At 35 WPM, I do not perceive any change in transmitted keying between CW and CW+. There is a difference in QSK receive. I certainly do not hear anything that would be described by "greatly improved keying" on the transmitted waveform. Perhaps the circumstances of your keying complaint needs further detailing?
Part of the issue with split, RIT, XIT, etc., is settling time for the complete reversal of most of the circuitry paths involved in TX/RX state change. CW+ removes the most time-costly state change reversals to accomplish the 70 WPM clarity. We need to remember that the change as currently implemented was introduced to service very high speed QRQ. Working some of this backward to mid-speed QSK code without introducing chirp and other artifacts will likely take some time. The lack of split in the reintroduce list for CW+ was deliberate and probably marks split as the most difficult item for quick transition. What seems more workable is pulling some of the CW+ code back into CW to improve the QSK there. Also, perhaps the K3 SO2V coding strategy used by N1MM bears rethinking in light of the CW+ changes. 73, Guy. On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:13 AM, GW0ETF <gw0...@btinternet.com> wrote: > To use SO2V in N1MM with the K3 requires using normal SPLIT. It would be a > pity not to be able to take advantage of the greatly improved keying with > CW+ at the higher speeds used in contesting. ______________________________________________________________ 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
