more of theses kind of issues you’re going to see. My biggest issue with all three is people not setting correct audio levels. I find a lot of them way low and you can’t hear them, or it is way too hi and distorts.
AA1PR says
its sadly the commercialization of a non commercialized hobby we are entering
I have allstar now & in all honesty my old echolink did what they do
why do we even bother, theres no real point to link everything & then when another ham gets on to use the system he is chased away since he is tieing up the system, so where is the congruency I must ask
n9kww says
Dstar is just getting a little bit hotter with Kenwood entering the fray with another Dstar offering. IRLP vs Echo link is a bit like comparing a Chevy to a ford, yes both are cars but both have very different ideas about what a car should do or look like. In a sense that is what Fusion radio does to the digital voice market; both have some positive and negative attributes. Now another thought, with the coming of age in digital voice the real question is going to be all about bandwidth.
If the history of the HF bands gives us any insight the war will be over bandwidth. We started out with spark gape, extremely large bandwidth but it worked. We worked our why to very narrow band CW, then voice with AM: again big bandwidth but we narrowed that down to SSB. I believe the vhf and above world will follow a similar path. Wide band FM will go away for narrow band FM and the digital mode will favor the narrow band digital formats, this mean Dstar will have a leg up on the rest. Fusion will be around for a while but because of its very wide foot print I think it will lose it following. Yes is can go narrow but with the current user base of FM users and since almost all are running wide band FM, this will become a magnet for the wide band users. The Fusion system repeaters that do decide to go digital and use the single channel approach will be more in line with the rest of the digital modes. I do not see the commercial modes of P25 and DMR along with their variants gaining traction on the amateur bands for the long haul.
Brian Farrar says
Hi John you are 100% correct. Also the DCS system has CCS7 which is and updated call routing system. When you add the DCS and Dstar system together there are many, many users.
Brian Farrar VK2AH CCS7 5052081
Michael Lloyd says
I’m a fan of Ham Radio. All of it. I don’t participate in all of it but I welcome the innovation that creates new “things”. I just bought an Icom ID-51A+ but I don’t have a DSTAR capable repeater close enough to me to use DSTAR (yet, my Raspberry PI, etc is on the way). I have an Allstar linked repeater about 15 miles up the road and my nephew contacted me through his Allstar node to the repeater north of me a few minutes ago. The repeater was linked to Alaska so that made the QSO interesting. My FT-847 had the repeater frequency in it so we had a nice QSO via Allstar and radio waves. I would’ve used the iCom but I think it has a bad tube in it (or maybe I haven’t figured out how to program it) 73 NE5U Mike
Dan KB6NU says
Yeah. Those tubes can be tricky. :)
Dan KB6NU says
FB, Mike. Just take those tubes down to the corner drugstore and check them on the tube tester there. :)
John - K7VE says
BTW, the DSTARUSERS.ORG count is a subset of D-STAR systems. Check out the table at the bottom of the page http://ircddb.net/ There also some listed at http://openquad.net/node/7 — let alone the thousands of ‘hot spot’ simplex access points.
Rob says
Im an Echolink user, IRLP and Dstar are too hardware intense and expensive. I can talk aroubd the world, and, there are contests, if youre into that. Ham radio is about technology, cat wiskers and vacum tubes had their day. Now we have amatur TV, and VoIP. l’m never far from my HT, and radio is at the heart of the amatur service but since the beginning Hams have been on the cutting edge. Digital communications is the future, by all means,the Ham community should explore it.