Icom IC R-8600 -- Is This SDR Already Obsolete ?

[MStep]

Well, perhaps "obsolete" is the wrong choice of words. But based on the dates I've seen of this unit posting on YouTube, the R-8600 has been on the market for about a year. And make no mistake; I love what the radio offers.

But for an "SDR" (software defined radio), aside from a few miscellaneous tweaks here and there, it appears that nothing really major has been added to the functionality of the radio in that one year period. I'm starting to wonder if all the SDR technology is more sizzle than steak, not just for Icom, but for other brands as well.

My main stumbling block in purchasing the 8600 is the lack of DMR and Fusion modes as part of its digital repertoire. I have owned and am happy with the AOR DV-1, albeit with no beautiful built-in spectrum scope. The lack of these two very important modes in the 8600, not just for the amateur radio bands, but also for business band monitoring, has been noted by many as being major deficiencies and oversights in the 8600.

It's somewhat curious to me that nothing has happened in the past year to advance this technology via an SDR update. After all, isn't that the purpose of SDR technology? To be able to quickly, efficiently and effectively address these types of issues?

Now some will tell you that Icom "says" they are "working on it". The proof, of course, is in the proverbial pudding. One of my other concerns is that if the aforementioned digital modes are not compatible with the hardware of the 8600 (but then way "SDR?), Icom might opt to go the route of Yaesu ala their FT991, and simply introduce an 8600-A, with new hardware enhancements. Yaesu did that much to their chagrin, and to the anger of many who had purchased the 991 only a year earlier.

As I said at the outset, I do love the technology and features of the 8600. But my concerns about just how far SDR technology can take a radio is outweighing my desire to own one, especially at 2300.00 USD. Your thoughts and input are greatly appreciated.

 

[prcguy]

As time goes on there will be more features, modes and clever designs. But for now the R8600 is the highest performing stand alone wide band SDR ever offered to the masses. On HF its hanging in there with the highest performing amateur transceivers ever made and on VHF/UHF nothing can touch it.

 

[digsatman]

Well, perhaps "obsolete" is the wrong choice of words. But based on the dates I've seen of this unit posting on YouTube, the R-8600 has been on the market for about a year. And make no mistake; I love what the radio offers.

But for an "SDR" (software defined radio), aside from a few miscellaneous tweaks here and there, it appears that nothing really major has been added to the functionality of the radio in that one year period. I'm starting to wonder if all the SDR technology is more sizzle than steak, not just for Icom, but for other brands as well.

My main stumbling block in purchasing the 8600 is the lack of DMR and Fusion modes as part of its digital repertoire. I have owned and am happy with the AOR DV-1, albeit with no beautiful built-in spectrum scope. The lack of these two very important modes in the 8600, not just for the amateur radio bands, but also for business band monitoring, has been noted by many as being major deficiencies and oversights in the 8600.

It's somewhat curious to me that nothing has happened in the past year to advance this technology via an SDR update. After all, isn't that the purpose of SDR technology? To be able to quickly, efficiently and effectively address these types of issues?

Now some will tell you that Icom "says" they are "working on it". The proof, of course, is in the proverbial pudding. One of my other concerns is that if the aforementioned digital modes are not compatible with the hardware of the 8600 (but then way "SDR?), Icom might opt to go the route of Yaesu ala their FT991, and simply introduce an 8600-A, with new hardware enhancements. Yaesu did that much to their chagrin, and to the anger of many who had purchased the 991 only a year earlier.

As I said at the outset, I do love the technology and features of the 8600. But my concerns about just how far SDR technology can take a radio is outweighing my desire to own one, especially at 2300.00 USD. Your thoughts and input are greatly appreciated.

Totally agree. I waited for around 18 months for the 8600 to appear. I didn't believe those who said it wouldn't have DMR but, sadly, they were right and Icom never sold me one. A large number of others obviously felt the same. Icom need to swallow their pride and add DMR. Whilst they are about it, the could also add Fusion. People like me may then buy one. They could also do the same with the R30.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

 

[AOR-262]

@MStep

I'm sure you are aware that using the IC-R8600 you can listen to transmissions that are 'DMR'. Not directly -- but with third party software installed on a PC/Laptop. The IC-R8600 is not really a mobile device such as a handheld i.e. the IC-R20 or the new IC-R30. The IC-R8600 is really a heavy brick sat comfortably on your desk -- albeit a very advanced brick. So I'm saying here that the IC-R8600 isn't going anywhere. It's not going to be clipped onto your belt. You can be out and about and listen to a transmission that is transmitting using 'DMR' if you own a receiver such an the new IC-R30 -- and that can be clipped onto your belt. There has been many discussion prior to the release of the IC-R8600 as to whether or not DMR will be invluded as a 'MODE'. I surmise that it's to do with licencing and cost. Will Icom ever *** DMR as a MODE in future updates? I think probably not. I suspect in years to come; Icom will release a sucessor to the IC-R8600 called something like the IC-R8600+1 (just like AOR did with receivers they released -- their newer model was a physical update and overall revamp and they just added a +1 to the new model). Whilst I can listen to any transmission using my IC-R8600, it means I have to have two third party software programs installed on my PC -- which is ok -- but it means the IC-R8600 is static on one frequency. There is no Scanning of frequencies or having a memory scan run. Not ideal but at least it's not a case of not being able to receive and listen to a DMR transmission at all. There's not many users of DMR where I live. Maybe about 5 or 6 I think. One user of a DMR radio is a local scrap metal collector who chats with his colleague where pretty much every other word is a 4-letter word beginning with F and ending with K so I'm not really bothered listening to what DMR I can receive anyway. I'm no expert or radio tester/reviewer but I will say I have no regrets paying the 2,500 I paid for what I got. 10/10 from me.

 

[digsatman]

Just to correct you, the IC-R30 cannot receive DMR.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

 

[Citywide173]

@MStep

I'm sure you are aware that using the IC-R8600 you can listen to transmissions that are 'DMR'. Not directly -- but with third party software installed on a PC/Laptop.

I'm sure he is aware, but his post was referring to internal capabilities

My main stumbling block in purchasing the 8600 is the lack of DMR and Fusion modes as part of its digital repertoire.

 

[vince48]

I agree with MSTEP, the cost for the R8600 is expensive. At this price point, I should not have to relay on external software for modes that are ...mainstream when the R8600 was designed and gone through testing.
Any modes during that testing period should come free through FW updates unless it is prohibited by hardware incompatibility.
Understanding that SDR technology is advancing at a very fast clip today, I'm hoping Icom is not taking page from the "scanner" manufactures.... selling the same radio (internals) under different model, with just some modest "marketing" enhancements. Been there done that.
The manufactures keep doing this and WE keep purchasing the newest models. Not much motivation from the manufactures to provide FW updates, they have a good sense, you, me will purchase the next.... model

 

[commscanaus]

I agree with MSTEP, the cost for the R8600 is expensive. At this price point, I should not have to relay on external software for modes that are ...mainstream when the R8600 was designed and gone through testing.
Any modes during that testing period should come free through FW updates unless it is prohibited by hardware incompatibility.
model

Absolutely.

The IC-R8600 has an asking price of AUD$3995 at my local dealer.
I am simply not prepared to spend this sort of money on a receiver that lacks one of the most used digital modes, both on the amateur bands and commercially.
DMR has replaced a huge proportion of analogue systems here, following the government mandate to narrow band and rationalize the spectrum above 400Mhz.
Why on earth would I buy this radio (and believe me I want one!) only to have to mess about with dongles and external software for DMR? My TRX-1 does this mode out of the box for far less money.

I was also disappointed by the lack of even a simple VGA output, to put that lovely waterfall up on a larger display. I could live with this on the IC-7300 transceiver, since it is not a high end model like the IC-7610.

But the IC-R8600 is FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS!!
Money I intend to keep until such time as Icom stops being pig headed with the lack of DMR.

So Icom, lose sales and sit on your hands like you did with the lack of firmware support for the IC-R9500.
This attitude will most certainly render the IC-R8600 obsolete.

 

[DaveNF2G]

SDR has generated some really unrealistic expectations among hobbyists. The same situation holds true with scanners nowadays, in terms of the demand for constant "updates".

If you want to buy a major branded receiver, regardless of underlying technology, then you need to bear in mind who owns what patents and licenses. DMR (Moto or Hytera) would be more costly on an Icom platform because they would have to pay licensing fees and royalties. The same applies to getting NXDN or IDAS on a Yeasu, or Fusion on anything not Yeasu.

AOR-262 correctly points out that software is where the capabilities are supposed to be provided for a true software defined radio. A radio that has everything built in is not SDR. Whatever brand you buy, the availability of compatible software that will make it do what you want is a critical consideration.

 

[MStep]

SDR has generated some really unrealistic expectations among hobbyists. The same situation holds true with scanners nowadays, in terms of the demand for constant "updates".

If you want to buy a major branded receiver, regardless of underlying technology, then you need to bear in mind who owns what patents and licenses. DMR (Moto or Hytera) would be more costly on an Icom platform because they would have to pay licensing fees and royalties. The same applies to getting NXDN or IDAS on a Yeasu, or Fusion on anything not Yeasu.

AOR-262 correctly points out that software is where the capabilities are supposed to be provided for a true software defined radio. A radio that has everything built in is not SDR. Whatever brand you buy, the availability of compatible software that will make it do what you want is a critical consideration.

I would certainly agree with you Dave on one point, about the unrealistic exceptions of hobbyists regarding SDR technology, although I think that those expectations have been fostered by the industry as well, to generate additional interest and profit.

In fact, and to his credit, Eric from Universal Radio clearly indicates in his company's YouTube video, that the Icom R 8600 utilizes hybrid technology, and that the "SDR" implementation is done only in the long, medium, and shortwave portions of the receiver's spectrum (below 30 MHz). Above 30 MHz, it uses "typical" conversion type technology. That information should have triggered alarm bells for those with high expectations, particularity regarding VHF and UHF digital enhancements.

To AOR's credit with their great DV1 receiver (another "SDR" radio), not only were they able to incorporate DMR, Yaesu Fusion, D-Star and a host of other modes into that receiver (apparently without running afoul of any patent or licensing infringements), but were also able to add a limited form of TETRA, several years after the radio was introduced.

I believe the the finest example of what SDR technology SHOULD BE, is the Expert Electronics MB1 ham radio transceiver. The radio has an actual Windows 10 computer built right into the radio, and uses it's beautiful touch screen display as a true Windows 10 display, utilizing their own proprietary software and firmware to create the radio's entire operating system. Kudos to Expert Electronics for creating what I consider to be a true software defined radio.

I do respectfully disagree with your statement Dave that, "A radio that has everything built in is not SDR". Au contraire, I believe that the opposite is a truer statement, as demonstrated by the MB1. A radio that has everything built in, including an on-board Windows computer, fits much more the category of what software defined radios should be.

Icom should be commended for venturing into the "SDR" wide band arena with the R 8600. But as Eric at Universal Radio points out, this is a "hybrid", so Icom is not quite there yet.

 

[iMONITOR]

I think a lot of people make assumptions and have unrealistic expectations of SDR capabilities. This is very common among the millennials. They can't accept not getting everything the want when they want it.

 

[prcguy]

A "Software Defined Radio" was defined in the 90s as a radio that uses computer simulation for basic hardware functions of a radio like IF band width filtering, demodulation, AGC and so on and these functions can be changed or upgraded via software or firmware.

An SDR can be a superhetrodyne with the IF digitized at some point like the R8600 does at VHF/UHF, or it can be a direct conversion where it digitizes the RF spectrum right at the antenna port as the R8600 does in the HF spectrum. SDR has nothing to do with computer control or including a built in computer, but it can include computer control.

So to say the MB1 is a true SDR and the R8600 isn't is just not a correct statement, they are both every bit an SDR and the R8600 is completely "there".

I would certainly agree with you Dave on one point, about the unrealistic exceptions of hobbyists regarding SDR technology, although I think that those expectations have been fostered by the industry as well, to generate additional interest and profit.

In fact, and to his credit, Eric from Universal Radio clearly indicates in his company's YouTube video, that the Icom R 8600 utilizes hybrid technology, and that the "SDR" implementation is done only in the long, medium, and shortwave portions of the receiver's spectrum (below 30 MHz). Above 30 MHz, it uses "typical" conversion type technology. That information should have triggered alarm bells for those with high expectations, particularity regarding VHF and UHF digital enhancements.

To AOR's credit with their great DV1 receiver (another "SDR" radio), not only were they able to incorporate DMR, Yaesu Fusion, D-Star and a host of other modes into that receiver (apparently without running afoul of any patent or licensing infringements), but were also able to add a limited form of TETRA, several years after the radio was introduced.

I believe the the finest example of what SDR technology SHOULD BE, is the Expert Electronics MB1 ham radio transceiver. The radio has an actual Windows 10 computer built right into the radio, and uses it's beautiful touch screen display as a true Windows 10 display, utilizing their own proprietary software and firmware to create the radio's entire operating system. Kudos to Expert Electronics for creating what I consider to be a true software defined radio.

I do respectfully disagree with your statement Dave that, "A radio that has everything built in is not SDR". Au contraire, I believe that the opposite is a truer statement, as demonstrated by the MB1. A radio that has everything built in, including an on-board Windows computer, fits much more the category of what software defined radios should be.

Icom should be commended for venturing into the "SDR" wide band arena with the R 8600. But as Eric at Universal Radio points out, this is a "hybrid", so Icom is not quite there yet.

 

[MStep]

A "Software Defined Radio" was defined in the 90s as a radio that uses computer simulation for basic hardware functions of a radio like IF band width filtering, demodulation, AGC and so on and these functions can be changed or upgraded via software or firmware.

An SDR can be a superhetrodyne with the IF digitized at some point like the R8600 does at VHF/UHF, or it can be a direct conversion where it digitizes the RF spectrum right at the antenna port as the R8600 does in the HF spectrum. SDR has nothing to do with computer control or including a built in computer, but it can include computer control.

So to say the MB1 is a true SDR and the R8600 isn't is just not a correct statement, they are both every bit an SDR and the R8600 is completely "there".

Well we can agree to disagree. But I will predict this--- with an operational AOR AR ALPHA II showing at the Tokyo Ham Fair this weekend, when Icom makes it's next logical move, which is an update of the famous Icom R9500, to a digital R9600, that unit will incorporate SDR technology not just up to 30 MHz, but throughout the entire spectrum that the radio will cover.

As an added bonus, at its likely price point, all licensing, patents and proprietary rights would have been addressed, and those nagging DMR, Fusion, and other digital modes, will finally be included.

I better get a bigger piggy-bank.

 

[AOR-262]

Something I'd like to add here as an observation to what 'us' as users of communication receiver devices is that there isn't going to be a receiver that will be a 'receive/decode' anything. At out homes/Shacks we all see from time to time people showing of their collection of radios, all of which do different things. People have a collection of receivers which all have different receiving capabilities. In particular, 'Modes' -- some receive/decode DMR, some dont, some receive FSK, some dont.

I have started playing around with decoding FSK. However, I have recently found out that there are other uses of FSK which the IC-R8600 will not decode and requires the use of software installed on a PC/Laptop such as HDSDR or SDR Console together with appropriate decoding software such as MultiPSK -- that software does all the decoding the IC-R8600 will do plus a lot more it doesn't.

 

[prcguy]

I'll tell you a little story that might explain why I'm so adamant about using correct terminology when describing SDRs.

In the early 90s while working for Hughes Aircraft, I was pulled into a project that was one of the worlds first SDR transceivers. At the time it could simultaneously receive several cell phone calls while receiving broadcast AM and FM, the tower down the street on VHF air, CB radio and HF SSB. It also had a 6W transmitter that would do just about anything. This early SDR was a superhet design due to A/D limitations at the time and it had an IF with 60MHz BW. I was an RF hardware guy on the program and worked along side the software junkies that wrote the software and modified it to receive and transmit different "waveforms" or modes.

Hughes had hired one of the worlds foremost engineers in SDR technology at the time and Hughes had to provide general training to understand the technology and to answer questions for people like me on the program. This is where SDR terms were explained and how they relate to current and future topologies like superhet vs direct conversion, computer control vs self contained, etc. They were all SDRs back then and all that holds true today almost 30yrs later.

So when I toss out certain statements about SDR terminology its not because I'm a recreational hobby user stuck on something I heard on a ham repeater, I actually have a little experience and attended classes on the subject. If you knew what's under the hood in a receiver like the R8600 you would know the statement "That information should have triggered alarm bells for those with high expectations, particularity regarding VHF and UHF digital enhancements" is meaningless when comparing direct conversion to a superhet design. In fact, the conversion scheme and resulting IF can actually improve VHF/UHF RF performance over a direct conversion VHF/UHF design.

And when you complain about the R8600 but call the AOR DV1 great, well there is about a 10 to 1 difference in RF performance between those two receivers in favor of the R8600 where it will receive things just fine in a heavy RF environment that will render a DV1 deaf.

Well we can agree to disagree. But I will predict this--- with an operational AOR AR ALPHA II showing at the Tokyo Ham Fair this weekend, when Icom makes it's next logical move, which is an update of the famous Icom R9500, to a digital R9600, that unit will incorporate SDR technology not just up to 30 MHz, but throughout the entire spectrum that the radio will cover.

As an added bonus, at its likely price point, all licensing, patents and proprietary rights would have been addressed, and those nagging DMR, Fusion, and other digital modes, will finally be included.

I better get a bigger piggy-bank.

 

[MStep]

I'll tell you a little story that might explain why I'm so adamant about using correct terminology when describing SDRs.

In the early 90s while working for Hughes Aircraft, I was pulled into a project that was one of the worlds first SDR transceivers. At the time it could simultaneously receive several cell phone calls while receiving broadcast AM and FM, the tower down the street on VHF air, CB radio and HF SSB. It also had a 6W transmitter that would do just about anything. This early SDR was a superhet design due to A/D limitations at the time and it had an IF with 60MHz BW. I was an RF hardware guy on the program and worked along side the software junkies that wrote the software and modified it to receive and transmit different "waveforms" or modes.

Hughes had hired one of the worlds foremost engineers in SDR technology at the time and Hughes had to provide general training to understand the technology and to answer questions for people like me on the program. This is where SDR terms were explained and how they relate to current and future topologies like superhet vs direct conversion, computer control vs self contained, etc. They were all SDRs back then and all that holds true today almost 30yrs later.

So when I toss out certain statements about SDR terminology its not because I'm a recreational hobby user stuck on something I heard on a ham repeater, I actually have a little experience and attended classes on the subject. If you knew what's under the hood in a receiver like the R8600 you would know the statement "That information should have triggered alarm bells for those with high expectations, particularity regarding VHF and UHF digital enhancements" is meaningless when comparing direct conversion to a superhet design. In fact, the conversion scheme and resulting IF can actually improve VHF/UHF RF performance over a direct conversion VHF/UHF design.

And when you complain about the R8600 but call the AOR DV1 great, well there is about a 10 to 1 difference in RF performance between those two receivers in favor of the R8600 where it will receive things just fine in a heavy RF environment that will render a DV1 deaf.

Oh I certainly hope others do not interpret my comments as "complaints". I merely avail myself of the data that is available, and make observations from my own perspective, experience and knowledge.. But there are some facts that are indisputable. And I guess this brings us full circle to my original post here in this thread--- the AOR DV1 excels at DMR and Fusion. And only because the 8600 does not include it. That is an unquestionable and empirical statement.

The fact that Eric at Universal Radio states in his video that the 8600 utilizes SDR technology up to 30 MHz is a statement of fact-- whether he is correct or incorrect is another story, as are the implications of his statement.

And my guess is, based on owning the Icom R9000 and the Watkins-Johnson HF1000, that the 8600 most likely does excel the DV1 on the HF bands.

Fortunately, a good friend here on RR is ordering a number of R8600's for his news gathering organization. He has kindly offered me one of those units in order that I may have first-hand experience with the radio, which is great. There's nothing like "hands-on" As I said at the outset in my original post regarding the 8600, I love what the radio offers.

Nothing in this world is perfect, least of all, wide band communications receivers. And no guys, but sorry, I'm not giving up the R9000 or my HF1000.

 

[prcguy]

Recent tests on the R8600 for narrow band dynamic range show its a good 30dB better in close spaced dynamic range and phase noise over the HF1000 and R9000. That's not a subtle improvement and it means the R8600 will completely blow the others away in actual performance.

I believe when you play with an R8600 side by side with the others things will become very clear. I'm not saying anyone should give up a classic and history making HF1000. Continue to use and enjoy it but break out the R8600 when the going gets rough.

Oh I certainly hope others do not interpret my comments as "complaints". I merely avail myself of the data that is available, and make observations from my own perspective, experience and knowledge.. But there are some facts that are indisputable. And I guess this brings us full circle to my original post here in this thread--- the AOR DV1 excels at DMR and Fusion. And only because the 8600 does not include it. That is an unquestionable and empirical statement.

The fact that Eric at Universal Radio states in his video that the 8600 utilizes SDR technology up to 30 MHz is a statement of fact-- whether he is correct or incorrect is another story, as are the implications of his statement.

And my guess is, based on owning the Icom R9000 and the Watkins-Johnson HF1000, that the 8600 most likely does excel the DV1 on the HF bands.

Fortunately, a good friend here on RR is ordering a number of R8600's for his news gathering organization. He has kindly offered me one of those units in order that I may have first-hand experience with the radio, which is great. There's nothing like "hands-on" As I said at the outset in my original post regarding the 8600, I love what the radio offers.

Nothing in this world is perfect, least of all, wide band communications receivers. And no guys, but sorry, I'm not giving up the R9000 or my HF1000.

 

[EricCottrell]

Hello,

The WJ-8711A is noted for it's excellent AM Audio recovery. I have seen comments about the R8600 audio harshness with certain firmware versions. I have both, but have not had the chance to compare the two directly. I do like to use the R8600 on HF and it seems to do better on HF than past wide-band radios that I have used, including the DV-1.

I use a Wellbrook ALA1530 loop on HF. Several MW radio stations have about a 0 dBm signal from the loop. The WJ-8711A handles this without any problem, even with the pre-selector out of circuit. The R8600 needs 10db or 20dB attenuation in the LW/MW band to prevent ADC overrange. The DV-1 needs attenuation below 18 MHz and I usually use a MW Band-Reject Filter to prevent overload artifacts. I am impressed by the strong signal handling of the WJ-8711A as I do not get interference from MW stations in the 2 to 4 MHz band that I got with other radios. The Racal RA3791 is also excellent.

The R8600 is the best wide-band receiver I have used on HF and is great value for the money. The WJ-8711A and RA3791 go for 2K to 2.5K used, just below the cost of a new R8600.

73 Eric

 

[MStep]

Thanks Eric for your comments and your input. My antenna situation needs to be upgraded, but I do manage to pull some stuff in on HF nonetheless. I use a long wire for HF, which I occasionally reposition in my backyard in the Union Square area here in Manhattan. On VHF and UHF, I have a discone and several mag mounts. My discone is somewhat "famous" as it is the very same Radio Shack antenna that Tom Kneitel had sent me some 35 years ago or so for an article and review I did in Popular Communications magazine. It has weathered rather well-- I guess because it is in the backyard and not on the roof on my 5 story walkup unfortunately. I had some antennas "topside" for HF, VHF and UHF, but they have come down over the years.

In any event, I am very excited about getting my hot little hands on the 8600, although the WJ HF-1000 and the DV1 have found permanent homes here. Thanks again for your input Eric.

Hello,

The WJ-8711A is noted for it's excellent AM Audio recovery. I have seen comments about the R8600 audio harshness with certain firmware versions. I have both, but have not had the chance to compare the two directly. I do like to use the R8600 on HF and it seems to do better on HF than past wide-band radios that I have used, including the DV-1.

I use a Wellbrook ALA1530 loop on HF. Several MW radio stations have about a 0 dBm signal from the loop. The WJ-8711A handles this without any problem, even with the pre-selector out of circuit. The R8600 needs 10db or 20dB attenuation in the LW/MW band to prevent ADC overrange. The DV-1 needs attenuation below 18 MHz and I usually use a MW Band-Reject Filter to prevent overload artifacts. I am impressed by the strong signal handling of the WJ-8711A as I do not get interference from MW stations in the 2 to 4 MHz band that I got with other radios. The Racal RA3791 is also excellent.

The R8600 is the best wide-band receiver I have used on HF and is great value for the money. The WJ-8711A and RA3791 go for 2K to 2.5K used, just below the cost of a new R8600.

73 Eric

 

[ridgescan]

I bought an R8600 today and am bringing it home tomorrow. Super exited! Reading all the posts in here got me all pumped-up especially with regards to HF where I play. It's going to be interesting especially since everything in this shack is old or really old.