Hopefully Elecraft will put a priority on pre-distortion which will vault the K4/KPA1500 combo to the top on the transmitter performance list. Only the Anan rigs from Apache Labs employs pre-distortion now.
73, Bill WE5P Comfortably Numb > On Jun 8, 2021, at 10:31, Rick Tavan <r...@tavan.com> wrote: > > Rob Sherwood's data is excellent. The problem is hams thinking the order of > listing is based on an > overall figure of merit. It is *not*. Rob had to choose *one column* on > which to sort his list. When he > first published it, he chose third-order dynamic range (narrow spaced), > probably because many > receivers *of that day* had poor performance on that important metric. For > consistency, he has chosen > to retain that sort order even though many (most?) modern receivers have > improved to the point > where that particular parameter is almost irrelevant when choosing among > top radios. George is > correct that most of us can't tell the difference among radios due to minor > differences in > DR - they are ALL excellent and Rob is careful to point that out when he > speaks at > hamfests. In fact, most modern transceivers excel in so many receiver > performance metrics that > Rob and others are now rightly crusading for improvements in transmitter > performance which > has not advanced as much as receiver performance across the industry. K4 > (and K3 before it) > and a few others have excellent transmitter IMD and clean keying that make > them best choices, > especially in crowded or multi-transmitter environments and among hams who > care about not > generating unnecessarily broad signals. That plus ergonomics and operating > features should be > the new basis of comparison but they don't fit on a list of *receiver > performance* metrics. > I'd like to see a new table of select transmitter performance measurements. > Ergonomics > and feature sets don't lend themselves as easily to tabular comparison > except by manufacturers > who can choose which things to mention, so it's important to read the > descriptions, read the > reviews, listen to owners and, if still unsure, sit down with the radios > before making a decision. > > The Sherwood data is good. Just don't interpret it the wrong way. > > 73, > > /Rick N6XI > >> On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 11:54 PM George Thornton < >> gthorn...@thorntonmostullaw.com> wrote: >> >> I agree that the price for the K4 has to be compared with the fully loaded >> K3 plus P3. In that respect it is not overpriced. >> >> I don't think we should make too much of the Sherwood Engineering test >> data at this point. I would suspect it would be hard for the human ear >> to tell the difference among the top eight or ten models on the list. I >> also think that when the K4 HD unit is out you might see higher results. I >> suspect direct sampling technology is not as capable as superhet when it >> comes to separating out closely spaced signals which is what Sherwood >> Engineering uses to rank radios. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net <elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net> >> On Behalf Of turnbull >> Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 11:27 PM >> To: Doug Person <d...@k0dxv.com>; elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up >> >> GM Doug, A fully loaded K3 P3 was always dear. It rivalled the 7850 >> price but did not reach the cost while arguably being the better radio. >> The fully loaded K4 is less expensive to my reckoning in todays money than >> the loaded K3 with P3 and physically smaller. I suspect it may not be so >> much superior to the K3 in RF terms except that it is in the important area >> of ergonomics. The wait has been excessive for sure.Your reasonng is >> understandable. Hope the next radio is great. Meanwhile keep enjoying >> ham radio.I will keep waiting.73 Doug EI2CNSent from my Galaxy >> -------- Original message --------From: Doug Person <d...@k0dxv.com> >> Date: 08/06/2021 03:34 (GMT+00:00) To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> Subject: [Elecraft] Giving Up Sadly, I've decided to give up waiting for >> the K4. I'm probably far down the list anyway. Their are numerous reason >> for this decision. First, there is the cost. With a tuner the price is >> $4600 making it one of the most expensive transceivers on the market. I >> fully realize that the K4 is feature rich and extremely well designed. I >> would never take anything away from Elecraft's engineering ability. The K3 >> set a new standard of performance that made the other manufacturers >> substantially up their game - which they did. But is the K4 going to do the >> same thing the K3 did? To me, it doesn't look like it. Innovative in some, >> perhaps many ways - yes. A new trend setter? I'm not so sure. When the K3 >> came out it was very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe >> the K4 with the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. At >> this point the price/performance just isn't there for me. I sold my very >> complete K3 station several years ago in anticipation of the K4. But now >> the waiting has left me thinking about how much I'm willing to invest and >> whether or not another brand whose transceivers are as much as $1500 less >> and whose performance seems quite impressive will meet my needs. After >> literally several years of contemplation I conclude that, for me, the K4 is >> not worth the price. $3600 (with the tuner since every other significant >> radio includes one) would seem competitive and I would jump on it at this >> price. But as it is? Can't see doing it. I apologize if feelings are hurt >> or I've made anyone angry. I'm leaving the list since I'm no longer waiting >> patiently for what we once called Vaporware.Good luck to everyone on their >> current and future K4s.Doug -- >> K0DXV______________________________________________________________Elecraft >> mailing listHome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp: >> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:elecr...@mailman.qth.netThis >> list hosted by: http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email list: >> http://www.qsl.net/donate.htmlMessage delivered to turnb...@net1.ie >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to gt...@seanet.com >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to rta...@gmail.com > > > > -- > -- > > Rick Tavan > Truckee and Saratoga, CA > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to weave...@usermail.com ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
