Re: [Elecraft] K rig's longevity?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's documented, just not publicly. That could always change. There's no guarantee of any more than poorly commented source code and that is true of any actively maintained software, whether it comes from Elecraft or someone else. (It has been said that Microsoft wrote Wordpad because they lost the source code for Write, so using the binary is not enough.) I didn't know they had a limited life - how many operations? What is the failure mode? All electromechanical components have limited lives. Typical specified electrical lives for relays are 100,000 operations, with rather longer mechanical ones. This is why use of the KIO2 to scan across bands is discouraged. The manufacturers don't specify what constitutes a failure, but an electrical one is likely to be parametric, i.e. excessive contact resistance, or bounce, and a mechanical one might be sluggish changeover, fatigue failure, or, maybe they would count contact welding. Keeping the switched voltages and currents low, and avoiding inductive loads on the contacts may improve the electrical life, as will tolerating higher final contact resistances. (Note these are lifetimes and represent wearout failures. Components may also have random failures resulting in mean time between failure figures, which can actually (e.g. hard disks) exceed the wearout lifetime.) -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood on ARRL Testing Methodology (LONG!)
That is exactly right. And it is not a fault only of ARRL. You never read a harsh review in RSGB RadCom or Practical Wireless over here either. PW reviews are a total waste of time as they are completely subjective. -- Julian, G4ILO K2 s/n: 392 K3 s/n: ??? G4ILO's Shack: www.g4ilo.com Ham-Directory: www.ham-directory.com On 10/1/07, Mike Fatchett W0MU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When will the day come when the information in QST is more than a fluff review, and a free multi-page advertisement for the manufacturer? When the magazine publishing costs are not paid for by the advertisers? ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] K rig's longevity?
As per the idea of understanding or determining the firmware code of a particular product - I am referring to legal situations. Example a company goes bankrupt and vanishes from the market - how do the surviving customers determine what it was that the company designed into the firmware? Or how can they continue, in some other fashion, to support and upgrade the firmware that existed. The list was discussing the longevity of rigs like the K3, etc. As a one who worked long hours in firmware RD groups - all sorts of situations need to be planned for. I guess the worst - if a Index Labs situation befell the Elecraft Inc. org. What happens then? Or a hostile takeover situation surfaced - ala kill the product. And, we as customers, what can we do, what can we request? Suddenly all the critical things surface; was the software documented? Can the customers some how obtain control of the last versions of the firmware/software? Did the designers use structure in their design, or was it more seat of the pants? Is the software full of timed loops, and critical timing software? Is the software even supported anymore in the industry? Is there a supported development system, for the software/firmware used? Given Elecraft's conservative customer-based nature - I suspect we, as customers, are in pretty good hands. As an engineer who worked many of these problems and worked with many other computer sci and firware designers in these trenches, I have natural technical concerns. Very bright computer engineers, can create some very difficult supportable software situations. Documentation, often is left to the end. We'll do all of that when we get time . I guess we are only talking a $2000 personal investment - worst case! Fred, de N3CSY western Florida Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Sherwood on ARRL Testing Methodology
W5WVO: I don't know what the test configuration of the SDR-5000 was -- I don't think it uses any discrete hardware roofing filters, does it? -- but Elecraft is already claiming that the IMDDR3 at 5 kHz spacing (400 Hz CW roofing filter) will be greater than 100 dB. (See K3 Specs page) I don't believe Eric would have let that spec be on a public web page unless he was pretty certain it would still be true when the final numbers come out. :-) The QSD design of the SDR-1000/5000 is completely different than that used by the Orion/K3, so it does not need roofing filters. Specs like IMD/BDR are determined by the resolution and linearity of the ADC in the sound card. Although Sherwood did not publish 2 kHz measurements, he did say the IMD/BDR performance is basically independent of signal spacing, so 2 kHz IMD performance is likely 96 dB also. BDR at 100 kHz was measured at 123 dB, which will also likely apply at 2 kHz. Phase noise was reported as: Phase noise (normalized) at 10 kHz spacing:123 (flat) dBc * * Phase noise does not fall off at 6 dB per octave as expected. Flex believes the present phase noise limitations are caused by A/D clock jitter. By contrast the K3's phase noise is: Rig 1kHz2 10 20 50 100 1M K3 -110 -119 -136 -140 -143 -144 -150 Bottom line is that QSD-based SDRs are very different beasts, so our assumptions based on classical designs are probably wrong. It's also dangerous to assume Elecraft's measurements will be identical to ARRL/Sherwood. There are often differences due to different test methodologies, people and equipment. For example Ten-Tec maintains Orion's 5 kHz IMD spec is 101 dB typical, but nobody else has ever measured more than about 95 dB, so I would wait for independent measurements on the K3. 73, Bill W4ZV ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: Elecraft Digest, Vol 41, Issue 51
---Original Message- From: Brett gazdzinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] In my book, comparing elecraft to heathkit is a bad idea. I disagree! I think Heathkit built stuff with price way to much in mind, and often used poor or very odd designs to save money and reduce kit price. Having built or extensively worked on the HW-101, DX-20, DX-100, VF-1, AR-2, QF-1, V-4, V-7, TC-1, GD-1, HP-23, HP-13, SB line, HW-2036 and more, I say Heath *sometimes* used unusual designs, mostly in the early days. The DX100 was full of compromises to cost, with weird power supply setups, very small driver transformer, 1625 tubes instead of 807's, a rickety vfo, etc. There was nothing 'weird' about the power supply setup of the DX-100. It was very conventional for the time. The driver transformer was small because they were trying to limit the frequency range of the rig. 1625s are simply the 12 volt version of the 807; they were all over the place back then at incredibly low prices. The VFO was simply the guts of a VF-1. The DX-100 was Heath's version of the Johnson Viking 2/122 VFO combo, built into a single box. Compare the schematics and see how similar they are. To compete with EFJ, Heath had to offer a significantly lower price, and the only way to do that was to replace high cost parts with less expensive ones, because the Viking 2 was available as a kit. The HW101 used a poor filter at 9 MHz? and some really odd rare tubes. The HW-101 IF filter is at 3.395 MHz. It was no worse than many filters of the day. None of the tubes in an HW-101 were rare when the rig was designed. They were all current-production, and using the types they did improved performance and reduced cost. All of them can still be found with a little looking. It should be remembered that the HW-101 originally sold for $250, which was an incredibly low price for the time. Consider just the cost of the tubes, (more than a dozen, including two 6146s), the xtal filter (a prefab unit custom made for Heath) and the 12 heterodyne, carrier and calibrator crystals (also custom made) and it's a wonder they could keep the price so low. Power supplies were always very marginal. Not in my experience! The only marginal power supplies in Heath ham gear I know of were in the DX-35/DX-40. There was a cure for that, too. I can understand the HW7 was a very low cost direct conversion rig, but even then, they could have made the design better for little or no additional cost. How? When looking at old rigs, the realities of their times must be remembered. Adding a few dollars in parts to a kit meant adding several dollars to the price, which cut hard into sales. When you look at prices from the old days, run them through an inflation-adjuster to see what they translate to in 2007 money. The amateur market then was much smaller than today, because there were far fewer hams, more homebrewing and surplus, and the cost was so much higher. Sure, Heath made some clunkers. Any company that put out so many products and lines so fast and with so much attention to cost could have the same problem. But before labeling a rig as a clunker, consider its times, not today's standards. No mention of Heath ham gear would be complete without tribute to the HW-16, a work of genius if there ever was one. Try actually building a rig to compete with the old Heathkit designs, using only parts and techniques available then, and using prices from those days. Elecraft on the other hand always seems to well exceed the sum of its parts, they take very basic circuits, computer control them, and get fantastic performance out of them. Looking at the diagrams, there is not THAT much difference between the sierra, the KX1, K1, and K2, at least in the analog part. Single conversion, xtal filter, the differences seem to be more in the computer control... The sierra was actually more complex with its IF amp chip... The true radio performance (dynamic range, sensitivity) comes mostly from the analog part. The features come from the controllers, except for things like the truly elegant VCO system. Schematics alone do not tell the whole story of any rig. While heathkit stuff always worked, it was usually a poor performer and had loads of improvements that could be done to it. That was part of the fun I suppose In my experience, Heath gear performed well, compared to the competition. Of course an SB-line was not as good as an S-line, but when a complete SB-line setup cost less than an S-line receiver, that shouldn't be a surprise. -Original Message- [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Wheeler Perhaps someone more familiar with the history of Heathkit could draw some similarities? One big similarity is the hands on approach. With kits, a ham had at least some idea what was inside the box, and a sporting chance of fixing it if something went wrong. There's also the experience of using something you
Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood on ARRL Testing Methodology (LONG!)
Good idea, I tried 2 years ago with the K2. Stewart G3RXQ Carefully steering clear of Airplane trap. On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 13:59:01 +0200, Simon Brown (HB9DRV) wrote: I expect he will be interested - with any luck he'll be at the RSGB HF convention, I'll ask him about this. Shirley someone can arrange for him to get his hands on a K3. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: Stewart Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] When I spoke with Peter a year or so back about a possible K2 review he didn't seem very interested. Who knows, the K3 may evoke a different response. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Elecraft vs. Heath.
Interesting thoughts, comparing the two companies across time space. I see many similarities, but one major difference. Elecraft has managed to thrive against the market forces that caused Heath to sink. The Japanese rigs dominate the field and offer lots of features for a low price. Well, wait, now, TenTec seems to be doing well tool. Maybe it isn't the same market. There are indeed more hams today and we as a group have more disposable income than 30 yrs ago. Sheesh, many of us were in our teens back then and are just now getting to where we can spend some serious money on ham gear. Also, I believe the ham population has become far wiser regarding gear performance. Back in the day, sensitivity seemed to be the driving metric. These days we're looking at all kinds of performance metrics. When we examine yesterday's well-respected rigs based on today's knowledge, we find they often come up very short. A smarter customer base with more money to spend means you can build a superior product and have luck selling it. I believe Ikensu has missed the boat to some extent. By focusing of features first, performance second, they've pushed the top performing rigs into the top category. Average folks are left with sub-standard rigs to buy. This has created a hole in the market which Elecraft is doing a great job filling. - Keith N1AS - - K2 5411.ssb.100 - - K3 wave 3 - ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood on ARRL Testing Methodology
At these incredibly low signal levels a very good screened room is required. Even in the 70's I was using a copper enclosure to measure sensitivity levels within a double screened room. Extraneous radiation from the test equipment itself disturbed our measurements. We had to fit blanking plugs to unused outlets on various bits of gear. This is not for the home lab. David G3UNA From: Don Wilhelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/10/01 Mon PM 03:53:59 BST To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood on ARRL Testing Methodology As measurements become more precise, it becomes more and more important to recognize what Bill is pointing out. A slight difference in test setup can result in a different result. These measurements are done at the sub-microvolt level and it does not take much to create a difference. Test equipment must be calibrated, and the calibration tolerance should be known. Traceable calibration is one thing, but the tolerance limits of that calibration are also important - not all calibration labs are equal. Even with calibrated equipment and the same test setup, two different equipment operators may yield two different results. As an example, consider an instrument having a display for readout (like an oscilloscope), the trace has a finite width, and one operator may place the cursor on the midpoint of a trace width while another may place it at one edge yielding two different values - how much they differ depends on the resolution used, brightness of the trace, scale illumination, how well the display was focused, etc. One good step in the right direction would be to report the region of uncertainty for all measurements. For me, that is a piece of information that becomes more critical as the measured values become smaller. The ARRL lab may do that calculation in-house (I haven't asked), but they do not state it in their published reports. So for now, when I see comparison data between two receiver that vary only by a dB or so, I usually figure that is close enough to ignore the difference (I usually do consider 3 dB or more difference to be significant). 73, Don W3FPR Bill Tippett wrote: snip... It's also dangerous to assume Elecraft's measurements will be identical to ARRL/Sherwood. There are often differences due to different test methodologies, people and equipment. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft vs. Heath.
On 10/1/07, Vic K2VCO [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: as Kenwood did. It's unfortunate that Tentec, which as far as I know does not have a big non-ham business, will take a hit. But that's biz biz. Well, TenTec does have some commercial and government radio contracts and, I believe, they have a pretty succesful enclosure and tool and die business that can stand alone. How lucritive? I'm not sure. -- JT Croteau, N1ESE - Manchester, NH (FN42gx) ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Elecraft vs. Heath.
Vic, You've hit on a major factor in my recent decision to order a K3. I believe we are on the eve of a shift in the market. I believe at $2000, the K3 is really going to win a lot of hearts. I wanted to get my order on the books as late as possible before that flood hits. I suspect demand for the rig will be high. I'm hoping there will be a bit of a lag. So far K3 sales have (I'm guessing here) largely been within the family, to current Elecraft customers who are upgrading / supplementing. But, once these rigs hit the air and people start winning contests with them, and once ARRL tests them and gives them their blessing, we'll see demand go up. I was going to wait for a while and order next spring or a year from now after the initial flood subsides, but I'm not sure it will subside that quickly. One thing is for sure, it is exciting to be watching from *almost* behind the scenes, as a new rig comes into being. I can't WAIT to see the QST review and to see how the K3 is received by the ham market. Maybe in a couple of years we'll see a hostile takeover as Elecraft buys Kenwood :-) - Keith N1AS - - K2 5411.ssb.100 - - K3 Wave 3 - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vic K2VCO Now with the K3 Elecraft has leveraged its two-way communication and the exceptional ability of its developers to take direct aim at the big boys. I suspect that they have been more or less taken by surprise. They will be hurt. The Japanese manufacturers are big players in the handheld market and in non-amateur areas. They may react by scaling down in the HF ham market, as Kenwood did. It's unfortunate that Tentec, which as far as I know does not have a big non-ham business, will take a hit. But that's biz biz. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] K2 Reception Improvement - DSP or AF filter?
Hey Kevin, I've had both the DSP and AF in my K2 at one time or another. Currently I have neither. I thought the AF was pretty good. It worked great for removing a lot of the IF hiss that I would hear in the headphones. At the narrowest setting, it rang a bit more than I wanted though. I tried the DSP for a bit as well. It did a better job of creating narrow AF filters than the AF filter did but it too would ring at the narrowest settings. I found the NR and other features on the DSP to be uninspiring. In the end, I figured it was an awful lot of money to spend to get narrow audio filtering so I sold it. In retrospect, I think I let go of the DSP too soon. I suspect there are times when the NR would be of great benefit but I didn't live with it long enough to really find out. I'm currently running an external QF-1A and it works nicely. I get all the AF filtering I want, two notch filters and there's the added benefit that it greatly improves the sound of my sidetone. You asked about atmospheric and man-made noise. I'm not sure either of these will do much to take care of that stuff. Static crashes still come booming through, although with less audio bandwidth. I think the electrical noise is something you'd need an NB to deal with. - Keith N1AS - - K2 5411.ssb.100 - - K3 Wave 3 - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of KBG Luxford Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 9:59 PM To: Elecraft Subject: [Elecraft] K2 Reception Improvement - DSP or AF filter? Now that my K2 is on the air (CW only until I assemble the SSB adapter) I am thinking about some fruit salad. The bands are pretty noisy at the moment - atmospheric, touch lamps, fluorescents, electrical storms et al. Has anyone experience of both the K2 DSP and AF filter that could offer a comparison? Many thanks and 73 Kevin VK3DAP / ZL2DAP ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft vs. Heath.
I used to live in Seymour TN, the next town over from Sevierville, and I knew quite a few of the management and engineering people at Ten Tec. I cannot say what their present situation is, but back when I knew them, Tec Tec made its money from its Government radio contracts and from custom machining in its tool room. They consistently lost money on their ham gear. They stayed in the ham business because 1) the top management were active hams and supported ham radio, and 2) they made enough profit from their other operations that they could afford to subsidize their ham manufacturing. 73 Steve Kercel AA4AK At 12:17 PM 10/1/2007, JT Croteau wrote: On 10/1/07, Vic K2VCO [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: as Kenwood did. It's unfortunate that Tentec, which as far as I know does not have a big non-ham business, will take a hit. But that's biz biz. Well, TenTec does have some commercial and government radio contracts and, I believe, they have a pretty succesful enclosure and tool and die business that can stand alone. How lucritive? I'm not sure. -- JT Croteau, N1ESE - Manchester, NH (FN42gx) ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft vs. Heath.
Hello Vic, But along the way people noticed that a single-conversion radio whose major goal was something other than low parts count could provide performance as good or better in some ways than the big boys. This is a fine example that more is not always better. One should assume that a double, triple or quadruple superhet receiver is superior to a single conversion design. Regarding strong signal handling capabilities this is not the case. The reason one went away from single conversion is that an economical general coverage receiver needs a high IF. Quality narrow filters at e.g. 45 MHz can be made, but are far more expensive than filters at a lower frequency. Hence the choice for a single wide and cheap filter at the first IF. However nothing dramatic is on order with a double conversion design with a high first IF, when proper gain distribution is maintained. Non of the major players have been able to address this issue right, but for one: AOR with the AR7030. This receiver ranks number four in the Sherwood Engineering Receiver Test Data List. This is achieved by an excellent active second mixer, the now obsolete Plessy SL6440. The low noise local oscillator completes an at the time innovative design. I own one and will not part from it. The receiver of the K2 is a simple and straight forward design. That the K2 performs better than the competition has much to say about the (lack of) performance of the major brands. In Dutch we have a saying that goes like among the blind one-eye is King.(I know someone who is in contesting and DX-peditioning. He told me that on an un-sponsored DX-pedition the group prefers to use K2's). In my view the strength of the K2 is, besides a sound RF-design, contained in the software. I have built quite a few receivers here, but I seem to come back to the K2 again and again. It simply is a joy to use. Some of you seem to call this mo-jo. Roelof Bakker, pa0rdt Middelburg, Netherlands JO11tm -- Mijn Postvak In wordt beschermd door SPAMfighter. 403 spam-mails zijn er tot op heden geblokkeerd. Download de gratis SPAMfighter via deze link: http://www.spamfighter.com/lnl ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft vs. Heath.
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 08:57:30AM -0700 I heard the voice of Vic K2VCO, and lo! it spake thus: Elecraft made another innovation, which is the ability of the developers to talk directly to their customers. The two-way dialog that they have created is unique in the industry, and the Japanese manufacturers cannot duplicate it. Possibly Tentec could, but so far they haven't. This is not just a side issue. Think about the amount of time that Eric and Wayne spend reading and writing on this reflector -- they wouldn't do it if it were not essential for both development, marketing, and support. On this, see some of Clay Shirky's writings about Audience vs. Community, e.g: Though both are held together in some way by communication, an audience is typified by a one-way relationship between sender and receiver, and by the disconnection of its members from one another -- a one-to-many pattern. In a community, by contrast, people typically send and receive messages, and the members of a community are connected to one another, not just to some central outlet -- a many-to-many pattern. [1] Both the channel between the developers and users, and the channel among the users, are vital bits of the Elecraft Community. The big manufacturers probably couldn't duplicate it if they tried, but they wouldn't want to try: As a result of these differences, communities have strong upper limits on size, while audiences can grow arbitrarily large. Put another way, the larger a group held together by communication grows, the more it must become like an audience -- largely disconnected and held together by communication traveling from center to edge -- because increasing the number of people in a group weakens communal connection.[1] Audience vs. Community isn't Good vs. Bad, they're just two alternatives. Audience gives you scale, which is what a company like Icom wants. Elecraft [this is all speculative on my part, btw, but I think it's reasonably accurate] is perfectly willing to give up the scale of being a Big Company and Selling Lots Of Units. Sure, they're in business to make money (otherwise, you're not in business), and all else being equal more is better, but all else isn't equal. Due to either a particular choice of market niche, or pre-existing biases of the developers (and probably both), the dialogue between developers and users is desired. Due to the nature of the products (and thus the people using them), the dialogue among users fruitfully occurs. And it's due to the combination, the overlapping, the mutually-reinforcing of the two components, that Elecraft has a Community, rather than an Audience. In a sense, to really go after the big boys on volume (as opposed to just on technology), Elecraft would have to end up with a much larger Audience than they currently have. That wouldn't necessarily spell the end of the Community (the two can exist somewhat independently; the large Audience buying and using the products, and the smaller Community interacting), but it would certainly change the dynamics of the situation. Currently, the Community is a significant portion (maybe not a majority, but certainly a large hunk) of the customer base; after such a change, it would no longer be. An interesting sociological study. [1] http://shirky.com/writings/community_scale.html Some other essays on the site touch on similar topics, but this is the most topical. He talks about communities in a somewhat different setting than this relatively specific and technical one, but it's still good general musings. -- Matthew Fuller, N3TZJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft vs. Heath.
Julian G4ILO wrote: I think that the Japanese manufacturers are influenced most by the Japanese market which, from what I've read, is a lot different to the rest of the world. Many JA hams live in apartments, and have limited antenna options. A lot are restricted to low power. In Japan, you can (or certainly used to be able to) buy 10W versions of radios that are only available in 100W versions here. If you're so restricted, you may well be more interested in knobs, buttons and appearance than in performance specs that you can't actually get any advantage from. I think Julian has nailed it here, in that the Ikensu strategy has always been essentially marketing-driven, and their experience base derives primarily from their domestic market. But I don't think the mass appeal of radios with a sexy appearance and sub-optimal performance is limited to Japan. We have plenty of substantially underinformed (trying to be charitable here) amateur operators right here in the USA, and I think the Ikensu features-first strategy will continue to work in this market. Will the K3 impact sales of their top-end super-premium transceivers? Probably. But how many of those radios do they actually sell? Not many in comparison to the number of low-end and mid-range transceivers they sell. And of course the VHF/UHF FM marketplace is huge in comparison to the high-performance HF marketplace as well, especially in this country where the majority of new hams settle into a niche on a local 2M repeater and never go beyond it. So I wouldn't worry about Ikensu being badly damaged. :-) Not that we would anyway! Bill / W5WVO ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] WTB
K8TB wrote: Now, what does a K2-10 go for? Absolutely silly people out there. And the answer is to look at Ebay auction item #220155224745. It is going for about a third less than that Heathkit went for. Seems someone *really* wanted to add the Heathkit radio to their collection. -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/ |What are we going to do today, Borg? Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 |Same thing we always do, Pinkutus: | Try to assimilate the world! #include disclaimer/favourite | -Pinkutus the Borg ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft vs. Heath.
Case in point, how many Icom/Yaesu/Kenwood rigs do you see dedicated to 220 Mhz or even multi-band VHF/UHF rigs with 220 capability? Julian G4ILO wrote: I think that the Japanese manufacturers are influenced most by the Japanese market which, from what I've read, is a lot different to the rest of the world. -- Blog: http://thek3ngreport.blogspot.com/ ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] FS: *AGAIN* Elecraft AF1 audio filter - assembled - unused
Previous deal fell through. This is up for sale again: --- Elecraft AF1 active audio filter. Bought it new last month, assembled and tested, nice build quality. I have no need for it. Elecraft price $60 (unassembled) plus shipping Your price $45 assembled and shipped (within U.S.) --Andrew, NV1B ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood on ARRL Testing Methodology
-Original Message- From: Goody K3NG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Another thing to note is that ARRL buys all the gear they review, right off the shelf just like any other ham would. And it's bought in such a way that the seller doesn't know it's going to be an ARRL test unit. -- As for fluff in ARRL Product Reviews, I attribute that to the wide 'dynamic range' of the readership's technical knowledge. On the one end are hams who can recite testing methodologies for all sorts of performance metrics, including pitfalls and claimed-vs-observed numbers. At the other end are hams who don't understand why you'd want passband tuning, narrow filters, or what the attenuator/preamp switch does. And everything in between. On top of that are complaints that QST is too technical and/or aimed only at the contest/DX/big station hams, etc., etc. So we get Product Reviews that are part lab test, part feelings, and part an attempt to Elmer. All jammed into a limited space, and on a limited time, to be done by a limited staff. The K2 got an expanded report that only appeared online. Went into more detail than the mag report. K3 should get the same. One ham's fluff is another ham's main interest. 73 de Jim, N2EY Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] FS: *SOLD AGAIN* Elecraft AF1 audio filter - assembled -unused
Andrew and Gang: I want to apologise again for having to back away from buying your AF1 filtre. No worries Doc and certainly no hard feelings. Filter has been resold. Best to you and your health Doc -- take care of yourself. 72, --Andrew ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Fwd: [Elecraft] K2/100 Usable for Winlink 2000?]
A little less than a month ago I posted a query to the Elecraft list with the same Subject line. I received a very useful reply form Bert, PA0LPE, telling me that a German ham had modified a K2 to allow the low-level audio to be taken from and sent to the K2. He even sent me a link to a website (written in German) that told how to do it. After another kind ham told me of a website that did machine translation, I was able to modify my own K2. I also ordered an SCS PTC-2usb modem. It took me about two weeks to do all the modifications and to get things working, but the answer to my question is Yes, the K2/100 is usable for Winlink 2000. The Airmail software is able to control the K2, changing bands and setting the correct frequency for the desired station. I was able to connect to a PMBO and send a test message late this afternoon. Now, having done that, I would be happy to share with anyone interested just how I got everything to work. 72, Jim - W4BQP ARES EC, Spartanburg Co., SC ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
