In Studio 1 the spurious/alias free dynamic range is greater than 130 dB In a SDR system traditional analog circuits are replaced with software functional blocks the quality of the processing is heavily influenced by the design. The first big difference is in the Digital Signal Processing core, the 'radio' itself. Second question: on what Studio 1 is better in comparison to free programs? As Studio 1 price is very accessible, it can be used also in combination with cheaper hardware but remember that final results are as good as the front-end used. For example, today a Studio 1 plus Perseus (about 800 Euro) can provide better performances in comparison to a rack mount $15,000 professional receiver of not so many years ago, plus new features not even possible in the past (like multiple receivers). Studio 1 has been designed to provide high-end receiving performances when used in combination with high-end hardware. SDR technology can be superior only if properly applied.Īll the above is about the first question: what is the purpose and target of Studio 1? The reality of course is very different: a good old 'analog' Icom R-7000 is still far superior to a RTL dongle (plus software) as a radio. The recent introduction of cheap SDR hardware has led to the wrong assumption that a good SDR receiving system can be built with a few Euro and free software. The principles behind SDR are not yet well understood by many, at least not as much as the 'good old' analog technology that ruled the market until not many years ago. SDR is a relatively new technology, at least in radio amateur applications. We hate making comparisons but I'm also tired to see the above discussions so I feel forced to give some explanations. On what Studio 1 is better in comparison?

Why I should pay for Studio 1 while there are several other programs available for free?

Sdrsharp for mac