date:20091219

Jerry,

Yes, do check the LPF and relays first just as a 'confidence builder'.
If that is all working fine, then I would first direct you to the 
wattmeter section.  Check with an external wattmeter in-line.  If the 
output power is in excess of 100 watts no matter what the requested 
power setting, then the KPA100 wattmeter is not working (D16 and D17 
usually is the problem).  Once you obtain proper power level control, 
then other problems can be addressed if necessary.

73,
Don W3FPR

n0jrn wrote:
> Thanks Don:
>
> Easy enough !   I appreciate that very much.
>
> Yes I am working with my KPA100.  I'm looking for why the K2 drops out of TX 
> when I try to adjust output above 35 watts.
>
> A couple of the bands are also showing excessive current draw and high 
> reflected.
>
> Just wanted to check the relays and make sure everything in the LPF first.
>
> I've spent a good part of the evening reading the archives for similar 
> issues.   Your comments in most cases take folks back to the SWR bridge and 
> related components.
>
> BUT first things first !
>
> Have a great evening
>
> Jerry
>
>   
>> I assume you are working on a KPA100 - if not, please ignore.
>> The easiest way to check the relays and the LPF of the KPA100 is with an
>> antenna analyzer.
>> Put the KPA100 to the right of the K2 (upside down on a book or other
>> support) with the ribbon cable connected to the K2.  Power only the base
>> K2 through the coaxial jack.
>> Put the leads of a 50 (ok, 51 will do fine) ohm resistor into the
>> connector that normally connects to the AUX RF header.
>> Power the K2 on and select each band in turn.  For each band, scan
>> through the frequency range of the antenna analyzer to determine the
>> cutoff frequency for the LPF - it should be higher than the band edge,
>> but lower than the 2nd harmonic.
>> If all bands meet that criteria, the relays and LPF are correct -
>> assemble the KPA100 to the base K2 and go.
>> 
>
> __
> 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
> 
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 9.0.717 / Virus Database: 270.14.114/2575 - Release Date: 12/19/09 
> 03:33:00
>
>   
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Checking KPA relays

2009-12-19 Thread n0jrn

Thanks Don:

Easy enough !   I appreciate that very much.

Yes I am working with my KPA100.  I'm looking for why the K2 drops out of TX 
when I try to adjust output above 35 watts.

A couple of the bands are also showing excessive current draw and high 
reflected.

Just wanted to check the relays and make sure everything in the LPF first.

I've spent a good part of the evening reading the archives for similar 
issues.   Your comments in most cases take folks back to the SWR bridge and 
related components.

BUT first things first !

Have a great evening

Jerry

> I assume you are working on a KPA100 - if not, please ignore.
> The easiest way to check the relays and the LPF of the KPA100 is with an
> antenna analyzer.
> Put the KPA100 to the right of the K2 (upside down on a book or other
> support) with the ribbon cable connected to the K2.  Power only the base
> K2 through the coaxial jack.
> Put the leads of a 50 (ok, 51 will do fine) ohm resistor into the
> connector that normally connects to the AUX RF header.
> Power the K2 on and select each band in turn.  For each band, scan
> through the frequency range of the antenna analyzer to determine the
> cutoff frequency for the LPF - it should be higher than the band edge,
> but lower than the 2nd harmonic.
> If all bands meet that criteria, the relays and LPF are correct -
> assemble the KPA100 to the base K2 and go.

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise - my test results (long)

Joe,

Fine business on those measurements, and thank you for providing the 
data.  I note that all except the K3 show the taper from 1600 Hz to the 
upper passband edge that follows something similar to a "pink noise" 
spectrum.  The K3 is flat without EQ.  It is interesting that the K3 
Norm does show some falloff, but not nearly as much as either the 
FT-2000 or the MK V or IC-706.

I am ready to conclude that the K3's ultra-flat in-passband response is 
the cause of several of the "noisy" responses.  That can be easily 
handled by shaping with the RX EQ if one desires.  I do data modes 
frequently, and prefer the flat response of the K3.

The audio response above the filter passband apparently has less 
influence than I had originally expected.

73,
Don W3FPR

Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> It would be interesting (at least to me) for someone to make similar 
>> measurements on an FT-1000 - perhaps with the INRAD filter.  I am 
>> especially interested to know if the in-passband response shows a 
>> similar taper at 2 kHz and above, and what is the response for the 
>> FT-1000 above the filter passband.
>> 
>
> Here are some measurements using Spectrogram and broadband noise: 
>
>   FT-2000   --- MK V --- IC-706 -- K3 --
>
> Analog   DSP MKIIG Norm  BW=4   EQ
>
>   50  -34   -44 -49  -46-35   -7   -35
>  100  -31   -24 -27  -40-18   -6   -18
>  200  -17   -10  -9  -21 -5   -2-5
>  300   -6-4  -4  -11 -10-1
>  400   -3-2  -1   -5  00 0
>  600   -2-1   0   -1  00 2
>  800   -1-1   00  00 1
> 1000   -1-1   0   -1  00 0
> 12000-1   0   -2  00 0
> 14000 0   0   -1  00-2
> 1600   -1-2  -1   -2  00-3
> 1800   -2-3  -2   -3  00-4
> 2000   -5-5  -2   -4 -10-5
> 2200   -7-6  -3   -6 -20-7
> 2400   -8-8  -4   -8 -20-8
> 2600  -10   -10  -6  -15 -30-9
> 2700  -23   -13  -7  -27 -40   -10
> 2800  -34   -19 -11  -31 -80   -14
> 2900  -41   -32 -24  -33-180   -24
> 3000  -50   -43 -36  -35-580   -60
> 3100-42 -670  
> 3200-580  
> 3300   0  
> 3400   0  
> 3500   0  
> 3600  -1  
> 3700  -2  
> 3800  -4  
> 3900  -5
> 4000 -13
> 4100 -34
> 4150 -66
>
> All measurements were made at the speaker output for consistency. 
> All measurements were made in USB mode with the default filter 
> settings.  FT-1000MP Mark V was measured with both the analog 
> and DSP (100-3100 Hz setting) detectors. 
>
> The two additional K3 measurements are 1) FM filter, BW=4.00 
> and FC=2.00 and 2) "NORM" using the "pink EQ" settings (1.60=-3, 
> 2.40=-5, 3.20=-6).  
>
> Note the K3 audio amplifier is the cleanest hands down.  The other 
> transceivers had noise floors at about -120 dBV (IC-706 mkIIg was 
> -100 dBV).  Except for what appear to be artifacts of the ADC 
> clock at 4, 8, 12, 16, 18 and 20 KHz the K3 out of band audio 
> noise is <140 dBV.
>
> 73, 
>
>... Joe, W4TV 
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Don Wilhelm [mailto:w3...@embarqmail.com] 
>> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 5:14 PM
>> To: li...@subich.com
>> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise - my test results (long)
>>
>>
>> Joe,
>>
>> I think you may have hit on some major part of the "problem" here.  I 
>> measured the passband (and out of passband) response of my K3 
>> and my K2, 
>> Yaesu FT-900 and Yaesu FT-817.  All measurements were with the SSB 
>> filter in all transceivers, and the K3 DSP width was set to 
>> maximum.  My 
>> K2 has the 2.4 kHz filter and the Yaesu transceivers have the 
>> stock SSB 
>> filter.
>>
>> The test setup consisted of an Elecraft broadband noise generator 
>> feeding that receiver and the output was observed with 
>> Spectrogram.  The 
>> receiver gain controls were adjusted to place the peak in-passband 
>> response at -30 dB.
>> I also connected an antenna and listened

Re: [Elecraft] Noisy K3 receiver

2009-12-19 Thread Philippe Trottet

Dear Bryan,
As you say, you're not playing with the settings of the K3, you really
must try !
K3 is a "Piston Cup" winner car compared to a standard limousine. 
You have the full choice to adapt all parameters to your own perception
and frankly speaking as I have been owner or tester for most of the
modern Ham and professional rigs, Elecraft waked up my Ham spirit after
years of Ham radio routine with general purpose trcvr's. This is Ham
product, by Hams and for Hams...what else !
They improved the rx side to the limit we can obtain today and I'm
quite sure they will go further, following the improvement of
technology.
Hpe to c u sn as propag with ZL is increasing yet.
Note: I'm refusing to play with rotating antennas, too easy, no fun,
only wires are used on my side for years, same thing with cw, no
interest at all to play with a computer where you've just to press
Functions keys. 
Vibroplex for normal use and hand key for contest that's real Ham sport
!
Best 73's
Philippe A65BI 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Philippe TROTTET 
Head of Field Telecom Unit - DUBAI

 
United Nations High Commissioner for  Refugees
International Humanitarian City
Office Building Nº3 - Room 2, 1st Floor
Doha Street
PO BOX: 506013
DUBAI - U.A.E.
 
Dubai time: GMT +4
W: Sunday to Thursday
HQ Ext: 7120
Vsat: xx 41 22 7120
External:
+971 4 3601753
+41 22 739 7120
Mobile: +971 504531756
Website: www.unhcr.org ( http://www.unhcr.org/ )


>>> "Bryan, ZL1NI"  18-12-2009 23:28 >>>
I would be interested to know how you arrive at that conclusion.

My perception is a LOT of people have posted genuine concerns about
noisy K3 receiver.

I will add my voice to those that find the K3 noisy receiver very
disturbing.
I am a casual user I rarely diddle with settings beyond the factory
defaults. This is true for the several other late model rigs of
different makes I own and operate.
I find the K3 very noisy and fatiguing in comparison to any of the
other rigs I have when tuning around a relatively quite band. I Rarely
use the preamp mostly have the attenuator in.

Bryan, Zl1NI

> -Original Message-
> 
> Stan,
> 
> Those who are complaining are the exceptions to the rule.
> 
> There are thousands of K3 users that are not complaining. There are
> a few,
> very vocal complainers here.
> 
> 73

__
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
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Checking KPA relays

Jerry,

I assume you are working on a KPA100 - if not, please ignore.
The easiest way to check the relays and the LPF of the KPA100 is with an 
antenna analyzer.
Put the KPA100 to the right of the K2 (upside down on a book or other 
support) with the ribbon cable connected to the K2.  Power only the base 
K2 through the coaxial jack.
Put the leads of a 50 (ok, 51 will do fine) ohm resistor into the 
connector that normally connects to the AUX RF header.
Power the K2 on and select each band in turn.  For each band, scan 
through the frequency range of the antenna analyzer to determine the 
cutoff frequency for the LPF - it should be higher than the band edge, 
but lower than the 2nd harmonic.
If all bands meet that criteria, the relays and LPF are correct - 
assemble the KPA100 to the base K2 and go.

73,
Don W3FPR

n0jrn wrote:
> Gang:   I'm finally off for the weekend.   Just curious, what is the 
> easiest way to check the low pass filter relays to see if they are 
> working?
>
> I've already checked U2 and pins 13 -18 are going low as they should.  I'm 
> just not sure what I should be looking for to determine if the relays are 
> working.
>
> Thanks and 73
>
> Jerry  N0JRN 
>
> __
> 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
> 
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 9.0.717 / Virus Database: 270.14.114/2575 - Release Date: 12/19/09 
> 03:33:00
>
>   
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!

2009-12-19 Thread Bill Johnson


I reloaded everything. Shut down and restarted, and there we go. I deleted ALL 
old files and now much better. Thank you for the idea!!! we are now much closer 
to what I expected in to start.  Oh, well, early adopters?  I think needed just 
a bit more time before release or the beta team was not used.  I have been a 
field tester on a lot of projects.  My question to Dave and co. did you use the 
full process.

 
Bill
K9YEQ
K2-#35 (2 more), KX1-#35, K3, TS2000, IC7000, etc.



 
> Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 18:41:42 -0800
> From: df...@yahoo.com
> Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!
> To: k9...@live.com
> 
> Bill,
> 
> It sounds like you're getting a SWR alarm. These occur when ALARM is turned 
> on and the W2 sees a high SWR. The SWR LEDs will blink until you power cycle 
> the W2. Set ALARM to off using the W2 Interface software and power cycle the 
> W2. 
> 
> David, W4SMT
> 
> --- On Sat, 12/19/09, Bill K9YEQ  wrote:
> 
> > From: Bill K9YEQ 
> > Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!
> > To: df...@yahoo.com
> > Date: Saturday, December 19, 2009, 9:24 PM
> > Tried it. No luck. The W2 is now not
> > working for me.  I now get flashing
> > full SWR LED's and that occurs after tuning in low
> > power.  The unit was
> > working to some degree before the last upgrade to .93
> > 
> > 
> > 73,
> > 
> > Bill
> > K9YEQ
> > K2 #35; KX1 #35; K3 #1744; mini mods
> > ATS-3B
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
> > [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net]
> > On Behalf Of David Fleming
> > Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 1:54 PM
> > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net;
> > NZ0T
> > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!
> > 
> > Hi Bill,
> > 
> > Try deleting the preferences file "W2Prefs" and restarting
> > the .EXE. 
> > 
> > On XP, it's located in: 
> > 
> > C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Application Data. 
> > 
> > On Vista and Windows 7:
> > 
> > C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming
> > 
> > 73, David, W4SMT
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Sat, 12/19/09, NZ0T 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > From: NZ0T 
> > > Subject: [Elecraft]  Help! W2 interface window is
> > gone!
> > > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> > > Date: Saturday, December 19, 2009, 2:06 PM
> > > 
> > > All of a sudden I can't see the window of the W2
> > interface
> > > on my computer. 
> > > The program is running and shows up on the task bar at
> > the
> > > bottom of the
> > > screen but but I can't get it to appear on the
> > > screen.  I have deleted it
> > > and re-loaded a few times with no luck.  I'm using
> > > XP.
> > > 
> > > Any ideas?
> > > 
> > > 73 Bill NZ0T
> > > -- 
> > > View this message in context:
> > http://n2.nabble.com/Help-W2-interface-window-is-gone-tp4192372p4192372.html
> > > Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at
> > Nabble.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
> > > 
> > __
> > 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
> > 
> > 
  
_
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222986/direct/01/
__
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

[Elecraft] Elecraft CW Net Announcement

2009-12-19 Thread Kevin Rock

Good Evening,
   This week Oregon has gotten back to normal.  Grey, very wet days, cool 
nights, and mild winds.  Luckily I did not undergo the deep freeze they had 
down in the valley.  Reading the paper I found their pipes froze quite a bit 
more than my one hour outage.  I just flipped on the space heater in the 
pumphouse and life was good again.  Running water is wonderful; hot running 
water is most fabulous :)  
   Throughout the week propagation was good but we are due to be smacked by a 
large CME.  The sunspot group shot it outward a few days ago and projections 
have been stating today is the day of impact.  Once the ionosphere settles down 
propagation should be rather nice.  Tomorrow we get to test that hypothesis by 
getting on and listening for one another.  

Please join us tomorrow evening.
 
1) Hail signs  (first letter or two of the suffix of your call)
2) NCS help  (as well as QSP/QNP  help)

Sunday 2300z (Sunday 3 PM PST) 14050 kHz
Monday z (Sunday 4 PM PST)  7045 kHz

   Stay warm,
  Kevin.  KD5ONS

-
__
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

[Elecraft] Checking KPA relays

2009-12-19 Thread n0jrn

Gang:   I'm finally off for the weekend.   Just curious, what is the 
easiest way to check the low pass filter relays to see if they are 
working?

I've already checked U2 and pins 13 -18 are going low as they should.  I'm 
just not sure what I should be looking for to determine if the relays are 
working.

Thanks and 73

Jerry  N0JRN 

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] OT: soldering leads to coin cell batteries

2009-12-19 Thread John Young

I salvage the holders from old computer mother boards.  Saves risking
explosion of the coin cell

73  John

-- 
John D Young
WA8KNE
ETC USN retired

On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Ken Alexander wrote:

>
> Hi John,
>
> If the leads on the existing cells are thin metal strips then they probably
> won't come off with a soldering iron.  They're usually welded on during the
> manufacturing process.
>
> You might try Mouser or Digi-Key to see if you can find a battery holder it
> would slip into.  The holder would have leads that are easy to connect to.
>
> 73,
>
> Ken Alexander
> VE3HLS
>
>
> --- On Sat, 12/19/09, John Ferguson  wrote:
>
> > From: John Ferguson 
> > Subject: [Elecraft] OT: soldering leads to coin cell batteries
> > To: elecr...@mailman.qth..net
> > Date: Saturday, December 19, 2009, 2:35 PM
> > Does anyone here have experience
> > soldering leads to coin cell batteries?
> > My Compaq Armada M300 needs a new cmos battery.  the
> > present one is a 2032 with 2 leads and a molex plug.
> >
> > my scheme is to put the needle point on my trusty WTCP,
> > remove the leads from the old battery, sand them and tin
> > them and using the flux I used for the smt project, quickly
> > as in QUICKLY touch the point to the leads.
> >
> > Why not?
> >
> > AI4TO  John Ferguson m/v arcadian
> >
> >
> >
> > __
> > 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
> >
>
> __
> 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
>
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise - my test results (long)


> It would be interesting (at least to me) for someone to make similar 
> measurements on an FT-1000 - perhaps with the INRAD filter.  I am 
> especially interested to know if the in-passband response shows a 
> similar taper at 2 kHz and above, and what is the response for the 
> FT-1000 above the filter passband.

Here are some measurements using Spectrogram and broadband noise: 

FT-2000   --- MK V --- IC-706 -- K3 --

Analog   DSP MKIIG Norm  BW=4   EQ

  50-34   -44 -49  -46-35   -7   -35
 100-31   -24 -27  -40-18   -6   -18
 200-17   -10  -9  -21 -5   -2-5
 300 -6-4  -4  -11 -10-1
 400 -3-2  -1   -5  00 0
 600 -2-1   0   -1  00 2
 800 -1-1   00  00 1
1000 -1-1   0   -1  00 0
1200  0-1   0   -2  00 0
1400  0 0   0   -1  00-2
1600 -1-2  -1   -2  00-3
1800 -2-3  -2   -3  00-4
2000 -5-5  -2   -4 -10-5
2200 -7-6  -3   -6 -20-7
2400 -8-8  -4   -8 -20-8
2600-10   -10  -6  -15 -30-9
2700-23   -13  -7  -27 -40   -10
2800-34   -19 -11  -31 -80   -14
2900-41   -32 -24  -33-180   -24
3000-50   -43 -36  -35-580   -60
3100-42 -670
3200-580
3300   0
3400   0
3500   0
3600  -1
3700  -2
3800  -4
3900  -5
4000 -13
4100 -34
4150 -66

All measurements were made at the speaker output for consistency. 
All measurements were made in USB mode with the default filter 
settings.  FT-1000MP Mark V was measured with both the analog 
and DSP (100-3100 Hz setting) detectors. 

The two additional K3 measurements are 1) FM filter, BW=4.00 
and FC=2.00 and 2) "NORM" using the "pink EQ" settings (1.60=-3, 
2.40=-5, 3.20=-6).  

Note the K3 audio amplifier is the cleanest hands down.  The other 
transceivers had noise floors at about -120 dBV (IC-706 mkIIg was 
-100 dBV).  Except for what appear to be artifacts of the ADC 
clock at 4, 8, 12, 16, 18 and 20 KHz the K3 out of band audio 
noise is <140 dBV.

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
 







> -Original Message-
> From: Don Wilhelm [mailto:w3...@embarqmail.com] 
> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 5:14 PM
> To: li...@subich.com
> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise - my test results (long)
> 
> 
> Joe,
> 
> I think you may have hit on some major part of the "problem" here.  I 
> measured the passband (and out of passband) response of my K3 
> and my K2, 
> Yaesu FT-900 and Yaesu FT-817.  All measurements were with the SSB 
> filter in all transceivers, and the K3 DSP width was set to 
> maximum.  My 
> K2 has the 2.4 kHz filter and the Yaesu transceivers have the 
> stock SSB 
> filter.
> 
> The test setup consisted of an Elecraft broadband noise generator 
> feeding that receiver and the output was observed with 
> Spectrogram.  The 
> receiver gain controls were adjusted to place the peak in-passband 
> response at -30 dB.
> I also connected an antenna and listened to several signals 
> participating in a 40 meter roundtable, and made my own 'quality of 
> sound' assessment.
> 
> Several things became apparent as a result of these tests.
> 1) the K3 in-passband response is almost flat - from 500 Hz 
> to 2500 Hz 
> it showed  less than 1 dB variation.
> 2) All the other passband responses were  down about 5 dB at 
> 500 Hz and 
> essentially flat from 1 kHz to 1600 Hz, then began a gradual falloff, 
> being down 3 dB at 2 kHz, down 8 dB at 2.5 kHz, the Yaesus 
> were down 17 
> dB while the K2 was down 36 dB (this is the effective high end of the 
> passband).  So within the passband, there is a rolloff 
> similar to that 
> which you suggested for the receive EQ settings on all but the K3.
> 3) The response outside the passband on the low end was also 
> interesting.  The K3 at 200 Hz was only down 3 dB, but 
> dropped steeply 
> at lower fr

Re: [Elecraft] line noise with the K3

2009-12-19 Thread Lance Collister, W7GJ

Howdy Rolf!

It is great to hear from you! I look forward to completing a contact with you on 6m
EME as soon as your line noise problem is cured ;-)

py...@terra.com.br wrote:

Dear Lance

You mentioned the other day on the VKlogger that I should get a K3.
Several other people have come out with the same suggestion. I just
wonder wether your comment was based on my mention of incurable
line-noise or not.

Yes, that was why I mentioned it. The K3 has a reputation for very effective noise
blanking. I have one here but don't have bad line noise.

I have heard about a new â€œintelligentâ€� noise blanker that fills the
holes left by blanking the noise spike, with intelligent information,
sort of a continuation of the data received just prior to the start of
the noise pulse. I cannot, however, find any mention of this on the web.
As a matter of fact I donâ€™t even know what rig this relates to. My
impression is it might be the Flexradio SDR, but I find no mention of it
on their site eitherâ€¦..

I was just wondering if you by chance know what I am talking about and
could point me in the right direction? I actually had this idea myself
several years ago, but did lack the technical knowhow to persue this any
further at the time, hi.

Yes, I have heard about that, but I can't recall if it is in the K3 or not. The K3
Noise Blanker has some different components and each are variable. Of course, the
firmware is being constantly updated, but I don't think there have been many changes
to the NB...I don't remember seeing anybody complain that it needs enhancing!

A quick Google search resulted in some additional information for you:

http://www.zerobeat.net/mediawiki/index.php/K3_Noise_Blanker
http://www.zerobeat.net/mediawiki/index.php/K3_DSP
http://www.cliftonlaboratories.com/elecraft_k3_noise_blanker_and_crystal_dsp_filtering.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JRiuzVCjKQ

There also is an audio file I found of the NB performance:

http://www.mail-archive.com/elecraft@mailman.qth.net/msg50016.html
http://www.n0ss.net/index_k3.html

It surely would seem this could be a â€œkill allâ€� solution for people
in a situation like mine! Even EME could have another chance of life if
this really works!

Well, one solution would be to mount two yagis side by side and elevate them...I am
sure your noise would go down quickly as you begin to elevate.

But maybe there are some K3's down in PY1 region that are not too far away from
you...and you could go actually try one in person. GL Rolf, and best Holiday Wishes
to you too! VY 73, Lance

Any info appreciated!

Merry Xmas and a Very Happy New Year with lots of NEW ONES!

73 Rolf

--
Lance Collister, W7GJ (ex: WN3GPL, WA3GPL, WA1JXN, WA1JXN/C6A, ZF2OC/ZF8,
E51SIX)
P.O. Box 73
Frenchtown, MT 59834 USA
QTH: DN27UB
TEL: (406) 626-5728
URL: http://www.bigskyspaces.com/w7gj
2m DXCC #11/6m DXCC #815

Interested in 6m EME? Ask me about subscribing to the MAGIC BAND EME email
reflector!
__
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

[Elecraft] Elecraft SSB Net Announcement

2009-12-19 Thread Phil and Christina

Hi gang,

The weekly Elecraft SSB net will meet Sunday, 12/20/09 at 1800Z on 14.314
MHz.  Hopefully, propagation will be good.  See you there.

73,

Phil, NS7P

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise - my test results (long)

Don Wilhelm-4 wrote:
> 
> My conclusions: I am not certain what K3 owners are perceiving as noise 
> any more than I  had been before these tests.   The flatter passband of 
> the K3 may be sub-consciously perceived as being more 'harsh', but I 
> could not equate that to 'noise'.  The other filters with a high end 
> in-passband response that drops off similar to a "pink noise" response 
> *could* be causing a perception of additional noise *if* their local 
> noise has significant content in the 2 kHz to 3 kHz range - yes, the K3 
> will make this section of the audio spectrum louder than the other 
> receiver I measured.  The "audio hiss" is not coming from the high 
> frequency spectrum outside the passband because in that area, the K3 and 
> the K2 are much more quiet than the others measured.
> 

I used Spectran rather than Spectrogram which has the advantage that it can
also be used interactively as an audio filter. I found that decreasing the
bass content by increasing the frequency of the high pass filter made the
audio seem more noisy. I presume this is because high frequency noise
components then comprised a greater proportion of the signal and were
emphasized.

I think that if people were using low impedance headphones and the original
DSP board with small value coupling capacitors then they would find the
audio over-bright and harsh, as I did.

I tried different AGC settings and agree that lower AGC THR settings make
the radio sound more noisy, so that may also be a factor. I am now using AGC
THR = 8 which is the maximum and might well use a higher setting if it was
available. I am also using AGC SLP = 1.

Having identified the problems and made some adjustments to settings the K3
sounds really good now on high impedance phones and on the internal speaker.

-
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
* G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com
* KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html
* KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Re-K3-receiver-noise-questionable-test-results-tp4192141p4193141.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results




Joe Subich, W4TV-4 wrote:
> 
> My tests with an audio spectrum analyzer using both broadband 
> noise and internally generated receiver noise show that the 
> K3 is flat from 100 Hz to 4100 Hz when using the 6 or 13 KHz 
> roofing filters with FC=2.10 and BW=4.00 to either speakers 
> or Line Out.  Headphone response is another issue that can be  
> addressed with the Rev C/Rev D DSP assemblies or replacing the 
> 10 uF headphone coupling capacitors with 100 uF caps and/or 
> using high impedance headphones.
> 

I agree the line output is pretty flat which is why the MP3 files I tried to
make didn't demonstrate the problem.

I think that rather than replace the DSP board I'll look for some high
impedance headphones. But even with them, I still feel the sound on SSB
needs some bass/mid range boost and a bit of extreme treble cut. I doubt if
the headphones need anywhere near 100mW of output to drive them so
overloading the amplifier should not be a problem.

-
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
* G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com
* KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html
* KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Re-K3-receiver-noise-questionable-test-results-tp4192141p4192997.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results

Dunc Carter - W5DC wrote:
> 
> Is this for voice or cw reception?  The consonant sounds in voice, are 
> mainly contained in the 1600 to 3200 Hz range; rolling this range off is 
> likely to reduce voice readability.  Are there or will there be mode 
> dependent settings for the receive equalizer?  I've tried using an 
> external high/low/bandpass filter with the K3 on cw and it's not 
> beneficial for me but then my hearing is damaged with midrange loss and 
> distortion in one ear as a result of having meniere's disease.
> 

We're talking about SSB here but I also like the same kind of sound when
receiving CW with the filter wide open. The idea is not to make the audio
sound muffled and lose intelligibility. Personally I think the bass boost is
more important to improving the sound than the treble cut. But a lot depends
on what you are listening on. The K3 internal speaker has a lot more bass
than headphones or many external speakers. I can't fault the audio on the
internal speaker or on computer headphones plugged in round the back, using
the settings given below, but two pairs of hi-fi stereo headphones and some
external passive speakers (all of which probably 8 ohm impedance) are
lacking in bass and tiring to listen to. 

The settings I'm currently using are:
50Hz+0
100Hz  +3
200Hz  +6
400Hz  +6
800Hz  +3
1600Hz +0
2400Hz -3
3200Hz -9

I do hope there will be mode dependent settings eventually because FM, in
particular, doesn't need equalization like this.

-
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
* G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com
* KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html
* KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Re-K3-receiver-noise-questionable-test-results-tp4192141p4192921.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise - my test results (long)

Joe,

I think you may have hit on some major part of the "problem" here.  I 
measured the passband (and out of passband) response of my K3 and my K2, 
Yaesu FT-900 and Yaesu FT-817.  All measurements were with the SSB 
filter in all transceivers, and the K3 DSP width was set to maximum.  My 
K2 has the 2.4 kHz filter and the Yaesu transceivers have the stock SSB 
filter.

The test setup consisted of an Elecraft broadband noise generator 
feeding that receiver and the output was observed with Spectrogram.  The 
receiver gain controls were adjusted to place the peak in-passband 
response at -30 dB.
I also connected an antenna and listened to several signals 
participating in a 40 meter roundtable, and made my own 'quality of 
sound' assessment.

Several things became apparent as a result of these tests.
1) the K3 in-passband response is almost flat - from 500 Hz to 2500 Hz 
it showed  less than 1 dB variation.
2) All the other passband responses were  down about 5 dB at 500 Hz and 
essentially flat from 1 kHz to 1600 Hz, then began a gradual falloff, 
being down 3 dB at 2 kHz, down 8 dB at 2.5 kHz, the Yaesus were down 17 
dB while the K2 was down 36 dB (this is the effective high end of the 
passband).  So within the passband, there is a rolloff similar to that 
which you suggested for the receive EQ settings on all but the K3.
3) The response outside the passband on the low end was also 
interesting.  The K3 at 200 Hz was only down 3 dB, but dropped steeply 
at lower frequencies (I do not have the low frequency mod on my K3).  
The K2 was down 26 dB at 200 Hz while the Yaesus were down 20 dB.
4) On he high frequency side out of the passband, the K2 and K3 had 
almost no audio response that showed on Spectrogram - in other words 
greater than 60 dB down from the passband peak.  The Yaesu FT-900 had 
audio artifacts that were only 44 dB down at 4 kHz and for the FT-817 
were only 35 dB down.  At 5 kHz the FT-900 had audio content at -50 dB 
and the FT-817 had content only 40 dB down.

Summary of my observations - the in-passband response of both Yaesu 
filters and the K2 filter tapered off above 1800 Hz, similar to a "pink 
noise" response, while the K3 response was remarkably flat with very 
steep filter skirts.  The skirt slope of the other filter passbands were 
more gentle.

On the high frequency end, both Yaesu transceivers had considerable 
audio content while the K2 and K3 content was much lower.

My conclusions: I am not certain what K3 owners are perceiving as noise 
any more than I  had been before these tests.   The flatter passband of 
the K3 may be sub-consciously perceived as being more 'harsh', but I 
could not equate that to 'noise'.  The other filters with a high end 
in-passband response that drops off similar to a "pink noise" response 
*could* be causing a perception of additional noise *if* their local 
noise has significant content in the 2 kHz to 3 kHz range - yes, the K3 
will make this section of the audio spectrum louder than the other 
receiver I measured.  The "audio hiss" is not coming from the high 
frequency spectrum outside the passband because in that area, the K3 and 
the K2 are much more quiet than the others measured.

It would be interesting (at least to me) for someone to make similar 
measurements on an FT-1000 - perhaps with the INRAD filter.  I am 
especially interested to know if the in-passband response shows a 
similar taper at 2 kHz and above, and what is the response for the 
FT-1000 above the filter passband.

For those trying the "pink noise rolloff", my measurements suggest that 
you should set the RX EQ bands from 100 Hz through 1600 Hz at 0 dB, 2400 
at -3 dB, and 3200 at -5 dB.  The 50 Hz band can be set at -16 dB for 
the reasons Joe has stated.

73,
Don W3FPR

Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
> If one is going to attempt to mimic the "pink noise" behavior, 
> there is no need to bother with the low frequency boost.  It 
> simply puts more strain on the audio amplifier, increasing the 
> amount of IMD products, with little or no aural benefit.  A 
> better RX EQ configuration with essentially the same perceived  
> sound: 
>
>   50:  -16 dB (reduce sub-vocal noise and hum) 
>  100:0 dB 
>  200:0 dB 
>  400:0 dB 
>  800:0 dB 
> 1600:   -3 dB 
> 2400:   -5 dB 
> 3200:   -6 dB  
>
>   
>   
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results



> I agree the 50Hz boost adds nothing useful, but I find to 
> increase the 100, 200 and 400 values make the audio sound 
> more balanced and easier on the ears. This is not boosting 
> the bass so much as trying to compensate for the bass 
> roll-off inherent in the K3.

My tests with an audio spectrum analyzer using both broadband 
noise and internally generated receiver noise show that the 
K3 is flat from 100 Hz to 4100 Hz when using the 6 or 13 KHz 
roofing filters with FC=2.10 and BW=4.00 to either speakers 
or Line Out.  Headphone response is another issue that can be  
addressed with the Rev C/Rev D DSP assemblies or replacing the 
10 uF headphone coupling capacitors with 100 uF caps and/or 
using high impedance headphones.  

I find that boosting the bass results in a muddy and distorted 
sound when using quality external speakers.  The bass boost 
makes the amplifier work too hard to overcome the issues at 
the output and 9 dB of gain at 100 Hz is effectively pushing 
the 100 mW headphone amplifier to over 750 mW - well beyond 
its capabilities.  If you absolutely must have more "low end" 
the way to accomplish that is by further cutting the high end. 

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 




> -Original Message-
> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Julian, G4ILO
> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:02 PM
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Subich, W4TV-4 wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > If one is going to attempt to mimic the "pink noise" behavior,
> > there is no need to bother with the low frequency boost.  It 
> > simply puts more strain on the audio amplifier, increasing the 
> > amount of IMD products, with little or no aural benefit.  A 
> > better RX EQ configuration with essentially the same perceived  
> > sound: 
> > 
> >   50:  -16 dB (reduce sub-vocal noise and hum) 
> >  100:0 dB 
> >  200:0 dB 
> >  400:0 dB 
> >  800:0 dB 
> > 1600:   -3 dB 
> > 2400:   -5 dB 
> > 3200:   -6 dB  
> > 
> > 
> 
> I agree the 50Hz boost adds nothing useful, but I find to 
> increase the 100, 200 and 400 values make the audio sound 
> more balanced and easier on the ears. This is not boosting 
> the bass so much as trying to compensate for the bass 
> roll-off inherent in the K3.
> 
> I will agree that low frequencies have no benefit when trying 
> to copy weak signals but surely it is the role of the 
> filtering to cut out those frequencies by manual adjustment 
> when trying to receive a weak signal? The purpose of 
> equalization is to achieve a pleasant and balanced audio 
> response for general use.
> 
> -
> Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
> * G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com
> * KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html
> * KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html
> 
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://n2.nabble.com/Re-K3-receiver-noise-questionable-test-re
sults-tp4192141p4192537.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 on 10

2009-12-19 Thread Barry N1EU

Barry N1EU wrote:
> 
> I'd hope that this could be addressed with dsp gain rather than external
> hardware.
> 

The reason I said this is that I cranked up the FL GN setting in the config
menu to +8dB as a temporary measure during the 10M contest and this gave me
the extra gain I needed on 10M.  So it would be easy for the K3 dsp firmware
to embed extra gain for 10M.

73,
Barry N1EU

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/K3-on-10-tp4192570p4192891.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

2009-12-19 Thread DM4iM

Gentlemen,
i played with AGC THR on 2 different K3's this afternoon.
To me both sound more pleasant with AGC THR 2 on strong signals.
But digging out the weak ones becomes difficult, the signal sounds mushy.
Try it, change AGC THR while listening to a very weak ssb-signal.
It becomes more and more readable the closer you get to 5, the default.
The signal stands out, even though the noise is higher.
YMMV

Martin

-- 

73, DM4iM
__
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

[Elecraft] K3: Keying problem on CAT line

2009-12-19 Thread Fred Jensen

Hi,

I've been using N1MM logger with the K3 for some time now, using RTS for 
PTT and DTR for keying on the serial line using a USB adapter I got from 
Elecraft.  In the RAC Winter contest, all was going well last night, but 
this AM when I turned things back on, N1MM wouldn't key the radio.  PTT 
is OK, and I can hear the keying in the monitor as a bunch of clicks [at 
the start of each element] I think.  My breakout box indicates that DTR 
is sending real CW keying.  The internal K3 keyer works fine, as does 
the hand key jack, and the radio works normally in all other respects. 
I've tried two other USB-Serial adapters, one of which is totally 
different from the Elecraft version, and they all do the same thing.

Couple of questions:

1.  Does DTR key the radio by going low or high?

2.  Is there some diagnostic thing I can do [maybe via K3 Utility?] to 
pin down the location of the problem?

I dropped off digest mode so I can see individual replies.

Thanks and Merry Christmas to all,

Fred K6DGW
Auburn CA 95603
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 on 10

Even with a 6/6/6 stack on 10 and a RX with MDS
of 135 dB (I think it is) you will benefit with
a low NF preamp.
However, antenna gain is NOT everything on 10m,
we are getting close to VHF  and I rather would
be interested in antenna noise temperature but
maybe you just will tell us that your antennas
are optimized for just that.

/ Jim SM2EKM
-
Bill W4ZV wrote:
> 
> 
> Barry N1EU wrote:
>>
>>
>> WA9VEE wrote:
>>> It seems to me the K3 receive could use more punch on 10M. 
>>>
>> Yes, I've similarly found that overall rf/if gain seems a bit low on 10M. 
>> I'd hope that this could be addressed with dsp gain rather than external
>> hardware.
>>   
> 
> But external 10m hardware is more fun!  :-)
> 
> http://users.vnet.net/btippett/images/W4zv1.jpg
> 
> Now we wait for the sunspots to make 10 fun again.
> 
> 73,  Bill
> 
> 
__
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

[Elecraft] New W2 interface software available

2009-12-19 Thread David Fleming

New versions of the interface software are available. Version 1.0.12.16.  

New features:

- Peak hold
- Multiple indicator bar colors (Blue, Green and Gray) selectable in SETUP
- multi-colored SWR indicator (yellow/red above 2:1)

The new files will be on the Elecraft site next week. For now, you can download 
them from the links below.

Windows: http://sight.net/W2/W2_WIN.zip 

Mac: http://sight.net/W2/W2_OSX.zip

David, W4SMT

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 on 10

2009-12-19 Thread Bill W4ZV




Barry N1EU wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> WA9VEE wrote:
>> 
>> It seems to me the K3 receive could use more punch on 10M. 
>> 
> Yes, I've similarly found that overall rf/if gain seems a bit low on 10M. 
> I'd hope that this could be addressed with dsp gain rather than external
> hardware.
>   

But external 10m hardware is more fun!  :-)

http://users.vnet.net/btippett/images/W4zv1.jpg

Now we wait for the sunspots to make 10 fun again.

73,  Bill


-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/K3-on-10-tp4192570p4192677.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 on 10

2009-12-19 Thread Barry N1EU




WA9VEE wrote:
> 
> It seems to me the K3 receive could use more punch on 10M. 
> 
Yes, I've similarly found that overall rf/if gain seems a bit low on 10M. 
I'd hope that this could be addressed with dsp gain rather than external
hardware.

73,
Barry N1EU

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/K3-on-10-tp4192570p4192668.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!

2009-12-19 Thread NZ0T


Thank you! That did it - I've been screwing with this all day.

David Fleming-2 wrote:
> 
> I should have mentioned that 'Application Data' is a hidden directory.
> From My Computer click 'Tools' then click 'Folder Options'. Click 'View'.
> In 'Advanced settings' click 'Show hidden files and folders'. Click 'OK'.
> Now you should be able to find the file. Yes, USERNAME is the username you
> login as. On my XP system, it's 'Administrator'.
> 
> David, W4SMT
> 
> --- On Sat, 12/19/09, NZ0T  wrote:
> 
>> I'm stupid - can't find "W2Prefs" - I looked in My
>> Computer, C, documents and
>> settings.  I assume that USERNAME would be me?
>> 
>> David Fleming-2 wrote:
>> > 
>> > Hi Bill,
>> > 
>> > Try deleting the preferences file "W2Prefs" and
>> restarting the .EXE. 
>> > 
>> > On XP, it's located in: 
>> > 
>> > C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Application Data. 
>> > 
>> > On Vista and Windows 7:
>> > 
>> > C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming
>> > 
>> > 73, David, W4SMT
>> > 
>> > 
>> > --- On Sat, 12/19/09, NZ0T 
>> wrote:
> 
>> >> All of a sudden I can't see the window of the W2
>> interface
>> >> on my computer. 
>> >> The program is running and shows up on the task
>> bar at the
>> >> bottom of the
>> >> screen but but I can't get it to appear on the
>> >> screen.  I have deleted it
>> >> and re-loaded a few times with no luck.  I'm
>> using
>> >> XP.
>> >> 
>> >> Any ideas?
>> >> 
>> >> 73 Bill NZ0T
> 
> __
> 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
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Help-W2-interface-window-is-gone-tp4192372p4192651.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Receiver Noise Level -- Evaluation and Adjustment

2009-12-19 Thread Guy Olinger K2AV

Sigh

Well, I must apologize, and take the flak for letting that neat piece
of information get past me. I still have to go find where that is laid
out and see what else I'm missing.  I *did* go looking around for
something that told me what the defaults were before I wrote the post,
but whatever it took to find it I didn't have at the moment.

The help sentence would be:

"3. Set AGC parms to default values in CONFIG: AGC . Tap DISP in
each AGC  to display  default."

The human factors guys at work would have said that a stand-alone
instruction should not require anything other than the instruction
itself to be successful.

73, Guy.
__
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

[Elecraft] K3 Power SDR

2009-12-19 Thread Phil LaMarche

For those hams using Power SDR with their K3, there's a new version 1.19.0.2
that gives a new skin that's just great.  The new skin looks like a real
radio compared to the Flex skin.  Take a look and install.  Be sure to help
them with a donation.
 
Phil
 

Philip LaMarche 
LaMarche Enterprises, Inc.
  www.instantgourmetspices.com

www.w9dvm.com   
800-395-7795 pin 02 
727-944-3226 
FAX 727-937-8834 
NASFT 30210 

K3  #1605

CCA 98  00827
CRA 1701

W9DVM 


 
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!

2009-12-19 Thread David Fleming

I should have mentioned that 'Application Data' is a hidden directory. From My 
Computer click 'Tools' then click 'Folder Options'. Click 'View'. In 'Advanced 
settings' click 'Show hidden files and folders'. Click 'OK'. Now you should be 
able to find the file. Yes, USERNAME is the username you login as. On my XP 
system, it's 'Administrator'.

David, W4SMT

--- On Sat, 12/19/09, NZ0T  wrote:

> I'm stupid - can't find "W2Prefs" - I looked in My
> Computer, C, documents and
> settings.  I assume that USERNAME would be me?
> 
> David Fleming-2 wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Bill,
> > 
> > Try deleting the preferences file "W2Prefs" and
> restarting the .EXE. 
> > 
> > On XP, it's located in: 
> > 
> > C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Application Data. 
> > 
> > On Vista and Windows 7:
> > 
> > C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming
> > 
> > 73, David, W4SMT
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Sat, 12/19/09, NZ0T 
> wrote:

> >> All of a sudden I can't see the window of the W2
> interface
> >> on my computer. 
> >> The program is running and shows up on the task
> bar at the
> >> bottom of the
> >> screen but but I can't get it to appear on the
> >> screen.  I have deleted it
> >> and re-loaded a few times with no luck.  I'm
> using
> >> XP.
> >> 
> >> Any ideas?
> >> 
> >> 73 Bill NZ0T

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!

2009-12-19 Thread NZ0T


I'm stupid - can't find "W2Prefs" - I looked in My Computer, C, documents and
settings.  I assume that USERNAME would be me?

David Fleming-2 wrote:
> 
> Hi Bill,
> 
> Try deleting the preferences file "W2Prefs" and restarting the .EXE. 
> 
> On XP, it's located in: 
> 
> C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Application Data. 
> 
> On Vista and Windows 7:
> 
> C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming
> 
> 73, David, W4SMT
> 
> 
> --- On Sat, 12/19/09, NZ0T  wrote:
> 
>> From: NZ0T 
>> Subject: [Elecraft]  Help! W2 interface window is gone!
>> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> Date: Saturday, December 19, 2009, 2:06 PM
>> 
>> All of a sudden I can't see the window of the W2 interface
>> on my computer. 
>> The program is running and shows up on the task bar at the
>> bottom of the
>> screen but but I can't get it to appear on the
>> screen.  I have deleted it
>> and re-loaded a few times with no luck.  I'm using
>> XP.
>> 
>> Any ideas?
>> 
>> 73 Bill NZ0T
>> -- 
>> View this message in context:
>> http://n2.nabble.com/Help-W2-interface-window-is-gone-tp4192372p4192372.html
>> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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
>> 
> __
> 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
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Help-W2-interface-window-is-gone-tp4192372p4192593.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results

2009-12-19 Thread Duncan Carter

Is this for voice or cw reception?  The consonant sounds in voice, are 
mainly contained in the 1600 to 3200 Hz range; rolling this range off is 
likely to reduce voice readability.  Are there or will there be mode 
dependent settings for the receive equalizer?  I've tried using an 
external high/low/bandpass filter with the K3 on cw and it's not 
beneficial for me but then my hearing is damaged with midrange loss and 
distortion in one ear as a result of having meniere's disease.

73, Dunc, W5DC

Julian, G4ILO wrote:
>
> Joe Subich, W4TV-4 wrote:
>   
>>
>> If one is going to attempt to mimic the "pink noise" behavior, 
>> there is no need to bother with the low frequency boost.  It 
>> simply puts more strain on the audio amplifier, increasing the 
>> amount of IMD products, with little or no aural benefit.  A 
>> better RX EQ configuration with essentially the same perceived  
>> sound: 
>>
>>   50:  -16 dB (reduce sub-vocal noise and hum) 
>>  100:0 dB 
>>  200:0 dB 
>>  400:0 dB 
>>  800:0 dB 
>> 1600:   -3 dB 
>> 2400:   -5 dB 
>> 3200:   -6 dB  
>>
>>
>> 
>
> I agree the 50Hz boost adds nothing useful, but I find to increase the 100,
> 200 and 400 values make the audio sound more balanced and easier on the
> ears. This is not boosting the bass so much as trying to compensate for the
> bass roll-off inherent in the K3.
>
> I will agree that low frequencies have no benefit when trying to copy weak
> signals but surely it is the role of the filtering to cut out those
> frequencies by manual adjustment when trying to receive a weak signal? The
> purpose of equalization is to achieve a pleasant and balanced audio response
> for general use.
>
> -
> Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
> * G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com
> * KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html
> * KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html
>
>   

__
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

[Elecraft] K3 on 10

2009-12-19 Thread Wayne Adams

It seems to me the K3 receive could use more punch on 10M. I had fun on 10M
CW last weekend during the contest and it reminded me that I used to use a
CB set to check for skip on 11 meters, thus probably an opening on 10M.

That got me to listen on 27MHz with the K3 and the receive sounded low
compared to the CB set I was using via an antenna switch. Exactly like it
could use a preamp. Which come to think of it is how SSB 10M on the K3
sounds to me also.

I haven't tried 6M yet, but perhaps if that preamp could be made to cover
28MHz also, it would be a good combination.
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results

Joe Subich, W4TV-4 wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> If one is going to attempt to mimic the "pink noise" behavior, 
> there is no need to bother with the low frequency boost.  It 
> simply puts more strain on the audio amplifier, increasing the 
> amount of IMD products, with little or no aural benefit.  A 
> better RX EQ configuration with essentially the same perceived  
> sound: 
> 
>   50:  -16 dB (reduce sub-vocal noise and hum) 
>  100:0 dB 
>  200:0 dB 
>  400:0 dB 
>  800:0 dB 
> 1600:   -3 dB 
> 2400:   -5 dB 
> 3200:   -6 dB  
> 
> 

I agree the 50Hz boost adds nothing useful, but I find to increase the 100,
200 and 400 values make the audio sound more balanced and easier on the
ears. This is not boosting the bass so much as trying to compensate for the
bass roll-off inherent in the K3.

I will agree that low frequencies have no benefit when trying to copy weak
signals but surely it is the role of the filtering to cut out those
frequencies by manual adjustment when trying to receive a weak signal? The
purpose of equalization is to achieve a pleasant and balanced audio response
for general use.

-
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
* G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com
* KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html
* KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Re-K3-receiver-noise-questionable-test-results-tp4192141p4192537.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] My K3's Very Quiet

Ed,

Now I do agree on ALL counts, well almost. Sounds fishy you had
to have AF gain wide open to be able to RX on 10m. Well since this
is the K3 list we better concentrate on the K3, after all K3 is
more state of the art then the "stone age" FT-1000D.

/ Jim SM2EKM
--
W0SD Ed Gray wrote:
> Thanks for the correction. I was happy with the FT-1000D other than on 
> 10M I often had the AF cranked wide open.  It was worse with head phones 
> than with the speaker.  I could of used more gain there.  Other than 
> that I was satisfied with the gain.
> 
> For me the K3 has been a huge step forward for lots of reasons such as:
> 1. So much lighter
> 2. Two CW keying ports
> 3. Better IMD
> 4. Lines in and Line out
> 5. Better set up for RX antenna
> 6. RX diversity is easier for me to use
> 7. The radio keeps getting better with better firmware.
> 8. etc. etc,
> 
> I am a ham radio operator and not a radio technician but I do have a lot 
> of operating experience and I know what works for me and what does not 
> and I get no benefit with the K3 using the pre-amp below 10 meters.  On 
> the other hand it does not mess me up that much as in reality most of 
> the time I am listening to a signal so the pre-amp gain does not hurt as 
> I am hearing it and not background noise.  For me it only comes into 
> play on very weak signals where I prefer the pre-amp off or when 
> seriously tuning around.
> 
> Ed W0SD
> 

__
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

[Elecraft] Receiver Equalizer

2009-12-19 Thread Keith

Adjusting the K3's receiver equalizer has really helped inprove my 
objectionable white noise. As far as the receiver goes I get NO noise when my 
K3 is connected to a dummy load so my objectional noise was not comming from 
the K3 receiver. It was just atmospheric noise on the band. Some bands have 
more noise than others depending on conditions. I just needed to reduce the 
high frequency response to this noise to make my receiver much more pleasant. 
Of course I always adjust my RF gain control. No use listening to more noise 
than I have to. This discussion has been very enlightening for me, a newer K3 
owner. Thanks and 73

Keith W8GX
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!

2009-12-19 Thread David Fleming

Hi Bill,

Try deleting the preferences file "W2Prefs" and restarting the .EXE. 

On XP, it's located in: 

C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Application Data. 

On Vista and Windows 7:

C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming

73, David, W4SMT


--- On Sat, 12/19/09, NZ0T  wrote:

> From: NZ0T 
> Subject: [Elecraft]  Help! W2 interface window is gone!
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Date: Saturday, December 19, 2009, 2:06 PM
> 
> All of a sudden I can't see the window of the W2 interface
> on my computer. 
> The program is running and shows up on the task bar at the
> bottom of the
> screen but but I can't get it to appear on the
> screen.  I have deleted it
> and re-loaded a few times with no luck.  I'm using
> XP.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> 73 Bill NZ0T
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://n2.nabble.com/Help-W2-interface-window-is-gone-tp4192372p4192372.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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
> 
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft] OT: soldering leads to coin cell batteries

2009-12-19 Thread Fred Lozo

Hello Captain John,
  I've attached wires to coin batteries by lightly grinding off a small patch 
of plating on the battery and then tinning that patch first with solder. Then I 
tin the wire and join the two together. Nothing to it.
Fair winds and calm seas,
Fred AK5U  K3-#3246  


Message: 26
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 06:35:06 -0800 (PST)
From: John Ferguson 
Subject: [Elecraft] OT: soldering leads to coin cell batteries
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <348415.69406...@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Does anyone here have experience soldering leads to coin cell batteries?
My Compaq Armada M300 needs a new cmos battery.  the present one is a 2032 with 
2 leads and a molex plug.

my
scheme is to put the needle point on my trusty WTCP, remove the leads
from the old battery, sand them and tin them and using the flux I used
for the smt project, quickly as in QUICKLY touch the point to the leads.

Why not?

AI4TO  John Ferguson m/v arcadian


...

FBL

===


  
__
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

[Elecraft] New W2 Firmware rev 0.93 available

2009-12-19 Thread Brian

We are announcing here on the Reflector the release of W2 Firmware Rev 
0.93.  The Elecraft/W2 website will be updated soon.

Here are the highlights for this release:

*Rev 0.93, 18-Dec-2009*
 

  * TWO VHF SENSOR ISSUES:* *1. No response at all in Auto mode, 2. 
Occasionally a long, slow, flickering decay could be seen: Both of these 
issues are now fixed.

 

  * ALARM SETTING: The SWR Alarm setting (On/Off) is now saved in 
EEPROM, so an "A" command remains as you last set it when the W2 is 
powered back on.



Please send any questions to k3supp...@elecraft.com.

This release will automatically be recognized by the "Elecraft W2 Utility".

Please use the latest version of W2 Utility to load.

73,
Brian, W6FVI
W2 Firmware Engineer
Elecraft, Inc.

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] My K3's Very Quiet

2009-12-19 Thread W0SD Ed Gray

Thanks for the correction. I was happy with the FT-1000D other than on 
10M I often had the AF cranked wide open.  It was worse with head phones 
than with the speaker.  I could of used more gain there.  Other than 
that I was satisfied with the gain.


For me the K3 has been a huge step forward for lots of reasons such as:
1. So much lighter
2. Two CW keying ports
3. Better IMD
4. Lines in and Line out
5. Better set up for RX antenna
6. RX diversity is easier for me to use
7. The radio keeps getting better with better firmware.
8. etc. etc,

I am a ham radio operator and not a radio technician but I do have a lot 
of operating experience and I know what works for me and what does not 
and I get no benefit with the K3 using the pre-amp below 10 meters.  On 
the other hand it does not mess me up that much as in reality most of 
the time I am listening to a signal so the pre-amp gain does not hurt as 
I am hearing it and not background noise.  For me it only comes into 
play on very weak signals where I prefer the pre-amp off or when 
seriously tuning around.


Ed W0SD


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.427 / Virus Database: 270.14.114/2575 - Release Date: 12/19/09 
08:33:00
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] My K3's Very Quiet

Ed,

No offence but what you say below puts everything on the tilt
since you say you have been using a FT-1000D, ifn´t you had
it in IPO all the time you have been using the preamp. There
is no two ways about it.

I do agree that the reel world performance compared to "lab"
performance is two totally different things.
I´m beginning to think we have something here in conjunction
with the K3.

As I did say before, my gut feeling is that there is something
going on but I can´t put my finger on it neither I have the
time available to investigate.


/ Jim SM2EKM
---
W0SD Ed Gray wrote:
> I believe the test results but the reality to me is in the real world it 
> does not make any difference on HF below 10 meters.
> 
> I don't use the ATU, all resonate antenna's here.  If using the 
> amplifier no ATU into the amplifier so that is not an issue here.
> 
> The 4 db mentioned with the pre-amp I am sure is accurate but I can not 
> hear the difference and I have a nice quiet location. IMHO you can't get 
> a quiet rx with a pre-amp as the background is going to increase when 
> you turn it on.  It would be fine to get more back ground if the signal 
> was better copy.  However for me I can never remember a case where 
> turning on the pre-amp made it possible to copy something better than 
> without it other than 10 meters and up and I have a quiet location out 
> in the country.
> My opinion is based on working all DXCC countries, 5Band WAZ, lots of 
> contests, operating 160-1296 and higher with about 300,000 qso's in the 
> log and being on several Dx-peditions. I just say this to validate I 
> have been blessed to be able to do a good deal of operating in the real 
> world.
> 
> To me there is a limit to the improvement you can get in the real world 
> on an antenna when you have atmospheric and man made noise. Again I have 
> chased weak signal DX for a long time and I have never found a time the 
> pre-amp helps below 10 meters on recent vintage radios.  It may help 
> others but it does not help me.  For me it is just tiring to the ears to 
> listen to the extra background noise with the pre-amp on.
> 
> For me the key point is that you can make legitimate tests that show a 
> difference in a test set up with test equipment but in the real world 
> listening on an antenna even at a very quiet location it just isn't 
> going to show up.
> 
> The fact is that probably only 1% or less of hams have very quiet 
> locations so they just amplify man made noise when they turn on the 
> pre-amp.  To get a benefit you need a very low noise floor and there is 
> a limit on HF even at the most quiet location.
> 
> I will stick to my "GUNS" and say the pre-amp does not help me any below 
> 10 meters and only makes it more fatiguing
> to listen to ( roughly 3-S units more background on my K3 meter) and I 
> am blessed with having a quieter location than I suspect 99% of the hams 
> have.  So the bottom line I think for most if you want less noise is to 
> turn the pre-amp off. If it does make a difference for you(I does not 
> for me) it will be a very small percentage of the time so why not leave 
> it off 99.9% of the time if background noise is an issue for you.
> 
> I think most of the persons having problems with listening to the K3 are 
> because of what I will call "pitch" or put another way what they trouble 
> setting it so it is what they like to listen to.  Here is a real world 
> example. Operating at TZ6EI this past summer on six meters W7XU was 
> having trouble with the K3 "noise" with the six meter pre-amp.  He likes 
> to copy a low pitch 300 hz, no more than 400 hz on cw. The background 
> noise was driving him "NUTS".  I had him adjust the shift to lower the 
> "pitch" of the noise and he was perfectly satisfied and we are talking 
> about hours and days of weak signal copying with headphones.
> 
> Ed W0SD
> 

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!

2009-12-19 Thread Richard Squire - HB9ANM


Same thing happened to me yesterday. If you are using an icon on the desktop,
check it properties and see whether "Open as" is set to "Normal Window". If
it is greyed out, reinstalling the shortcut should help.

73
Richard - HB9ANM


NZ0T wrote:
> 
> All of a sudden I can't see the window of the W2 interface on my computer. 
> The program is running and shows up on the task bar at the bottom of the
> screen but but I can't get it to appear on the screen.  I have deleted it
> and re-loaded a few times with no luck.  I'm using XP.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> 73 Bill NZ0T
> 


-
Richard - HB9ANM
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Help-W2-interface-window-is-gone-tp4192372p4192425.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

[Elecraft] Help! W2 interface window is gone!

2009-12-19 Thread NZ0T


All of a sudden I can't see the window of the W2 interface on my computer. 
The program is running and shows up on the task bar at the bottom of the
screen but but I can't get it to appear on the screen.  I have deleted it
and re-loaded a few times with no luck.  I'm using XP.

Any ideas?

73 Bill NZ0T
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Help-W2-interface-window-is-gone-tp4192372p4192372.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] My K3's Very Quiet

2009-12-19 Thread W0SD Ed Gray

I believe the test results but the reality to me is in the real world it 
does not make any difference on HF below 10 meters.


I don't use the ATU, all resonate antenna's here.  If using the 
amplifier no ATU into the amplifier so that is not an issue here.


The 4 db mentioned with the pre-amp I am sure is accurate but I can not 
hear the difference and I have a nice quiet location. IMHO you can't get 
a quiet rx with a pre-amp as the background is going to increase when 
you turn it on.  It would be fine to get more back ground if the signal 
was better copy.  However for me I can never remember a case where 
turning on the pre-amp made it possible to copy something better than 
without it other than 10 meters and up and I have a quiet location out 
in the country.
My opinion is based on working all DXCC countries, 5Band WAZ, lots of 
contests, operating 160-1296 and higher with about 300,000 qso's in the 
log and being on several Dx-peditions. I just say this to validate I 
have been blessed to be able to do a good deal of operating in the real 
world.


To me there is a limit to the improvement you can get in the real world 
on an antenna when you have atmospheric and man made noise. Again I have 
chased weak signal DX for a long time and I have never found a time the 
pre-amp helps below 10 meters on recent vintage radios.  It may help 
others but it does not help me.  For me it is just tiring to the ears to 
listen to the extra background noise with the pre-amp on.


For me the key point is that you can make legitimate tests that show a 
difference in a test set up with test equipment but in the real world 
listening on an antenna even at a very quiet location it just isn't 
going to show up.


The fact is that probably only 1% or less of hams have very quiet 
locations so they just amplify man made noise when they turn on the 
pre-amp.  To get a benefit you need a very low noise floor and there is 
a limit on HF even at the most quiet location.


I will stick to my "GUNS" and say the pre-amp does not help me any below 
10 meters and only makes it more fatiguing
to listen to ( roughly 3-S units more background on my K3 meter) and I 
am blessed with having a quieter location than I suspect 99% of the hams 
have.  So the bottom line I think for most if you want less noise is to 
turn the pre-amp off. If it does make a difference for you(I does not 
for me) it will be a very small percentage of the time so why not leave 
it off 99.9% of the time if background noise is an issue for you.


I think most of the persons having problems with listening to the K3 are 
because of what I will call "pitch" or put another way what they trouble 
setting it so it is what they like to listen to.  Here is a real world 
example. Operating at TZ6EI this past summer on six meters W7XU was 
having trouble with the K3 "noise" with the six meter pre-amp.  He likes 
to copy a low pitch 300 hz, no more than 400 hz on cw. The background 
noise was driving him "NUTS".  I had him adjust the shift to lower the 
"pitch" of the noise and he was perfectly satisfied and we are talking 
about hours and days of weak signal copying with headphones.


Ed W0SD


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.427 / Virus Database: 270.14.114/2575 - Release Date: 12/19/09 
08:33:00
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] K3DSPUPGD



Perhaps this information quoted from a private e-mail received from 
Eric within the last 48 hours will provide a definitive answer: 

> ALL of the DSP UPGRADE boards have the LPF that rolls off above 4-4.5 
> kHz in addition to the low frequency response parts.
> 
> We originally thought that the upgrade board would only have the low 
> freq components and wouldn't have the LPF - that's what I originally 
> posted. But we were able to get the LPF board here in time before we 
> shipped the first upgrade, so I added that to the upgraded DSPs at no 
> additional charge.
> 
> Note that we should be referring to the assembly level of the DSP 
> board, not the raw PCB fab revision level. When the LPF is added to 
> the earlier DSP board that already has the other low freq component 
> changes, it rolls the assembly from Rev C to Rev D. All DSP UPGRADE 
> boards are at Assembly Rev D. Also, production K3 DSPs that have all 
> of the changes incorporated in new PCB are also assembly Rev D, since 
> they are functionally identical.
> 
> All K3s currently ship with the Assembly Rev D DSP that includes all 
> the mods.

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
 



> -Original Message-
> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of 
> sr...@swbell.net
> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 10:34 AM
> To: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net; 'Lisa Jones - Elecraft Sales'
> Subject: [Elecraft] [K3] K3DSPUPGD
> 
> 
>   I find no actual description of what the K3DSPUPGD (REV 
> C) consists of. Does it include the lowpass audio filter that 
> everyone keeps talking about, or is that an additional add on 
> to the REV C DSP board?
> 
>   Could someone from Elecraft please straighten me out on 
> this so I can determine if there is something additional I 
> need to order for the REV C DSP upgrade board? All this talk 
> on the subject has got me confused.
>  
> 
> Stan Rife 
> W5EWA 
> 



__
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

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results



> If that's the case, then the K3's receiver equalizer can be set up 
> to mimic a pink rolloff which is -3 dB per octave.
> 
> 50 Hz : + 9 dB
> 100 : + 6
> 200 : + 3
> 400 : 0
> 800 : - 3
> 1600 : - 6
> 3200 : - 9

If one is going to attempt to mimic the "pink noise" behavior, 
there is no need to bother with the low frequency boost.  It 
simply puts more strain on the audio amplifier, increasing the 
amount of IMD products, with little or no aural benefit.  A 
better RX EQ configuration with essentially the same perceived  
sound: 

  50:  -16 dB (reduce sub-vocal noise and hum) 
 100:0 dB 
 200:0 dB 
 400:0 dB 
 800:0 dB 
1600:   -3 dB 
2400:   -5 dB 
3200:   -6 dB  

Note: the K3 RX EQ would be more useful (and more intuitive to 
adjust) if the 8 bands had a constant Q response and were based 
on 2/3 octave frequencies - specifically: 

  1   100 Hz 
  2   160 Hz
  3   250 Hz 
  4   400 Hz
  5   630 Hz
  6  1000 Hz
  7  1600 Hz
  8  2500 Hz

Additional controls at 63 and 4000 Hz would be worthwhile if 
a 10 band configuration were possible.  However, since audio 
below 100 Hz and above 3000 Hz is generally not used for 
communications purposes and the K3 DSP response is limited 
to 4200 Hz, making bands 1 and 8 "shelving" instead of peaking 
responses would be a usable alternative to the additional bands.  

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
 




> -Original Message-
> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Luis V. Romero
> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 12:50 PM
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results
> 
> 
> Kudos to Al for supplying these settings that make my K3 
> #3192 sound almost identical to my TS570D (albeit, into 
> different speakers, but lets not open up THAT can of worms)!
> 
> -Lu-W4LT-
> 
> From: "Al Lorona" 
> Cc: 
> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:40 AM
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 receiver noise questionable test results
> 
> 
> > But a few of the K3 owners that have pro-audio  
> instrumentation have 
> >reported that the K3 audio  response is more like 'white 
> noise' (a flat 
> >response), as opposed to other receivers which have a 'pink
> > noise' audio spectrum.
> 
> If that's the case, then the K3's receiver equalizer can be set up 
> to mimic a pink rolloff which is -3 dB per octave.
> 
> 50 Hz : + 9 dB
> 100 : + 6
> 200 : + 3
> 400 : 0
> 800 : - 3
> 1600 : - 6
> 3200 : - 9
> 


__
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

Re: [Elecraft] My K3's Very Quiet

Hmm, interesting, 4 dB MDS improvement and the gain of the
preamp is 15-20 dB i think. Spontaneously this is a lousy
preamp or I had too much too drink during  Saturday dinner.

Correction to W0SD:

The FT-1000D DO have a preamp, about20 dB gain. Check the
schematic and you will see. When you turn switch to IPO it
kicks out the preamp. Then turning it further to 6 dB etc etc
you switch in attenuation in 6 dB steps. IMO this was soo stupid, 
instead I did modify my FT-1000D NOT to turn off preamp but just
use the atennuation steps. Easy to do, just look at the schematic.
By using the 6 12 18 dB attenuation steps I easily can improve
the IMDDR3 when needed. My modified FT-1000D has about 92 dB
IMDDR3 at a MDS of about 142 dB 2 kHz spacing. Not too shabby,
and I don´t have to "ride the" RF gain. Also I don´t get fatigued by 
strange pink or whatever noise.

Soo here we have a radio ( K3 ) with 135 dB MDS and you guys
are going to lower the gain! In my head something is totally
wacky here.

/ Jim SM2EKM

drewko wrote:
> Regarding the preamp: MDS measurements show a better (S+N)/N with the
> preamp on, approx 4 db improvement in MDS on my K3 on 40m. A similar
> improvement is obtained by setting the ATU to BYPASS. 
> 
> The macro to toggle Preamp+Bypass is SWH19;SWT24; for anyone who wants
> to try it. It may be useful for weak signals. You do have to remember
> to toggle it (the ATU) back on when you transmit though.
> 
> 73,
> Drew
> AF2Z
> 
> 
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 10:27:16 -0600, Ed W0SD wrote:
>> It has been my experience over the years to "NOT" use the pre-amp on any 
>> HF radio unless you are out of audio gain.  The FT-1000D did not have  a 
>> pre-amp and the only place for me it was lacking was 10 meters.  For me 
>> I just don't hear more at 10 meters and down  with a pre-amp.  For me it 
>> just brings the noise up with the signal.  The only place I have seen a 
>> big benefit from a pre-amp is above 28 mhz.  Obviously the K3 benefits 
>>from a pre-amp on six meters.
>> Ed W0SD
> 

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] FW suggestion: mode-specific monitor

2009-12-19 Thread Bruce Meier

While monitor firmware changes are being discussed - - 

Is it possible to change the firmware so that when MON is pushed the level
can be adjusted without blanking out the RX?  Yes, that would probably
eliminate the constant tone, but in my opinion, that would be fine.  The
Monitor level numbers would still be displayed that should be sufficient to
indicate the amount of up/down adjustment.

73,
Bruce - N1LN  

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

2009-12-19 Thread Bob Naumann

There's something about Cookie's description of how one can hear noise that
makes me think that perhaps some of these "noisy" K3 comments are due to
having an expectation that is simply not realistic.

I get the impression that the expectation may be that at some point, with a
given signal strength, and enough signal to noise ratio, you will hear no
noise at all. I know this is false - unless you are using FM and the
receiver is locked on that one signal. Even under such a "full quieting"
situation, you can still hear lightning crashes through the FM signal if
they're strong enough.

The only other way that this would happen is if we were removing the noise
using DSP techniques, and re-creating the desired signal absent of the noise
that will always be there. I have tried such DSP stuff, and what remains
does not sound all that good to me, and it needs to be used sparingly.

When we're listening to CW or SSB, the level of the signal is constantly
changing in amplitude from both fading and just from the constant waveform
variance. If the AGC is set to a value (slow) that holds the gain down
during the variances, it will mask the apparent amount of noise that we
hear. Its not gone, but we don't hear it as much. To confirm this just
switch from fast to slow AGC and back to fast on most any receiver and you
will notice this phenomena. The point is that there will be noise within
your pass band regardless of how narrow it may be and how strong the signal
may be that you are listening to. 

Am I recognizing an unrealistic expectation by users of the K3 (or most any
receiver) or am I just misinterpreting this comment? 

73,

Bob W5OV

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of WILLIS COOKE
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 11:37 AM
To: d...@w3fpr.com; Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

There are two ways to hear noise that comes from the antenna.  If you are
hearing it while hearing a CW tone, it is strong enough to compete with the
signal and about all you can do is narrow the band width or mentally filter
it.  If the noise is blanked by the key down signal, but you are hearing
it in the pauses it can still be annoying and you can still perceive the
receiver to be noisy.  In the latter case, changes in the AGC, or RF gain
can be effective and reduce the annoyance.  This is primarily why I like my
slope at about 6 instead of 10.  But, I am mostly a CW operator with some
SSB.  I don't operate AM or FM with my K3 which would certainly have
different requirements.  Also there is a difference in what is appropriate
for weak signal operation or strong signal operation.  In a contest
situation you repidly switch between strong and weak signals so you probably
would prefer a compromise setting.
 Willis 'Cookie' Cooke 
K5EWJ 

From: Don Wilhelm 
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Sat, December 19, 2009 9:23:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

Maarten (and all),

There are two separate noise sources to be considered here, and it is 
important to separate them.  One is the internal receiver noise, and the 
second is demodulated noise that comes into the receiver via the antenna 
port.

For anyone who suspects that the K3 itself is noisy (because of internal 
noise), I encourage those owners to do an MDS measurement.  If the 
internal noise is excessive, the MDS will be greatly reduced - MDS is 
the minimum signal level that can be detected above the receiver noise 
floor.  The Elecraft XG1 or XG2 is an inexpensive signal generator that 
will do the task - and the instructions for measuring MDS are in the 
manual.  If your K3 is not 'up to par', then that problem can be fixed.

OTOH, if the noise is coming into the receiver on the antenna port, 
there is not much that can be done to eliminate it - it is just like any 
other "signal" coming in from the antenna.
The K3 does offer tools such as the attenuator and AGC adjustments that 
can better handle than noise.  Unfortunately, there is not a "one size 
fits all" solution because each source of noise is different in its 
character and amplitude.

I cannot comment intelligently to those who are comparing the K3 audio 
noise output with that of another receiver because I do not have access 
to the receivers they are comparing.  I can only guess that the 
difference may be due to differences in receiver gain, AGC action, 
bandpass width, or the shaping of the audio spectrum.  Without doing 
actual measurements, these variables cannot be quantified.

73,
Don W3FPR

Maarten van Rossum wrote:
> I hope that with the help of this topic on the reflector, I too am able to
> set my K3 correctly for my circumstances so I too can enjoy noise free
> reception.
>  
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qt

Re: [Elecraft] : K3 receiver noise questionable test results

2009-12-19 Thread Luis V. Romero

Kudos to Al for supplying these settings that make my K3 #3192 sound almost
identical to my TS570D (albeit, into different speakers, but lets not open
up THAT can of worms)!

-Lu-W4LT-

From: "Al Lorona" 
Cc: 
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 receiver noise questionable test results


> But a few of the K3 owners that have pro-audio
> instrumentation have reported that the K3 audio
> response is more like 'white noise' (a flat response),
>as opposed to other receivers which have a 'pink
> noise' audio spectrum.

If that's the case, then the K3's receiver equalizer can be set up 
to mimic a pink rolloff which is -3 dB per octave.

50 Hz : + 9 dB
100 : + 6
200 : + 3
400 : 0
800 : - 3
1600 : - 6
3200 : - 9

No virus found in this outgoing message

Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (6.1.0.25 - 6.13950).
http://www.pctools.com/free-antivirus/




__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

2009-12-19 Thread WILLIS COOKE

There are two ways to hear noise that comes from the antenna.  If you are 
hearing it while hearing a CW tone, it is strong enough to compete with the 
signal and about all you can do is narrow the band width or mentally filter 
it.  If the noise is blanked by the key down signal, but you are hearing it in 
the pauses it can still be annoying and you can still perceive the receiver to 
be noisy.  In the latter case, changes in the AGC, or RF gain can be effective 
and reduce the annoyance.  This is primarily why I like my slope at about 6 
instead of 10.  But, I am mostly a CW operator with some SSB.  I don't operate 
AM or FM with my K3 which would certainly have different requirements.  Also 
there is a difference in what is appropriate for weak signal operation or 
strong signal operation.  In a contest situation you repidly switch between 
strong and weak signals so you probably would prefer a compromise setting.
 Willis 'Cookie' Cooke 
K5EWJ 

From: Don Wilhelm 
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Sat, December 19, 2009 9:23:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

Maarten (and all),

There are two separate noise sources to be considered here, and it is 
important to separate them.  One is the internal receiver noise, and the 
second is demodulated noise that comes into the receiver via the antenna 
port.

For anyone who suspects that the K3 itself is noisy (because of internal 
noise), I encourage those owners to do an MDS measurement.  If the 
internal noise is excessive, the MDS will be greatly reduced - MDS is 
the minimum signal level that can be detected above the receiver noise 
floor.  The Elecraft XG1 or XG2 is an inexpensive signal generator that 
will do the task - and the instructions for measuring MDS are in the 
manual.  If your K3 is not 'up to par', then that problem can be fixed.

OTOH, if the noise is coming into the receiver on the antenna port, 
there is not much that can be done to eliminate it - it is just like any 
other "signal" coming in from the antenna.
The K3 does offer tools such as the attenuator and AGC adjustments that 
can better handle than noise.  Unfortunately, there is not a "one size 
fits all" solution because each source of noise is different in its 
character and amplitude.

I cannot comment intelligently to those who are comparing the K3 audio 
noise output with that of another receiver because I do not have access 
to the receivers they are comparing.  I can only guess that the 
difference may be due to differences in receiver gain, AGC action, 
bandpass width, or the shaping of the audio spectrum.  Without doing 
actual measurements, these variables cannot be quantified.

73,
Don W3FPR

Maarten van Rossum wrote:
> I hope that with the help of this topic on the reflector, I too am able to
> set my K3 correctly for my circumstances so I too can enjoy noise free
> reception.
>  
>
__
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

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] My K3's Very Quiet

2009-12-19 Thread drewko

Regarding the preamp: MDS measurements show a better (S+N)/N with the
preamp on, approx 4 db improvement in MDS on my K3 on 40m. A similar
improvement is obtained by setting the ATU to BYPASS. 

The macro to toggle Preamp+Bypass is SWH19;SWT24; for anyone who wants
to try it. It may be useful for weak signals. You do have to remember
to toggle it (the ATU) back on when you transmit though.

73,
Drew
AF2Z

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 10:27:16 -0600, Ed W0SD wrote:
>
>It has been my experience over the years to "NOT" use the pre-amp on any 
>HF radio unless you are out of audio gain.  The FT-1000D did not have  a 
>pre-amp and the only place for me it was lacking was 10 meters.  For me 
>I just don't hear more at 10 meters and down  with a pre-amp.  For me it 
>just brings the noise up with the signal.  The only place I have seen a 
>big benefit from a pre-amp is above 28 mhz.  Obviously the K3 benefits 
>from a pre-amp on six meters.
>
>Ed W0SD

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] K3 receiver noise questionable test results




Don Wilhelm-4 wrote:
> 
> 
> In the situation you describe, only a low pass audio filter would help - 
> it should be available soon.
> Perhaps some others are hearing the same thing, but have not described 
> it as well.
> 
> 
I'm not convinced, Don.

I'm looking at the output from the K3 using Spectran now. I can see
"spurious" signals on the trace in the 10KHz - 14KHz region *when other
signals are present*. But the noise floor of the K3 outside the selected
passband is actually much lower than other receivers. It's something like
60dB down on the level of noise within the passband going from 3KHz to
20KHz.

-
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
* G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com
* KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html
* KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/K3-receiver-noise-questionable-test-results-tp4186597p4192029.html
Sent from the [K3] mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Receiver Noise Level -- Evaluation and Adjustment

2009-12-19 Thread Ken Wagner K3IU

All one has to do is go to the CONFIG menus, select the parameter, and 
tap Display and be told what the Default value is for that parameter. 
It's easy. It takes less than a minute to do all of the AGC parameters. 
That's pretty short.
73, Ken K3IU

On 12/19/2009 12:02 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
> Short version: put a way to reset to default AGC in the K3 itself. Do this 
> ASAP.
>
> Long version:
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Wayne Burdick  wrote:
>
>
>> If you feel that the noise level of your K3's receiver is excessive,
>> please try the following:
>>  
> snip
>
>
>> 3. Use the factory defaults for AGC. These were carefully chosen to
>> adjust gain in the presence of significant band noise.
>>  
> snip
>
> While the advice is official, there is not much point in posting "set
> to factory defaults" unless you include what those numbers are in your
> text.
>
> Otherwise the reader has to do the research (Google, site search,
> thumb manual looking for numbers...) to determine what the factory
> defaults are.
>
> Digging around on the web site, etc, will defeat a lot of readers. Not
> because your site is trashy (it's not), or the manual is bad (it's
> not), or K3 users are stupid (they're not), but because in human
> evolution web-searching was never the reason why one did or didn't
> live long enough to pass on one's genes to one's children.  That and
> such things as RTFM were not Darwinian criteria.  More than that...
>
> Human behavior studies in information assimilation on all kinds of us
> regular folks show over and over that on average humans don't do well
> at drilling down in information, become quickly bored, tired,
> irritated, frustrated, confused just to name a few. And while they may
> doggedly stay with such tasks to keep a job to feed and house the
> family, teeth-grinding information drilling to find the default
> numbers does not cut it in our pastime activities.  Moreover, even
> relating to work, studies with competent well-thought-of clerical
> personnel showed that errors, misreads, no-finds, and nasty remarks
> increased dramatically with the number of steps to fetch, or with any
> uncertainty as to the source, appearance or presentation of the needed
> information.
>
> Given the amount of attention, confusion and complaints related to
> noise and AGC, wouldn't it make sense to identify your default
> CONFIG:AGCxxx setting numbers with a "dEF" to the left of the number
> when VFO A rolls over it, so that when the folks from Mount Aptos say
> to use the default AGC, that can be easily set and/or confirmed and/or
> returned to without needing to dig up the numbers somewhere?
>
> 73, Guy.
> __
> 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
>
>
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Receiver Noise Level -- Evaluation and Adjustment

2009-12-19 Thread Guy Olinger K2AV

Short version: put a way to reset to default AGC in the K3 itself. Do this ASAP.

Long version:

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Wayne Burdick  wrote:

> If you feel that the noise level of your K3's receiver is excessive,
> please try the following:

snip

> 3. Use the factory defaults for AGC. These were carefully chosen to
> adjust gain in the presence of significant band noise.

snip

While the advice is official, there is not much point in posting "set
to factory defaults" unless you include what those numbers are in your
text.

Otherwise the reader has to do the research (Google, site search,
thumb manual looking for numbers...) to determine what the factory
defaults are.

Digging around on the web site, etc, will defeat a lot of readers. Not
because your site is trashy (it's not), or the manual is bad (it's
not), or K3 users are stupid (they're not), but because in human
evolution web-searching was never the reason why one did or didn't
live long enough to pass on one's genes to one's children.  That and
such things as RTFM were not Darwinian criteria.  More than that...

Human behavior studies in information assimilation on all kinds of us
regular folks show over and over that on average humans don't do well
at drilling down in information, become quickly bored, tired,
irritated, frustrated, confused just to name a few. And while they may
doggedly stay with such tasks to keep a job to feed and house the
family, teeth-grinding information drilling to find the default
numbers does not cut it in our pastime activities.  Moreover, even
relating to work, studies with competent well-thought-of clerical
personnel showed that errors, misreads, no-finds, and nasty remarks
increased dramatically with the number of steps to fetch, or with any
uncertainty as to the source, appearance or presentation of the needed
information.

Given the amount of attention, confusion and complaints related to
noise and AGC, wouldn't it make sense to identify your default
CONFIG:AGCxxx setting numbers with a "dEF" to the left of the number
when VFO A rolls over it, so that when the folks from Mount Aptos say
to use the default AGC, that can be easily set and/or confirmed and/or
returned to without needing to dig up the numbers somewhere?

73, Guy.
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

2009-12-19 Thread David Gilbert

That's an interesting observation and there is an easy way to check it 
out.  If you feed the stereo Line Out signal from your K3 into your 
sound card while using Spectrogram (a free program) to observe both 
channels, you should be able to get a direct comparison of the two 
receivers.  Spectrogram will even let you take a jpeg snapshot of the 
spectrum display.  Any chance you might be willing to do that?  If you 
don't want to mess with it, just record some of the audio as a stereo 
file and I'll run it through Spectrogram for you.

Just be sure to have all the same K3 settings (gain, bandwidth, shift, 
etc) for both receivers and tune both receivers to similar portions of 
the band.

73,
Dave   AB7E

Richard Ferch wrote:
> HB9ANM wrote:
>   
>> what puzzles me is why this topic now suddenly pops up more
>> two years after the first K3s appeared in the ham community? There must be
>> some good reason why nobody raised the subject before... Until someone
>> sparked a tsunami of comments!
>> 
>
> Possibly because the problem might exist in only a small percentage of 
> K3s. For example, my main RX is quiet, but my sub-RX is noisy. Two K3 
> receivers in the same box with the same settings and firmware, different 
> audio performance. Maybe the main receivers in the K3s whose owners 
> complain about noise have the same problem as my sub-RX, whatever that 
> problem may happen to be.
>
> 73,
> Rich VE3KI
> 
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver


I can't say that I was ever completely happy with the audio output of the K3.
My father was an audiophile and the K3 reminds me a bit of some of the
high-end audio stuff that he used to demonstrate to me. It had remarkable
detail and clarity but it also revealed things that perhaps were best hidden
and made it, to me, a bit tiring to listen to compared to my own budget
stereo system.

On the K3 CW and data signals sound remarkably pure and distortion free and
SSB sounds very clean and open. But on headphones particularly and on some
speakers other than the internal speaker I do find the K3 tiring to listen
to. This may be due to high frequency "artifacts" that some have mentioned,
but I have come to the conclusion that it has more to do with the excessive
low frequency roll-off in the K3 audio circuits particularly the headphone
circuit.

Today, I performed the RF gain calibration procedure, recalibrated the S
meter, then experimented with the AGC threshold and slope settings along the
lines suggested in this thread. I didn't find it made much difference to the
sound of the radio, or even the ability of signals to "pop out" of the noise
has been described.

I then made some A/B comparisons between the K3 and my FT-817ND, since that
was connected up and available. Listening on headphones, the FT-817ND was
definitely the most pleasant of the two radios to listen to, and signals
seemed to stand clear of the noise better. I then attempted to record this
to make some demo MP3 files via the line audio from both radios. The
difference, though still noticeable, was less marked than when listening on
headphones.

As my K3 is connected to its own dedicated sound card, I downloaded Spectran
and used this to experiment with the effect of filtering on the received
audio. You can play the K3 audio into one sound card and play back the
output (optionally filtered by Spectran) to the regular one and listen with
headphones plugged into the computer. This convinced me that the K3 is
certainly capable of producing very high quality audio. I didn't see any
sign of high frequency "artifacts" on the display. A low pass filter coming
in anywhere from 2.7KHz or higher didn't make much difference to the sound
at all. But changing the position of the high pass filter to allow more bass
through made a big subjective difference to the sound. More bass made the
audio less tiring and more pleasant to listen to.

I have done the KIO3 mod to improve the bass through the line output and the
mod on the main board for the speaker output. I still have the original DSP
board. Recently I plugged a pair of cheap computer speakers into the rear
speaker socket of the K3. Being computer speakers they were powered with a
high impedance input so there is less attenuation of low frequencies than
when using non-powered 8 ohm speakers. The audio quality was quite pleasant
considering the price of the speakers. The audio through headphones plugged
into the socket of one of the speakers was also much better than the audio
from the same headphones plugged directly into the K3.

I agree with others who have said that more information is needed than just
"my K3 is noisy". We need to know what they are listening with, what
impedance it is, what audio-related mods have been done.

I personally think that the excessive attenuation of low frequencies in the
K3's audio circuits particularly the headphone output is the major factor in
many of the complaints that the K3 sounds tiring. I am not convinced that an
add-in LPF will have any effect. What I am concerned about - especially in
view of the cost of exchanging the DSP board for those outside the US - is
whether the improvements in low frequency output are enough.

A lower-cost workaround might be to try some powered computer speakers and
use the headphone output on those. Most people will have computer speakers
already they can hook up as an experiment, so it would not be difficult to
try it.

-
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
* G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com
* KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html
* KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/Noisy-K3-receiver-tp4184529p4191926.html
Sent from the [K3] mailing list archive at Nabble.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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 receiver noise questionable test results

James,

In the situation you describe, only a low pass audio filter would help - 
it should be available soon.
Perhaps some others are hearing the same thing, but have not described 
it as well.

I have also heard from K3 owners who have changed their AGC parameters 
closer to the SLP = 002 and TH = 002 that I normally use and have 
reported a big change in the apparent noise of their K3.  There is not 
one answer for everyone - it all depends on the noise source.

73,
Don W3FPR

James Sarte wrote:
> Greetings Al et all,
>
> In my case, I experience a significant amount of high-frequency white noise.
> I'm not sure if that's the best way to describe it.  Think of the
> high-pitched whine you'd hear if you're travelling inside an airplane.
> Adjusting AGC, gain, and even RX EQ settings don't have much of an effect.
> If anything, adjusting AGC and gain controls just seem to reduce volume but
> not actual audio characteristic.
>
> 73 de James K2QI
>
> -Original Message-
> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Al Lorona
> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 9:07 PM
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 receiver noise questionable test results
>
> 
>
> Help me out here: are we talking about the *amount* of noise, or the
> *character* of the noise? I don't even think we've established the answer to
> this.
>
> If it's the amount of noise that folks are hearing, wouldn't you just turn
> the gain down to match your Other receiver? No two receivers have the same
> amount of gain, and I think this point has been lost on some of us.
>
> If it's the character of the noise, and if you find it objectionable, and if
> no settings of gain, filtering or noise reduction change it, I'd say
> it's time to go back to the Other receiver, and I'm not being facetious
> about this.
>
> 
>
> Al  W6LX
> __
> 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
>
> __
> 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
> 
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 9.0.717 / Virus Database: 270.14.114/2575 - Release Date: 12/19/09 
> 03:33:00
>
>   
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 receiver noise questionable test results

2009-12-19 Thread James Sarte

Greetings Al et all,

In my case, I experience a significant amount of high-frequency white noise.
I'm not sure if that's the best way to describe it.  Think of the
high-pitched whine you'd hear if you're travelling inside an airplane.
Adjusting AGC, gain, and even RX EQ settings don't have much of an effect.
If anything, adjusting AGC and gain controls just seem to reduce volume but
not actual audio characteristic.

73 de James K2QI

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Al Lorona
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 9:07 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 receiver noise questionable test results



Help me out here: are we talking about the *amount* of noise, or the
*character* of the noise? I don't even think we've established the answer to
this.

If it's the amount of noise that folks are hearing, wouldn't you just turn
the gain down to match your Other receiver? No two receivers have the same
amount of gain, and I think this point has been lost on some of us.

If it's the character of the noise, and if you find it objectionable, and if
no settings of gain, filtering or noise reduction change it, I'd say
it's time to go back to the Other receiver, and I'm not being facetious
about this.



Al  W6LX
__
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

__
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

[Elecraft] My K3's Very Quiet

2009-12-19 Thread W0SD Ed Gray

I am listening on 17 meters SSB right now and Europe is coming through 
mostly S-7 to S-9 on the TH-11.
I can tune to an open spot in the band or just above the top edge of the 
band and my S-meter
has one bar.  This is with the pre-amp off.  The band width is 2.1 khz.  
Even at 2.7 khz I stay at one bar but
to my ear I can hear just a tiny bit more background noise which seems 
logical to me.  I had the RF gain at maximum
for the test.  Obviously if you have some noise backing the RF gain off 
is the way to go.


I like to listen with the shift at FC 1.40  rather than 1.50.  For me a 
little shift is always more
pleasant to listen to.  I also always did this with the FT-1000D and 
TS-950SDX

that I previously owned.

IMHO what more can you ask for?

When  I switch to the dummy load at normal volume I can barely tell the 
radio is on.  I have zero bars on the S-Meter on

the dummy load.

I did these same checks with #1037, #1096 and #3423 and I can hear no 
difference.  They are all very quiet!  Of course a factor
here is I live in a rural area where man made noise is low!  I sure 
don't expect my K3 to be quiet if I have man made noise other than 
things you can do with the NB, NR, AGC and bandwidth.


It has been my experience over the years to "NOT" use the pre-amp on any 
HF radio unless you are out of audio gain.  The FT-1000D did not have  a 
pre-amp and the only place for me it was lacking was 10 meters.  For me 
I just don't hear more at 10 meters and down  with a pre-amp.  For me it 
just brings the noise up with the signal.  The only place I have seen a 
big benefit from a pre-amp is above 28 mhz.  Obviously the K3 benefits 
from a pre-amp on six meters.


Ed W0SD
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.427 / Virus Database: 270.14.114/2575 - Release Date: 12/19/09 
08:33:00
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] K3DSPUPGD

2009-12-19 Thread Bob Cunnings

This question has been asked several times recently, without direct
response from Elecraft. However, W4TV apparently made contact and
posted an answer the other day:

http://www.mail-archive.com/elecraft@mailman.qth.net/msg87611.html

Bob NW8L

On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 8:33 AM,   wrote:
>        I find no actual description of what the K3DSPUPGD (REV C) consists
> of. Does it include the lowpass audio filter that everyone keeps talking
> about, or is that an additional add on to the REV C DSP board?
>
>        Could someone from Elecraft please straighten me out on this so I
> can determine if there is something additional I need to order for the REV C
> DSP upgrade board? All this talk on the subject has got me confused.
>
>
> Stan Rife
> W5EWA
>
>
>
> __
> 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
>
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] K3DSPUPGD

Stan,

If I understand correctly, the new DSP boards will be Rev D and will 
include the LPF as well as the increased low frequency audio response.
I am not certain where I received that information, so I could be 
suffering from a 'memory loss incident'.  But whatever the board Rev 
number is, it includes the LPF.

73,
Don W3FPR

sr...@swbell.net wrote:
>   I find no actual description of what the K3DSPUPGD (REV C) consists
> of. Does it include the lowpass audio filter that everyone keeps talking
> about, or is that an additional add on to the REV C DSP board?
>
>   Could someone from Elecraft please straighten me out on this so I
> can determine if there is something additional I need to order for the REV C
> DSP upgrade board? All this talk on the subject has got me confused.
>  
>
> Stan Rife 
> W5EWA 
>
>
>
> __
> 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
> 
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 9.0.717 / Virus Database: 270.14.114/2575 - Release Date: 12/19/09 
> 03:33:00
>
>   
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Noisy K3 receiver

2009-12-19 Thread Robert Carroll

I have K3 envy but use an Orion and, as with Van, I have an FT2000 and am a
member of that reflector.  Until a death-by-lightning incident I also had an
FT1000MP.  One of the frequently heard complaints on the 2000 and sometimes
the Orion reflector is that the Orion is noisy compared to either an MP or
2K.  I don't find that to be the case unless I am using too much RF gain
with the Orion but quite a few others dont agree.  I recall that in early
runs of the MP there were many complaints about audio hiss, and InRad had a
fix which was a simple audio BW roll-off cap. I suspect Yaesu may have
included a similar change in later MP's and MKV's as those complaints
stopped.  The idea was to eliminate any white noise in the phones when the
antenna input was disconnected. That noise was coming from an audio stage. I
am very interested in seeing where the K3 noise thread leads.  

73
Bob W2WG

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jan Erik Holm
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 10:12 AM
Cc: Elecraft List
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Noisy K3 receiver

Well something isn´t right or different from other radios.
There are radios with lower MDS that sounds much quieter then
the K3.
Here we have proposals to turn of preamp and make MDS even
higher. Not logical and state of the art to me.

So again, I know there are receivers with lower MDS then the
K3 that sounds much more quiet.
IMO something is going on but I can´t put my fingers on it
and I don´t have the time to investigate. And believe you
me with the experience I do have in the performance of a
multitude of different radios going back in to the 60´ties
I know what I´m talking about.

It´s been most interesting to read some of the comments,
maybe something can come out of it and things can be fixed.

merry xmas Jim SM2EKM
-
Don Wilhelm wrote:
> will return the K3 to full gain.  You are correct in reducing the RF 
> Gain to the point where the band noise is reduced.  I trust you are also 
> using the attenuator and have the preamp off because these are stages 
> prior to the mixer and will have a greater impact on the band noise 
> reduction than the RF Gain which operates at the IF.
> 
> For those who have noisy reception, do a trial at a spot in each HF band 
> where there are no signals present - first turn off the preamp, and then 
> if noise is still present and bothersome, turn on the attenuator, then 
> lastly reduce the RF Gain.
> 

__
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

__
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

[Elecraft] [K3] K3DSPUPGD

2009-12-19 Thread srife

I find no actual description of what the K3DSPUPGD (REV C) consists
of. Does it include the lowpass audio filter that everyone keeps talking
about, or is that an additional add on to the REV C DSP board?

Could someone from Elecraft please straighten me out on this so I
can determine if there is something additional I need to order for the REV C
DSP upgrade board? All this talk on the subject has got me confused.
 

Stan Rife 
W5EWA 



__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

Maarten (and all),

There are two separate noise sources to be considered here, and it is 
important to separate them.  One is the internal receiver noise, and the 
second is demodulated noise that comes into the receiver via the antenna 
port.

For anyone who suspects that the K3 itself is noisy (because of internal 
noise), I encourage those owners to do an MDS measurement.  If the 
internal noise is excessive, the MDS will be greatly reduced - MDS is 
the minimum signal level that can be detected above the receiver noise 
floor.  The Elecraft XG1 or XG2 is an inexpensive signal generator that 
will do the task - and the instructions for measuring MDS are in the 
manual.  If your K3 is not 'up to par', then that problem can be fixed.

OTOH, if the noise is coming into the receiver on the antenna port, 
there is not much that can be done to eliminate it - it is just like any 
other "signal" coming in from the antenna.
The K3 does offer tools such as the attenuator and AGC adjustments that 
can better handle than noise.  Unfortunately, there is not a "one size 
fits all" solution because each source of noise is different in its 
character and amplitude.

I cannot comment intelligently to those who are comparing the K3 audio 
noise output with that of another receiver because I do not have access 
to the receivers they are comparing.  I can only guess that the 
difference may be due to differences in receiver gain, AGC action, 
bandpass width, or the shaping of the audio spectrum.  Without doing 
actual measurements, these variables cannot be quantified.

73,
Don W3FPR

Maarten van Rossum wrote:
> I hope that with the help of this topic on the reflector, I too am able to
> set my K3 correctly for my circumstances so I too can enjoy noise free
> reception.
>   
>
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Noisy K3 receiver

Well something isn´t right or different from other radios.
There are radios with lower MDS that sounds much quieter then
the K3.
Here we have proposals to turn of preamp and make MDS even
higher. Not logical and state of the art to me.

So again, I know there are receivers with lower MDS then the
K3 that sounds much more quiet.
IMO something is going on but I can´t put my fingers on it
and I don´t have the time to investigate. And believe you
me with the experience I do have in the performance of a
multitude of different radios going back in to the 60´ties
I know what I´m talking about.

It´s been most interesting to read some of the comments,
maybe something can come out of it and things can be fixed.

merry xmas Jim SM2EKM
-
Don Wilhelm wrote:
> will return the K3 to full gain.  You are correct in reducing the RF 
> Gain to the point where the band noise is reduced.  I trust you are also 
> using the attenuator and have the preamp off because these are stages 
> prior to the mixer and will have a greater impact on the band noise 
> reduction than the RF Gain which operates at the IF.
> 
> For those who have noisy reception, do a trial at a spot in each HF band 
> where there are no signals present - first turn off the preamp, and then 
> if noise is still present and bothersome, turn on the attenuator, then 
> lastly reduce the RF Gain.
> 

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] OT: soldering leads to coin cell batteries

2009-12-19 Thread Ken Alexander


Hi John,

If the leads on the existing cells are thin metal strips then they probably 
won't come off with a soldering iron.  They're usually welded on during the 
manufacturing process.

You might try Mouser or Digi-Key to see if you can find a battery holder it 
would slip into.  The holder would have leads that are easy to connect to.

73,

Ken Alexander
VE3HLS


--- On Sat, 12/19/09, John Ferguson  wrote:

> From: John Ferguson 
> Subject: [Elecraft] OT: soldering leads to coin cell batteries
> To: elecr...@mailman.qth..net
> Date: Saturday, December 19, 2009, 2:35 PM
> Does anyone here have experience
> soldering leads to coin cell batteries?
> My Compaq Armada M300 needs a new cmos battery.  the
> present one is a 2032 with 2 leads and a molex plug.
> 
> my scheme is to put the needle point on my trusty WTCP,
> remove the leads from the old battery, sand them and tin
> them and using the flux I used for the smt project, quickly
> as in QUICKLY touch the point to the leads.
> 
> Why not?
> 
> AI4TO  John Ferguson m/v arcadian
> 
> 
>       
> __
> 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
> 

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] OT: soldering leads to coin cell batteries

2009-12-19 Thread Mike

John - If that doesn't work out, take a look here.

http://www.batterybob.com/category.asp?cat=9024
SKU #: 399040
SKU #: 399039

73, Mike NF4L

John Ferguson wrote:
> Does anyone here have experience soldering leads to coin cell batteries?
> My Compaq Armada M300 needs a new cmos battery.  the present one is a 2032 
> with 2 leads and a molex plug.
>
> my scheme is to put the needle point on my trusty WTCP, remove the leads from 
> the old battery, sand them and tin them and using the flux I used for the smt 
> project, quickly as in QUICKLY touch the point to the leads.
>
> Why not?
>
> AI4TO  John Ferguson m/v arcadian
>
>
>   
> __
> 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
>
>   


__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Q

David,

I find it hard to believe that all those pins actually show zero ohms.  
Does your DMM actually indicate "0.00", or is it indicating exactly what 
it does when the leads are not connected to anything (infinite resistance)?

If your meter is indicating infinite resistance, then all is OK - that 
is what the ">" (greater than) sign means - the resistance must be 
higher than the value listed, and may even be infinite.

73,
Don W3FPR

David wrote:
> Hi,I am building the K2 and the control board is done and checks out fine.The 
> Front Panel is done but in the check list of J1 pins 1-20 pins 1-7 show 0 
> ohms pin 8 shows .12 ohms pin 9   0 ohms this is not consistent with 
> checklist all else checks out ok , solder looks good no solder bridges could 
> please make a suggestion David
> __
> 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
> 
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 9.0.717 / Virus Database: 270.14.113/2573 - Release Date: 12/18/09 
> 02:35:00
>
>   
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Noisy K3 receiver

2009-12-19 Thread Maarten van Rossum

Hi Richard,

About I year ago the subject was discussed on the reflector as well. Just
like it does now it then caused a lot of discussion too. If I remember it
correctly Elecraft came up with a firmware release which provided more low
audio response partially because of that discussion on the reflector.
Among others, K8ZOA wrote an article about the different parameters of the
AGC which helped a lot of people to set up the AGC correctly.
It seems to me that now, a year later, that article has dropped to the
background and new users seem to struggle with a correct AGC setting.
It's certainly is not something new, people have mentioned it before and I
like to believe it's still a work in progress.

73, Maarten van Rossum
PD2R

P.s. This is the article I reffered to:
http://www.cliftonlaboratories.com/Documents/Elecraft%20K3%20Transceiver%20AGC%20Parameters%20and%20S-meter.pdf

2009/12/19 Richard Squire - HB9ANM 

>
> Hi Maarten. It is a fact that DSP receivers tend to have a somewhat higher
> noise floor. I am certainly not suggesting anybody lost his rights to talk
> about it. But what puzzles me is why this topic now suddenly pops up more
> two years after the first K3s appeared in the ham community? There must be
> some good reason why nobody raised the subject before... Until someone
> sparked a tsunami of comments!
>
>
> PD2R wrote:
> >
> > Correct me if I'm wrong Richard, but are you saying that "the noise",
> > whatever color it may be, is something we all have to put up with? And
> > since
> > 2 years have past, we have lost the right to say anything about it?
> >
> >
>
>
> -
> Richard - HB9ANM
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://n2.nabble.com/Noisy-K3-receiver-tp4184529p4191276.html
> Sent from the [K3] mailing list archive at Nabble.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
>
__
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

[Elecraft] OT: soldering leads to coin cell batteries

2009-12-19 Thread John Ferguson

Does anyone here have experience soldering leads to coin cell batteries?
My Compaq Armada M300 needs a new cmos battery.  the present one is a 2032 with 
2 leads and a molex plug.

my scheme is to put the needle point on my trusty WTCP, remove the leads from 
the old battery, sand them and tin them and using the flux I used for the smt 
project, quickly as in QUICKLY touch the point to the leads.

Why not?

AI4TO  John Ferguson m/v arcadian


  
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Noisy K3 receiver