Ok so I'm curious if I'll be able to do what I'd like. I'd like to
setup my K3 for maximum flexibility. At the moment I have these
filters.
2.8Khz
1.8Khz
1Khz
250Hz
These 4 filters are duplicated in the lower 4 slots of both receivers.
I'd like to have the ability to do AM and FM both TX and
Why woould you swap out the 2.7 ilter for the 2.8 filter. What do you
acheive with the switck
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/K3-Filter-Question--tp18131895p18131895.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_
I misunderstood the previous thread on matched filters.
When I receive the KRX3 after assembling the K3, do I worry about the
stock filters on the K3/100 and KRX3 being mis-matched? Does it matter?
If it doesn't make that much difference for general use, then that's all
I'm wondering.
I'm
I have recently been examining how my K3 filters operate and was curious if I
could somehow expand the range I can use my lowest filter which is 250 kHz. It
generally cuts out at 300 kHz and then my 1.8 kHz filter takes over. I would
like to use the 250 kHz filter up to 400 kHz as I have read th
I have the 5 pole 2.7 filters for main and sub RX.
One filter offset is -.94, the other is -.81
In order to do diversity receive, I have to set them both to about -.88
My question is: what happens when you set a filter offset differently than the
one specified (as in my case) ?
How is this suppos
Manual, pg 74:
"Rule #1: If you plan to use a particular filter for both transmitting
and receiving (main receiver), you’ll need to
install it on the RF board. You can optionally install a filter of the
same or similar bandwidth on the sub
receiver for receive-only use. (This is recommended since
I forgot to go back to that... I was thrown off by the comment on the
order page that said you only need one of each filter for transmit. I
know that doesn't fully say what I was hoping for though
I wonder if there is any possibility of allowing AM TX and/or ESSB via
the FM filter... As I'd
# 2192
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits"..
-- Albert Einstein
--- On Thu, 7/9/09, Brett Howard wrote:
From: Brett Howard
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter Question
To: "Bob Cunnings"
Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Date: Thursday, July
t Howard
> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 2:21 AM
> To: Bob Cunnings
> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter Question
>
>
> I forgot to go back to that... I was thrown off by the
> comment on the order page that said you only need one of each
>
t] On Behalf Of Brett Howard
>> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 2:21 AM
>> To: Bob Cunnings
>> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter Question
>>
>>
>> I forgot to go back to that... I was thrown off by the
>> comment on the
m: Stewart Baker [mailto:stew...@baker.nildram.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 10:35 AM
> To: li...@subich.com; 'Brett Howard'; 'Bob Cunnings'
> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter Question
>
>
> I agree.
> The cost of
the shape factor around 1.8:1.
>
> 73,
>
>... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Stewart Baker [mailto:stew...@baker.nildram.co.uk]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 10:35 AM
> > To: li...@subich.com; 'Brett Howard'; 'Bob
does
double duty for FM and AM receive.
73 de James K2QI
-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Brett Howard
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 1:31 AM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Filter Question
Ok
Mostly I think it is just a consistency thing having all 8 pole or
having all 5 pole. Ive had both in my K-3. There really isnt a
difference between the 2.7 and 2.8. I can hear some slight difference
but It's not significant. Im sure the number crunchers will have
different opinions mine is
Jeff,
If and only if you are doing diversity receive, then the mismatched
filters would be noticeable. If they are not far apart, you can 'cheat'
a little on the filter offsets - set both of them the same (to the
average of the two offsets) and you are not likely to notice.
If you have the na
Why an 8 pole filter
OR
Why a 5 pole filter?
Yeah I know the 5 poles are cheaper... but other than that.
Phil
Santa Fe
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.h
Hi Keith,
In the K3 utility program, you can change the filter bandwidths to
whatever you need. Many ops use this function to set filter switch
points that are different than the listed bandwidth. Look under the
Configure tab, then push the Configure Crystal Filters radio button.
Note that sett
How do i change the cut out point for this filter? Is this something
I can change in the utility program under filter calibration?
Yes, set the bandwidth of that slot to 380 or 400 Hz. See the Owner's
Manual or K3 Utility help file.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 2/26/2014 9:28 AM, Keith Heimbo
Matt,
Thanks, I was hoping that was the case. The 1.8 kHz filter is good for SSB but
not exactly what I want at 350 kHz in CW. I think I will set it for 600 kHz and
see what happens.
I really appreciate your quick response.
Keith
AK6ZZ
Sent from my iPhone please excuse typos
> On Feb 26, 201
Thanks Joe for additional clarification will set to 400 kHz.
73,
Keith
AK6ZZ
Sent from my iPhone please excuse typos
> On Feb 26, 2014, at 6:45 AM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" wrote:
>
>
>> How do i change the cut out point for this filter? Is this something
>> I can change in the utility program u
Hi Keith,
I understand, and I'm running the 250 Hz filters in main and sub
receivers at 350 Hz, myself. If you make this type of adjustment, you
might want to check the amount of gain for the filter with the changed
switch point. It shouldn't be off by much, but worth checking anyway.
73,
matt
As I operate much more CW than SSB I need some advice and opinions from the
SSB contesters before adding additional filters for my K3s. Currently I
only have the stock 2.7Khz filters in both K3s (main and sub rx) for SSB. I
have 400hz and 250hz for CW. If I wanted to add an additional roofing
f
nd use the DSP filter to improve readability
(signals below noise) once I found a signal.
--
Message: 43
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:27:05 -0500
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV"
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter question - SSB
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Messag
aandrei wrote:
>
> I have the 5 pole 2.7 filters for main and sub RX.
> One filter offset is -.94, the other is -.81
> In order to do diversity receive, I have to set them both to about -.88
>
> My question is: what happens when you set a filter offset differently than
> the one specified (as in
Adi,
How much you can "fool" the offset depends on the filter bandwidth.
70 Hz is a small percentage (2.6%) of a 2.7 kHz bandwdth - you will
hardly notice the difference, and if you do, you have very good ears, or
are using instruments to measure it - most of us simply use our ears for
SSB.
test
_
From: Barry N1EU [via Elecraft]
[mailto:ml-node+6271081-1705900565-157...@n2.nabble.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 7:19 PM
To: pcbyrne
Subject: Re: K3 filter question
aandrei wrote:
I have the 5 pole 2.7 filters for main and sub RX.
One filter offset is -.94, the ot
I tested, as far as I could use my ears, but it is difficult to be sure (
especially being in Londodn, UK, and having S5-S9 noise on all usable bands), I
was hoping someone has tried a similar thing, or someone at Elecraft can
explain what is happening in such a situation in the radio.
E.g. wha
aandrei wrote:
>
> I tested, as far as I could use my ears, but it is difficult to be sure (
> especially being in Londodn, UK, and having S5-S9 noise on all usable
> bands), I was hoping someone has tried a similar thing, or someone at
> Elecraft can explain what is happening in such a situation
Phil,
Go to this link on the Elecraft website:
http://www.elecraft.com/K3/Roofing_Filters.htm
And this link:
http://www.elecraft.com/K3/K3_filter_plots.htm
Dave, N4QS
- Original Message -
From: "Phil Townsend"
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 8:12 PM
Subject: [El
Those 8-pole filters have steeper skirts. Either the 5- or 8-pole
work quite well.
I use 5-pole for the narrower filters (250, 500), and the 8-pole for
1.8, 2.8, 13 KHz bandwidths.
73,
matt W6NIA
K3 #24
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 19:12:58 -0600, you wrote:
>Why an 8 pole filter
>
>OR
>
>Why a 5 pole
My thought on the 5 pole was that it would give you some protection but because
the skirts were not as steep you could hear someone calling you off frequency
better. They would be down but not out. The 5's have slightly less insertion
loss and are cheaper. On the other hand they need an offset
Good point. It would depend upon whether or not you'd want to hear
someone so far from zero beat.
73,
matt
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 23:38:06 -0400, you wrote:
>My thought on the 5 pole was that it would give you some protection but
>because the skirts were not as steep you could hear someone call
Go the 1.8KHz filter bruce,
Forget the 2.1.
73 de
Jeff Cochrane - VK4BOF
East Innisfail
QLD, Australia
K3 #4257, P3#1629, KPA-500 #161
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Meier
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 9:29 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Filter
Bruce this is from a similar question on the Yahoo Groups K3 list:
-- In elecraft...@yahoogroups.com, Hector Padron wrote:
>
> The 1.8 roofer today with so much band noise and fool ops close to your
> freq disrespecting the spectrum, its a must.This 8 poles filter together
> with the DSP makes br
Bill W4ZV wrote:
>
> 3. It *WILL* require very careful tuning for intelligibility. With callers
> that are off frequency by only 100 Hz, you'll miss off-frequency callers
> the
> first time which will slow your run rate. I had one caller even 500 Hz
> below my
> run frequency and I'm certain I wo
The 1.8 is where I would go. Inrad also sells a 1.5 which a number of
people swear by for really nasty SSB contests.
Mike W0MU
J6M CQ WW DX CW Contest 2011
J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011
W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net
On 11/10/2011 4:29 AM, Bruce Meier wrote:
> As I operate much more CW th
I would not go any tighter than 1.8 KHz. I have a pair of the 1.5 KHz
filters that I would swap for 1.8s.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 11/10/2011 10:11 AM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
> The 1.8 is where I would go. Inrad also sells a 1.5 which a number of
> people swear by for really nasty SSB con
Bill W4ZV wrote:
>
> 1. It *WILL* keep your AGC from pumping if there's another strong station
> within the 1.8 kHz passband. However, do you really think you could copy a
> weak
> signal while a S9+30 interfering signal is inside your 1.8k bandwidth? I
> don't
> think so. With any typical SSB fi
I also have a pair of the 1.5 KHz filters, and while I find them to be
desirable under certain DXing situations, I rarely use them in a
contest. In a contest you need quick intelligibility and filters as
narrow as 1.5 KHz don't necessarily give you that. I have a pretty good
ear, but lots of
On 11/10/2011 8:34 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
> there is so much
> atrocious splatter from crummy rigs or ignorantly adjusted rigs during a
> major contest
YES, YES, YES.
> that it is truly rare to find such a narrow filter
> actually being helpful. I also would trade my 1.5 KHz filters for a
>
Barry N1EU wrote:
>
>
> Bill W4ZV wrote:
>>
>> 1. It *WILL* keep your AGC from pumping if there's another strong station
>> within the 1.8 kHz passband. However, do you really think you could copy
>> a weak
>> signal while a S9+30 interfering signal is inside your 1.8k bandwidth? I
>> don't
>>
I've had exactly the same experience. If the offending QRM is outside
the passband of the filter, the narrower filter setting helps. However,
If the offending QRM is heavily inside the passband (i.e., splatter), it
seems that the additional intelligibility gain by capturing more of the
desi
Bill W4ZV wrote:
>
> However, given that most SSB signals generate 3rd garbage (spurs, phase
> noise, etc) in the area of -35 dBc, an S9+30 signal just outside your 1.8k
> passband will easily obliterate a weak signal inside the passband.
>
I agree. Although I routinely use 1.8Khz roofing filte
happens outside of contests as well
I can get alongside of a SSB signal
and if it is clean have no problem
but the guys that feel increasing there bandwidth for a better/pleasant
sounding
signal creep me out,,, the K3 is the first rcv I can say this about
if the signal next door is clean regardless
I'm glad this came up because it is an aspect of filtering that seldom is
addressed.
Many folks seem to think that you can arbitrarily close down the bandwidth of a
receiver to eliminate QRM and improve intelligibility.
1.8 kHz is deemed better than 2.1 kHz, and 1.5 kHz is deemed better than
Interesting to me is position today that 2.1 kHz is narrow. For many
decades, a 2.1 kHz filter was normal, and sometimes only SSB filter.
Heathkit SB-101 etc 350 - 2450 (center 1400)
Collins KWM-2A etc 400 - 2500 (center 1450)
Sometime during the 90s, or so, the standard seemed to move t
On 11/10/2011 3:33 PM, John Oppenheimer wrote:
>> I use a 1200 Hz center frequency with my 1800 Hz roofing filter. It gives
>> roughly the same passband as my ancient FT-101E with a cascaded pair of
>> Yaesu filters, one in the normal receive line and the second in the speech
>> clipper.
>
> Du
Al Lorona wrote:
>
>1.8 kHz is deemed better than 2.1 kHz, and 1.5 kHz is deemed better
>than both.
>
>But at some point intelligibility itself suffers because you start to
>eliminate the signal you're trying to copy in the first place.
>
>I for one suffer from a type of listener's fatigue when f
Jim Brown wrote:
>On 11/10/2011 8:34 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
>> there is so much
>> atrocious splatter from crummy rigs or ignorantly adjusted rigs during a
>> major contest
>
>YES, YES, YES.
>
>> that it is truly rare to find such a narrow filter
>> actually being helpful. I also would trade
Folks - We are now hitting the single subject posting limit. Please wrap
this thread up ASAP.
73, Eric
list moderator
---
www.elecraft.com
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mai
Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
>
> Unlike a 1.8kHz DSP filter with a 2.5kHz roofing filter, the 1.8kHz
> crystal filter also avoids artefacts caused by pumping of the hardware
> AGC loop by strong signals in the gaps between the wider and the
> narrower passband.
>
The suggestion is that a 1.8Khz r
-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Bill W4ZV
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 2:21 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter question - SSB
Barry N1EU wrote:
>
>
> Bill W
52 matches
Mail list logo
