We are looking into the possibility of migrating to a platform other
than the PA3FWM WebSDR currently in use. While there are
several
options out there such as "Phantom WebSDR" and its follow-on project, "NovaSDR" - and UberSDR. This has
the advantage of using simpler hardware (and RX-888 or similar)
to receive HF bands, presenting the user with a single interface for
the entire HF
spectrum - much like the KiwiSDR or even the University of Twente
WebSDR, also operated by
PA3FWM.
We have "spun up" a (non-public) NovaSDR instance and we are also
working with other folks who have this and UberSDR running - but this
has led us to a few observations:
It's
not as stable.
Reports from others who have been testing it have reported that it's a
bit of a fight to get it going - and it requires a bit of babysitting
to to keep it working properly. In contrast, the PA3FWM
WebSDR is extremely
stable and robust.
It's a
bandwidth hog.
Whereas each, individual user of the PA3FWM WebSDR need consume only
40-50kbps of bandwidth for audio, waterfall and control, the typical
configuration of the UberSDR results in each user
requiring somewhere in the range of 200-500 kbps. NovaSDR can be
configured such that only 60-90kbps is required per-user, which is
getting to the point of being manageable from our standpoint.
To support just 200 users - which is a common load
for the
Northern Utah WebSDR - would require approximately 100 megabits of
Internet bandwidth, and that is simply not
available at the remote
Northern Utah WebSDR receive site at this time. The reason
for
this seems to be (unnecessarily?)
high audio encoding rates and an inefficient means of conveying the
waterfall display as currently implemented in Phantom WebSDR and UberSDR.
Requiring nearly a half megabit of also
strains the connectivity of many individual users - particularly those
who may have tenuous (e.g.
mobile
devices and satellite connections, poor connectivity overall, etc.)
Internet connections and/or "metered" ("pay per gigabyte") data plans.
Potentially
marginal
performance of a single, wide-band receiver coving all of HF.
Simply connecting a single, wideband receiver -
like a KiwiSDR, RX-888,
Web-888, Red Pitaya or similar to an antenna will likely result in
mediocre performance - particularly if this system is located in an
area with a
very low noise floor - the result being that performance of the receive
system, particularly on the upper HF amateur bands, will be rather poor
compared to a typical amateur receiver in terms of sensitivity and the
ability to handle large signal levels.
This issue is solvable -
and articles on doing this (which
may well involve constructing specialized hardware that isn't available
commercially)
may be found in the "Technical" pages of the Northern Utah WebSDR and
other places - but
the need and means of doing this may not be known to many who attempt
to use this hardware.
If you peruse the Northern Utah WebSDR's web sites you'll note that we do
cover all of HF on some receivers (KiwiSDRs)
as well as a number of the shortwave broadcast bands. Further
investigation will reveal that these resourcesget relatively little
use compared to the amateur band receivers. Between these
observations as well as results of surveys and
correspondence with users indicate that most users do NOT
really care about frequencies other
than
amateur bands for the most
part - and that there's something to be said about simplicity of
operation when one can simply select an individual amateur band rather
than have to pick it out from a 30 MHz wide display..
We expect that NovaSDR, UberSDR - and possibly others -
will eventually mature to the point where they are both stable and
suitable for large numbers of users and be optimized for both processor
and network bandwidth utilization - but that day is not
yet today.
Comments related to testing with NovaSDR (as of 18 February, 2026):
In our testing of NovaSDR, there are a few comments/concerns that will
need to be addressed before we would consider using it as a wholesale
replacement of the existing PA3FWM WebSDRs, in no particular order:
No obvious time-out mechanism.
There needs to be a time-out mechanism to prevent "leeches" -
that is, users that camp for 24/7 on the server: If they don't
make some sort of change (tune, change modes, etc.)
in the space of a few hours, we can presume that they aren't actually
listening. As we have limited bandwidth available to us, we would
like to minimize such usage.
Some sort of audio distortion.
It's hard to put a finger on it, but the audio is somewhat
"crunchy." This sounds like some sort of clipping - either in the
codec or, perhaps, in the AGC action. This seems to be present
both in the ADPCM and the FLAC codecs, and at 8 and 16 ksps:
Side-by-side comparison with the same signals on the PA3FWM
WebSDR - which also uses ADPCM - show the latter to lack this
distortion.
Higher/"Creeping" latency.
The latency of the NovaSDR seems to be significantly greater than
that of the PA3FWM WebSDR - but it also appears to have the tendency to
"stretch" to several seconds - a phenomenon not reflected in the debug
stats on the user's UI: A delay of just a second makes it
unpleasent to use in the context of a net, either as net control or as
one of the participants.
A few configuration changes were made (different codes/rates) but this seemed to not have any obvious effect.
There is currently no means of configurating/changing the waterfall update rate.
Slowing the the watefall update - either by configuration or when
the number of users exceeds a threshold - would be very useful for
bandwidth management.
There is no means of tine-tuning the receiver's operating frequency. This is not
the user-facing tuning, but rather the inability to compensate for the
receiver hardware itself being off-frequency: If the receiver is,
say, 100 Hz off at 14 MHz, there appears to be no means of fixing this
offset in the configuration.
There is no means of S-meter compensation across wide frequency ranges.
If one plans to use a wideband, direct-sampling receiver such as
the RX-888, they better be prepared to apply "pre-emphasis" (a.k.a. "shelving filter") to maximize dynamic range across the HF spectrum - and if you
are running this or similar receive hardware, the overall performance
of your system is surely suffering: You can read about this issue
HERE.
This sort of compensation means that an S-meter calibration (e.g. applying a known signal level to the system antenna port - on the "antenna" side of any such filtering) will be valid only at that particular frequency.
What is needed is the ability to input a number of different
frequency/S-meter calibration entries in a table to allow - via linear
interpolation between these entries - correct S-meter readings despite
differences in gain and filtering across the received spectrum.
It would be nice for the Synchronous AM detector to show the frequency of the recovered carrier. In many receivers with synchronous AM detection (e.g. KiwiSDR) it will display the apparent frequency of the carrier.
For example: If the front-end receiver is GPS-locked,
this could indicate to the user the absolute frequency of the signal in
question.
A "lock" status of the SAM detector would also be very nice.
A more graphical S-meter. An "S-unit" scale would mean more to different users.
The ability to graph the S-meter readings.
The KiwiSDR and PA3FWM WebSDRs have the provisions to graph the
signal strength over time - useful for antenna and other signal
measurements.
Amateur band pre-sets. In speaking with those first using the KiwiSDR or similar (like the NovaSDR) being immediately presented with all of the HF spectrum (as one might be using an RX-888)
is a bit daunting: A pre-set band selection where the zoom and
mode is preset when the user clicks on a button would be handy.
We are aware that the NovaSDR - and others - are currently being developed and fully anticipate refinements as time goes on.
Questions? Use
the contact info on the About
page to let
us know.
Additional information:
For general information about this WebSDR system -
including contact info - go to the about
page(link).
For technical information about this WebSDR system, go to
the technical
info
page(link).
For a list of questions and answers, visit the FAQ
page (link).
For more information about the WebSDR project in general -
including information about other WebSDR servers worldwide and
additional technical information - go to http://www.websdr.org