Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Yes, the original phase noise plot was way off reality. The ARRL corrected it in a subsequent issue. The KSYN3A gives the K3 and K3S among the best RMDR and lowest TX phase noise of any transceiver. 73, Wayne N6KR http://www.elecraft.com > On Jun 30, 2018, at 9:02 AM, a**@sbcglobal wrote: > > Ian, now that I think of it, wasn’t the first ARRL KSYN3A review in error and > then an updated review came out, or something like that? Does anybody > remember? I wonder if Ian and I are looking at two different reviews of the > same product. . > > 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 > Message delivered to n...@elecraft.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Ian, now that I think of it, wasn’t the first ARRL KSYN3A review in error and then an updated review came out, or something like that? Does anybody remember? I wonder if Ian and I are looking at two different reviews of the same product. . 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 Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Al, thank you for pointing this out. To my surprise, the reason for the difference between Al's interpretation and mine is that there are *two different versions* of the ARRL review of the KSYN3A, both available on the arrl.org website. The version retrieved appears to depend on the search route taken. My message posted on Wednesday 27th June was based on the weblink referenced within the message. In that version, Figure 10 shows a very distinct phase noise advantage for the older KSYN3 at wider frequency offsets. However, the version accessed by Al is *different*. In this second version, Figures 10 and 11 both show much lower levels of phase noise from the KSYN3A at wider frequency offsets. (That appears to be the only change, that Figures 10 and 11 have been quietly replaced.) Based on this second version, I would agree with Al that there is no significant difference in phase noise between the KSYN3 and KSYN3A at wider offsets. In view of the uncertainly between the two different sets of published results for wider frequency offsets, it seems best to withdraw my message posted on Wednesday 27th June. Thanks once again to Al W6LX for pointing this out. 73 from Ian GM3SEK >-Original Message- >From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft- >boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Al Lorona >Sent: 29 June 2018 22:47 >To: Ian White; elecraft@mailman.qth.net >Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) > >I'm not sure I agree with the exact numbers, Ian. I'm looking at the >review from Nov 2015 QST (from the Product Review archive on >www.arrl.org ) and it appears that the difference in phase noise >between old and new synths is closer to about 3 dB (difficult to tell from >the graph) beginning at offsets of *50 or 100 kHz*, not the 6 kHz you >cited. At 6 kHz the new still beats the old by almost 20 dB! > >So, while the old synthesizer certainly exhibits lower transmitted phase >noise out beyond 50 kHz offset, the new one is within a few dB of it, >and at 50 MHz both seem to meet the -130 dBc/Hz limit you cited. > >Al W6LX > > > > >From: Ian White >To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 2:45 PM >Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) > > > >>A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in >both >>transmit and receive phase noise. > >That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the >better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets >is more important for their particular type of operating. > >For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is >of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a >huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but >*only* in that specific context. There are also several other >advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could >also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. > >At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed >offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 >(which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, >that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all >offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower >noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". > >Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of >much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a >combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often >much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; >and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to >the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features >stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond >those for which most HF transceivers are designed. > >Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of >raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole >contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers >reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a >responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below >about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This >can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the >transceiver is almost always the most important building block. > >The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at >frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL >review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with >10-15dB to spare. > >I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the >KSYN3A, of c
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I'm not sure I agree with the exact numbers, Ian. I'm looking at the review from Nov 2015 QST (from the Product Review archive on www.arrl.org ) and it appears that the difference in phase noise between old and new synths is closer to about 3 dB (difficult to tell from the graph) beginning at offsets of *50 or 100 kHz*, not the 6 kHz you cited. At 6 kHz the new still beats the old by almost 20 dB! So, while the old synthesizer certainly exhibits lower transmitted phase noise out beyond 50 kHz offset, the new one is within a few dB of it, and at 50 MHz both seem to meet the -130 dBc/Hz limit you cited. Al W6LX From: Ian White To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 2:45 PM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) >A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both >transmit and receive phase noise. That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets is more important for their particular type of operating. For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but *only* in that specific context. There are also several other advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 (which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond those for which most HF transceivers are designed. Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the transceiver is almost always the most important building block. The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with 10-15dB to spare. I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the KSYN3A, of course) is used for HF contesting where smaller frequency offsets are important. Meanwhile the old K3 is now used as a transverter driver for 144MHz and above - and for that particular purpose there are very good reasons *not* to replace the original KSYN3. 73 from Ian GM3SEK [1] http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ProductReviewsForDeb/2015/pr112015.pd f [2] https://thersgb.org/members/publications/video_archive.php?id=5703 Sorry, this talk is accessible only to RSGB members, but in a few words... G8DOH runs the numbers to demonstrate that the -130dBc/Hz target for transmitted phase noise is necessary to avoid raising the noise floor of other stations many kilometres away, and also many tens to hundreds of kHz away across the band, whenever their high-gain beams happen to be pointed at each other. That calculation assumes the UK transmitter power limit of 400W PEP output. For the US power limit of 1500W output, keeping all other assumptions the same, the target for transmitted noise floor would need to be better than -135dBc/Hz. The older KSYN3 can still meet that more stringent target but the KSYN3A probably cannot. >-Original Message- >From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft- >boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm >Sent: 27 June 2018 14:23 >To: hawley, charles j jr; Charlie T >Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net >Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) > >Chuck, > >A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both >transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new transceiver. > >If you are strictly a casual operator, those qualities may not be >important to you, but if you are a DX'er or a co
[Elecraft] [K3} Factory upgrade to K3(s)
If I remember correctly, the new synths also fix some operating limitations of the K3 in high-speed QSK, which was my principal reason for making the switch. Receive recovery time seems shorter. And I believe they extend receiver usability in VLF from 500 down to 100 Khz or so, for 220M. At the time they became available Elecraft published an FAQ about the new synths, which might still be available online. As for what the old synths can be used for when removed, the best I heard was drink coasters. I tried to give mine away but there were no takers even at zero dollars, shipping prepaid. Ted, KN1CBR -- Message: 7 Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 17:50:28 -0700 (MST) From: ab2tc To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Message-ID: <1530147028885-0.p...@n2.nabble.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi all, There is a bit of misinformation in this thread. The new synthesizer does not make any difference to the noise floor in the absence of strong nearby signals. This is how noise floor is usually measured. What it does is improving the reciprocal mixing of nearby signals and the phase noise on transmit. This improvement is significant. But the basic sensitivity of the receiver (noise floor) is not affected. AB2TC - Knut -- Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.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 Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Hey, at least it is not "K3 Pro" or "K3 Mark IIG" k4ia, Buck K3# 101 Honor Roll 8B DXCC EasyWayHamBooks.com On 6/27/2018 7:12 PM, Fred Jensen wrote: Why not adopt the grammar of the Lao [and Thai] languages which have no plural forms. It would be K3S, two K3S, three K3S, one hundred K3S ... I've always thought K3S was a misteak, K3.1 would have been better ... or not. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 6/27/2018 3:00 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote: Would not K3S' be the plural of K3S? Bob, K4TAX Sent from my iPhone On Jun 27, 2018, at 4:44 PM, Ian White wrote: A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise. That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets is more important for their particular type of operating. For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but *only* in that specific context. There are also several other advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 (which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond those for which most HF transceivers are designed. Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the transceiver is almost always the most important building block. The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with 10-15dB to spare. I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the KSYN3A, of course) is used for HF contesting where smaller frequency offsets are important. Meanwhile the old K3 is now used as a transverter driver for 144MHz and above - and for that particular purpose there are very good reasons *not* to replace the original KSYN3. 73 from Ian GM3SEK [1] http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ProductReviewsForDeb/2015/pr112015.pd f [2] https://thersgb.org/members/publications/video_archive.php?id=5703 Sorry, this talk is accessible only to RSGB members, but in a few words... G8DOH runs the numbers to demonstrate that the -130dBc/Hz target for transmitted phase noise is necessary to avoid raising the noise floor of other stations many kilometres away, and also many tens to hundreds of kHz away across the band, whenever their high-gain beams happen to be pointed at each other. That calculation assumes the UK transmitter power limit of 400W PEP output. For the US power limit of 1500W output, keeping all other assumptions the same, the target for transmitted noise floor would need to be better than -135dBc/Hz. The older KSYN3 can still meet that more stringent target but the KSYN3A probably cannot. -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft- boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm Sent: 27 June 2018 14:23 To: hawley, charles j jr; Charlie T Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Chuck, A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new transceiver. If you are strictly a casual operator, those qualities may not be important to you, but if you are a DX'er or a contester, or otherwise operate in crowded band condition, those things should be important to you. 73, Don W3FPR On 6/27/2018 9:03 AM, hawley, charles j jr wrote: I decided
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Hi all, There is a bit of misinformation in this thread. The new synthesizer does not make any difference to the noise floor in the absence of strong nearby signals. This is how noise floor is usually measured. What it does is improving the reciprocal mixing of nearby signals and the phase noise on transmit. This improvement is significant. But the basic sensitivity of the receiver (noise floor) is not affected. AB2TC - Knut -- Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.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 Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
And with that, let's go ahead and close the thread. :-) 73, Eric /elecraft.com/ On 6/27/2018 5:31 PM, jeff griffin wrote: Or how about K3Pro with benefits :-) 73 Jeff kb2m -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Fred Jensen Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 7:13 PM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Why not adopt the grammar of the Lao [and Thai] languages which have no plural forms. It would be K3S, two K3S, three K3S, one hundred K3S ... I've always thought K3S was a misteak, K3.1 would have been better ... or not. __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Or how about K3Pro with benefits :-) 73 Jeff kb2m -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Fred Jensen Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 7:13 PM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Why not adopt the grammar of the Lao [and Thai] languages which have no plural forms. It would be K3S, two K3S, three K3S, one hundred K3S ... I've always thought K3S was a misteak, K3.1 would have been better ... or not. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 6/27/2018 3:00 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote: > Would not K3S' be the plural of K3S? > > Bob, K4TAX > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 27, 2018, at 4:44 PM, Ian White wrote: > >>> A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in >> both >>> transmit and receive phase noise. >> That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the >> better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets >> is more important for their particular type of operating. >> >> For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is >> of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a >> huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but >> *only* in that specific context. There are also several other >> advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could >> also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. >> >> At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed >> offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 >> (which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, >> that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all >> offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower >> noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". >> >> Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of >> much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a >> combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often >> much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; >> and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to >> the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features >> stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond >> those for which most HF transceivers are designed. >> >> Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of >> raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole >> contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers >> reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a >> responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below >> about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This >> can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the >> transceiver is almost always the most important building block. >> >> The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at >> frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL >> review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with >> 10-15dB to spare. >> >> I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the >> KSYN3A, of course) is used for HF contesting where smaller frequency >> offsets are important. Meanwhile the old K3 is now used as a >> transverter driver for 144MHz and above - and for that particular >> purpose there are very good reasons *not* to replace the original >> KSYN3. >> >> 73 from Ian GM3SEK >> >> >> [1] >> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ProductReviewsForDeb/2015/pr112015.pd >> f >> >> [2] >> https://thersgb.org/members/publications/video_archive.php?id=5703 >> Sorry, this talk is accessible only to RSGB members, but in a few >> words... >> >> G8DOH runs the numbers to demonstrate that the -130dBc/Hz target >> for transmitted phase noise is necessary to avoid raising the noise >> floor of other stations many kilometres away, and also many tens to >> hundreds of kHz away across the band, whenever their high-gain beams >> happen to be pointed at each other. >> >> That calculation assumes the UK transmitter power limit of 400W PEP >> output. For the US power limit of 1500W output, keeping all other >> assumptions the same, the target for transmitted noise floor would >> need to be better than -135dBc/Hz. The older KSYN3 can still meet >> that more stringent
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Skip, Maybe, but that is not within the Elecraft policy of not releasing a new model with every upgrade mod like other manufacturers do. The K3S is more than an upgraded K3 (for example, the RF Board cannot be changed in the K3), but it is similar to the change in the K2 that happened at SN 3000. Hindsight says it should have been called the K4 or something similar. Eric is likely to shut down this thread soon! Too many posts, and here I am adding to the count. 73, Don W3FPR On 6/27/2018 7:12 PM, Fred Jensen wrote: Why not adopt the grammar of the Lao [and Thai] languages which have no plural forms. It would be K3S, two K3S, three K3S, one hundred K3S ... I've always thought K3S was a misteak, K3.1 would have been better ... or not. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 6/27/2018 3:00 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote: Would not K3S' be the plural of K3S? Bob, K4TAX Sent from my iPhone On Jun 27, 2018, at 4:44 PM, Ian White wrote: A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise. That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets is more important for their particular type of operating. For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but *only* in that specific context. There are also several other advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 (which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond those for which most HF transceivers are designed. Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the transceiver is almost always the most important building block. The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with 10-15dB to spare. I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the KSYN3A, of course) is used for HF contesting where smaller frequency offsets are important. Meanwhile the old K3 is now used as a transverter driver for 144MHz and above - and for that particular purpose there are very good reasons *not* to replace the original KSYN3. 73 from Ian GM3SEK [1] http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ProductReviewsForDeb/2015/pr112015.pd f [2] https://thersgb.org/members/publications/video_archive.php?id=5703 Sorry, this talk is accessible only to RSGB members, but in a few words... G8DOH runs the numbers to demonstrate that the -130dBc/Hz target for transmitted phase noise is necessary to avoid raising the noise floor of other stations many kilometres away, and also many tens to hundreds of kHz away across the band, whenever their high-gain beams happen to be pointed at each other. That calculation assumes the UK transmitter power limit of 400W PEP output. For the US power limit of 1500W output, keeping all other assumptions the same, the target for transmitted noise floor would need to be better than -135dBc/Hz. The older KSYN3 can still meet that more stringent target but the KSYN3A probably cannot. -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft- boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm Sent: 27 June 2018 14:23 To: hawley, charles j jr; Charlie T Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Chuck, A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new transceiver
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Why not adopt the grammar of the Lao [and Thai] languages which have no plural forms. It would be K3S, two K3S, three K3S, one hundred K3S ... I've always thought K3S was a misteak, K3.1 would have been better ... or not. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 6/27/2018 3:00 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote: Would not K3S' be the plural of K3S? Bob, K4TAX Sent from my iPhone On Jun 27, 2018, at 4:44 PM, Ian White wrote: A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise. That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets is more important for their particular type of operating. For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but *only* in that specific context. There are also several other advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 (which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond those for which most HF transceivers are designed. Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the transceiver is almost always the most important building block. The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with 10-15dB to spare. I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the KSYN3A, of course) is used for HF contesting where smaller frequency offsets are important. Meanwhile the old K3 is now used as a transverter driver for 144MHz and above - and for that particular purpose there are very good reasons *not* to replace the original KSYN3. 73 from Ian GM3SEK [1] http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ProductReviewsForDeb/2015/pr112015.pd f [2] https://thersgb.org/members/publications/video_archive.php?id=5703 Sorry, this talk is accessible only to RSGB members, but in a few words... G8DOH runs the numbers to demonstrate that the -130dBc/Hz target for transmitted phase noise is necessary to avoid raising the noise floor of other stations many kilometres away, and also many tens to hundreds of kHz away across the band, whenever their high-gain beams happen to be pointed at each other. That calculation assumes the UK transmitter power limit of 400W PEP output. For the US power limit of 1500W output, keeping all other assumptions the same, the target for transmitted noise floor would need to be better than -135dBc/Hz. The older KSYN3 can still meet that more stringent target but the KSYN3A probably cannot. -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft- boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm Sent: 27 June 2018 14:23 To: hawley, charles j jr; Charlie T Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Chuck, A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new transceiver. If you are strictly a casual operator, those qualities may not be important to you, but if you are a DX'er or a contester, or otherwise operate in crowded band condition, those things should be important to you. 73, Don W3FPR On 6/27/2018 9:03 AM, hawley, charles j jr wrote: I decided to bypass the replacement of the synthesizers. Could you describe the "huge" difference? __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailma
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Exactly Don. Thanks for that comment. That's what the boys at Elecraft recommended when K3S was first announced and we had a field day (pun) with remarks about plural, etc when guys tried to match the logo. You'll notice that Wayne always uses K3S now on this reflector. I am still trying to figure out what the K3(s), the K3[s] and K3*s guys are trying to say. Don't try to replicate the K3S marketing logo as you can't do it with the font here on the reflector. Please just use K3S. 73, Terry, W0FM -Original Message- From: Don Wilhelm [mailto:donw...@embarqmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 3:41 PM To: Grant Youngman; Mark E. Musick Cc: Elecraft Reflector Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Grant, I always use "K3S" and "K3", and add a lower case "s" for plural. If you look at the logo, yes, the trailing "S" is smaller than the "K3", but not small enough to be lower case (1/2 the height of the caps). 73, Don W3FPR On 6/27/2018 4:27 PM, Grant Youngman wrote: How the heck do you differentiate between plurals with this radio :-) __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Would not K3S' be the plural of K3S? Bob, K4TAX Sent from my iPhone On Jun 27, 2018, at 4:44 PM, Ian White wrote: >> A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in > both >> transmit and receive phase noise. > > That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the > better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets > is more important for their particular type of operating. > > For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is > of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a > huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but > *only* in that specific context. There are also several other > advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could > also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. > > At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed > offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 > (which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, > that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all > offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower > noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". > > Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of > much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a > combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often > much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; > and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to > the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features > stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond > those for which most HF transceivers are designed. > > Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of > raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole > contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers > reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a > responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below > about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This > can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the > transceiver is almost always the most important building block. > > The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at > frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL > review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with > 10-15dB to spare. > > I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the > KSYN3A, of course) is used for HF contesting where smaller frequency > offsets are important. Meanwhile the old K3 is now used as a > transverter driver for 144MHz and above - and for that particular > purpose there are very good reasons *not* to replace the original > KSYN3. > > 73 from Ian GM3SEK > > > [1] > http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ProductReviewsForDeb/2015/pr112015.pd > f > > [2] > https://thersgb.org/members/publications/video_archive.php?id=5703 > Sorry, this talk is accessible only to RSGB members, but in a few > words... > > G8DOH runs the numbers to demonstrate that the -130dBc/Hz target > for transmitted phase noise is necessary to avoid raising the noise > floor of other stations many kilometres away, and also many tens to > hundreds of kHz away across the band, whenever their high-gain beams > happen to be pointed at each other. > > That calculation assumes the UK transmitter power limit of 400W PEP > output. For the US power limit of 1500W output, keeping all other > assumptions the same, the target for transmitted noise floor would > need to be better than -135dBc/Hz. The older KSYN3 can still meet > that more stringent target but the KSYN3A probably cannot. > > >> -Original Message- >> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft- >> boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm >> Sent: 27 June 2018 14:23 >> To: hawley, charles j jr; Charlie T >> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) >> >> Chuck, >> >> A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in > both >> transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new > transceiver. >> >> If you are strictly a casual operator, those qualities may not be >> important to you, but if you are a DX'er or a contester, or > otherwise >> operate in crowded band condition, those things should be important >> to you. >> >> 73, >> Don W3FPR >> >>> On 6/27/2018 9:03 AM, hawley, charles j
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
>A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both >transmit and receive phase noise. That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets is more important for their particular type of operating. For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but *only* in that specific context. There are also several other advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 (which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond those for which most HF transceivers are designed. Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the transceiver is almost always the most important building block. The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with 10-15dB to spare. I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the KSYN3A, of course) is used for HF contesting where smaller frequency offsets are important. Meanwhile the old K3 is now used as a transverter driver for 144MHz and above - and for that particular purpose there are very good reasons *not* to replace the original KSYN3. 73 from Ian GM3SEK [1] http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ProductReviewsForDeb/2015/pr112015.pd f [2] https://thersgb.org/members/publications/video_archive.php?id=5703 Sorry, this talk is accessible only to RSGB members, but in a few words... G8DOH runs the numbers to demonstrate that the -130dBc/Hz target for transmitted phase noise is necessary to avoid raising the noise floor of other stations many kilometres away, and also many tens to hundreds of kHz away across the band, whenever their high-gain beams happen to be pointed at each other. That calculation assumes the UK transmitter power limit of 400W PEP output. For the US power limit of 1500W output, keeping all other assumptions the same, the target for transmitted noise floor would need to be better than -135dBc/Hz. The older KSYN3 can still meet that more stringent target but the KSYN3A probably cannot. >-Original Message- >From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft- >boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm >Sent: 27 June 2018 14:23 >To: hawley, charles j jr; Charlie T >Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net >Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) > >Chuck, > >A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both >transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new transceiver. > >If you are strictly a casual operator, those qualities may not be >important to you, but if you are a DX'er or a contester, or otherwise >operate in crowded band condition, those things should be important >to you. > >73, >Don W3FPR > >On 6/27/2018 9:03 AM, hawley, charles j jr wrote: >> I decided to bypass the replacement of the synthesizers. Could you >describe the "huge" difference? >> __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
(Note: K3s refers to multiple K3 radios. K3S refers to a single K3S radio. K3Ss or K3Ses refers to multiple K3S radios. I'm sorry if you are reading the note on a monocase system like RTTY.) Many of us have installed the new synthesizers in our K3s. For example, #6299 has the new synthesizers, and the rest of the available K3S goodies. One clear advantage of Elecraft radios is that they can be upgraded, and they don't even need a trip back to the factory to do it. 73 Bill AE6JV On 6/27/18 at 9:50 AM, markmus...@sbcglobal.net (Mark E. Musick) wrote: There is no need to pop the cover to check the K3 to see if it has the new synthesizer. It says on the Elecraft website they started installing the new synthesizer in the K3 starting with serial number 8801. If your K3 serial number is 8801 or higher, you have the new synthesizer. --- Bill Frantz| Re: Computer reliability, performance, and security: 408-356-8506 | The guy who *is* wearing a parachute is *not* the www.pwpconsult.com | first to reach the ground. - Terence Kelly __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
That was actually a joke of sorts. I’d rather have the upgrades than knowing where to put the upper and lower case s’s :-) Grant NQ5T K3 #2091, KX3 #8342 > On Jun 27, 2018, at 4:48 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: > > I say “multiple K3S radios”. > > wunder > K6WRU > Walter Underwood > CM87wj > http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > >> On Jun 27, 2018, at 1:40 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote: >> >> Grant, >> >> I always use "K3S" and "K3", and add a lower case "s" for plural. >> If you look at the logo, yes, the trailing "S" is smaller than the "K3", but >> not small enough to be lower case (1/2 the height of the caps). >> >> 73, >> Don W3FPR >> >> On 6/27/2018 4:27 PM, Grant Youngman wrote: >> How the heck do you differentiate between plurals with this radio :-) >> __ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to wun...@wunderwood.org > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to ghyoung...@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I say “multiple K3S radios”. wunder K6WRU Walter Underwood CM87wj http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > On Jun 27, 2018, at 1:40 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote: > > Grant, > > I always use "K3S" and "K3", and add a lower case "s" for plural. > If you look at the logo, yes, the trailing "S" is smaller than the "K3", but > not small enough to be lower case (1/2 the height of the caps). > > 73, > Don W3FPR > > On 6/27/2018 4:27 PM, Grant Youngman wrote: > How the heck do you differentiate between plurals with this radio :-) > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to wun...@wunderwood.org __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Grant, I always use "K3S" and "K3", and add a lower case "s" for plural. If you look at the logo, yes, the trailing "S" is smaller than the "K3", but not small enough to be lower case (1/2 the height of the caps). 73, Don W3FPR On 6/27/2018 4:27 PM, Grant Youngman wrote: How the heck do you differentiate between plurals with this radio :-) __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
As far as I know, the new DSP board has NOT been made available. (I've asked about it time or two). Also the main 4-layer RF board has never been listed for upgrade, Which is a shame, on both. I understand the main board — you would have to essentially re-kit the K3 to replace it, and then build the radio again. For many of us who built our K3 radios to begin with, it would be a couple day’s work. A lot of folks would have sent their radios back to get it installed, and Elecraft would have spent all their time tearing down and rebuilding k3s(or building a K3 over again from a bag of boards) instead of building K3(s)s .. How the heck do you differentiate between plurals with this radio :-) In any case, I understand (sort-of) why the new main board wasn’t an offered upgrade option. But I’ll still throw in my vote … be happy to buy one. I guess Elecraft needs to maintain some differentiation between versions. My own K3 is updated with all of the new available options (and historical updates) except for the new RF/tuner modules. I don’t really feel “left out” or “2nd class” (at least not for that reason) without a K3S. Grant NQ5T K3 #2091, KX3 #8342 > > From the Elecraft website, here is a FAQ comparing the K3S to the K3. It > lists what is unique to the K3S and what is upgradeable on the K3. > > http://www.elecraft.com/manual/K3S-FAQ%20rev%20C5%20customer.pdf __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
From the Elecraft website, here is a FAQ comparing the K3S to the K3. It lists what is unique to the K3S and what is upgradeable on the K3. http://www.elecraft.com/manual/K3S-FAQ%20rev%20C5%20customer.pdf 73, Mark, WB9CIF -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On Behalf Of Nr4c Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 6:38 PM To: j...@kk9a.com Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Adding all the “new” upgrades to a K3, still don’t make a K3S. The “S” has an entirely new main-board, and the KPA100 and ATU are much improved. Sent from my iPhone ...nr4c. bill > On Jun 27, 2018, at 7:38 AM, "j...@kk9a.com" wrote: > > I have seen more than a few people selling a K3 but advertising it as > a K3S. When you look into their radio more you learn that it was a K3 > upgraded to a claimed K3S. While it is fantastic that an older K3 can > be upgraded, it will still never be a K3S and should not be called one. > > John KK9A > > > > KE2WY wrote: > > If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) > upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the > approximate cost. Thanks. > ...robert > -- > Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY > rcrgs at verizon.net.usa > Syracuse, New York, USA > > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email > list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to > n...@widomaker.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to markmus...@sbcglobal.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Adding all the “new” upgrades to a K3, still don’t make a K3S. The “S” has an entirely new main-board, and the KPA100 and ATU are much improved. Sent from my iPhone ...nr4c. bill > On Jun 27, 2018, at 7:38 AM, "j...@kk9a.com" wrote: > > I have seen more than a few people selling a K3 but advertising it as a > K3S. When you look into their radio more you learn that it was a K3 > upgraded to a claimed K3S. While it is fantastic that an older K3 can be > upgraded, it will still never be a K3S and should not be called one. > > John KK9A > > > > KE2WY wrote: > > If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) > upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the > approximate cost. Thanks. > ...robert > -- > Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY > rcrgs at verizon.net.usa > Syracuse, New York, USA > > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to n...@widomaker.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I put them with my zip drives & other SCSI peripherals. 73, Josh W6XU Sent from my mobile device > On Jun 27, 2018, at 5:55 AM, Charlie T wrote: > > Also, what did you do with the old discarded synthesizer boards? __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Ronnie and Don, There is no need to pop the cover to check the K3 to see if it has the new synthesizer. It says on the Elecraft website they started installing the new synthesizer in the K3 starting with serial number 8801. If your K3 serial number is 8801 or higher, you have the new synthesizer. 73, Mark, WB9CIF -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 1:10 PM To: Ronnie Hull ; Charlie T Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Ronnie, The latest K3 builds included the new synthesizers. Open the top cover and look - if your synthesizer board(s) have a 3.5mm jack at the top, they are the new ones. The new synthesizers make a big improvement - If I recall it is an 8 to 10 dB improvement in the receive noise floor. I am going from my recollection of Eric's presentation to FDIM just as the K3S was being announced. 73, Don W3FPR On 6/27/2018 8:14 AM, Ronnie Hull wrote: > Y ah imagine my surprise when I scrimped and saved for TWO YEARS to be able > to purchase a K3 and then a month or so later the K3S appears. Of course they > wouldn’t exchange. > I havnt felt right about Elecraft since > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to markmus...@sbcglobal.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
With all the talk about the old and new synthesizers, I dug out my old screen captures of some tests I did showing P3 captures as the synthesizers were changed from old to new, in two radios, one looking at the P3 for changes. See: https://www.nk7z.net/k3/ The images are of my P3, showing another radio with both with the old synthesizer, then with one radio upgraded, then both radios upgraded. There is a very visible change for the better using the new synthesizers. 73s and thanks, Dave NK7Z https://www.nk7z.net On 06/27/2018 08:41 AM, Wes Stewart wrote: I have an old K3 that came with the pre-stiffener plate synthesizer. I discovered the microphonic issue ten years ago and my radio was the first to get the stiffener plate mod. So, it's old. I also have a K3S so the old radio is a spare. For some silly reason after all of these years I decided to upgrade the synthesizer and just did it last week. I haven't evaluated it on the air but listening to a clean signal source I didn't notice this huge difference everyone else is excited about. But at my age I'm not easily excited. YMMV. Wes N7WS On 6/27/2018 6:03 AM, hawley, charles j jr wrote: I decided to bypass the replacement of the synthesizers. Could you describe the “huge” difference? Chuck Jack KE9UW __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to d...@nk7z.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I have an old K3 that came with the pre-stiffener plate synthesizer. I discovered the microphonic issue ten years ago and my radio was the first to get the stiffener plate mod. So, it's old. I also have a K3S so the old radio is a spare. For some silly reason after all of these years I decided to upgrade the synthesizer and just did it last week. I haven't evaluated it on the air but listening to a clean signal source I didn't notice this huge difference everyone else is excited about. But at my age I'm not easily excited. YMMV. Wes N7WS On 6/27/2018 6:03 AM, hawley, charles j jr wrote: I decided to bypass the replacement of the synthesizers. Could you describe the “huge” difference? Chuck Jack KE9UW __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I think that’s the answer pertaining to my usage. But I may update the synthesizers on the K3 some day even though. Chuck Jack KE9UW Sent from my iPhone, cjack > On Jun 27, 2018, at 8:22 AM, Don Wilhelm wrote: > > Chuck, > > A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both > transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new transceiver. > > If you are strictly a casual operator, those qualities may not be important > to you, but if you are a DX'er or a contester, or otherwise operate in > crowded band condition, those things should be important to you. > > 73, > Don W3FPR > >> On 6/27/2018 9:03 AM, hawley, charles j jr wrote: >> I decided to bypass the replacement of the synthesizers. Could you describe >> the “huge” difference? __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Chuck, A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new transceiver. If you are strictly a casual operator, those qualities may not be important to you, but if you are a DX'er or a contester, or otherwise operate in crowded band condition, those things should be important to you. 73, Don W3FPR On 6/27/2018 9:03 AM, hawley, charles j jr wrote: I decided to bypass the replacement of the synthesizers. Could you describe the “huge” difference? __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Ronnie, The latest K3 builds included the new synthesizers. Open the top cover and look - if your synthesizer board(s) have a 3.5mm jack at the top, they are the new ones. The new synthesizers make a big improvement - If I recall it is an 8 to 10 dB improvement in the receive noise floor. I am going from my recollection of Eric's presentation to FDIM just as the K3S was being announced. 73, Don W3FPR On 6/27/2018 8:14 AM, Ronnie Hull wrote: Y ah imagine my surprise when I scrimped and saved for TWO YEARS to be able to purchase a K3 and then a month or so later the K3S appears. Of course they wouldn’t exchange. I havnt felt right about Elecraft since __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I decided to bypass the replacement of the synthesizers. Could you describe the “huge” difference? Chuck Jack KE9UW Sent from my iPhone, cjack > On Jun 27, 2018, at 7:55 AM, Charlie T wrote: > > That's why I prefaced my comments with "In my opinion". > Also, what did you do with the old discarded synthesizer boards? > > 73, Charlie k3ICH > > > > -Original Message- > From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On > Behalf Of Victor Rosenthal 4X6GP > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 8:21 AM > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) > > On the other hand, just changing the synthesizer(s) in the K3 makes a huge > difference and is worth doing. Yes, there are plenty of other nice things > about the K3S, but I already had a good external preamp and no need for a > USB port. > > 73, > Victor, 4X6GP > Rehovot, Israel > Formerly K2VCO > CWops no. 5 > http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/ >> On 27/06/2018 14:44, Charlie T wrote: >> In my opinion, up-grading a K3 accomplishes nothing but generating a >> few useless PC boards that had virtually zero value. >> Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do >> with them? >> Especially since as you know, an "up-graded" K3 still is NOT a K3S. >> Gold fingers, built-in pre-amp etc., ae a couple that come to mind. >> >> The only logical step to me, was to pull the accessories that were the >> same and sell the radio. >> Admittedly, I couldn't get as much for my K3 as I would have been able >> to if the K3S hadn't been released. >> But to me this is the normal cycle of newer radios. AND, I didn't have >> junk parts to deal with. >> Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do >> with them? >> >> Anyway, I'm happy now with my "new" K3S and my old K3 is still on the >> air (somewhere?). >> >> 73, Charlie k3ICH > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message > delivered to pin...@erols.com > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to c-haw...@illinois.edu __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
That's why I prefaced my comments with "In my opinion". Also, what did you do with the old discarded synthesizer boards? 73, Charlie k3ICH -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On Behalf Of Victor Rosenthal 4X6GP Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 8:21 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) On the other hand, just changing the synthesizer(s) in the K3 makes a huge difference and is worth doing. Yes, there are plenty of other nice things about the K3S, but I already had a good external preamp and no need for a USB port. 73, Victor, 4X6GP Rehovot, Israel Formerly K2VCO CWops no. 5 http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/ On 27/06/2018 14:44, Charlie T wrote: > In my opinion, up-grading a K3 accomplishes nothing but generating a > few useless PC boards that had virtually zero value. > Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do > with them? > Especially since as you know, an "up-graded" K3 still is NOT a K3S. > Gold fingers, built-in pre-amp etc., ae a couple that come to mind. > > The only logical step to me, was to pull the accessories that were the > same and sell the radio. > Admittedly, I couldn't get as much for my K3 as I would have been able > to if the K3S hadn't been released. > But to me this is the normal cycle of newer radios. AND, I didn't have > junk parts to deal with. > Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do > with them? > > Anyway, I'm happy now with my "new" K3S and my old K3 is still on the > air (somewhere?). > > 73, Charlie k3ICH __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to pin...@erols.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I upgraded by K3 to as close to a K3S as I could; I am very happy with it. Is it a K3S? No, but in the ways that matter to me, it is... I feel like it cost me less than selling it and buying a K3S would have, and will be worth a bit more when I finally sell it. As for not exchanging yours after a month, it is not COSTCO... How far in advance should they stop selling one product before its replacement comes out? How far back should they be willing to do an exchange? I fear there are no good answers for a small company that needs some cash flow to keep progressing during development; nailing down exact dates for FCC acceptance and supplier readiness and so on can be difficult, and besides, I have learned to measure the goodness of my purchase decisions based on "was it a good decision based on all information available to me at the time?". If so, relax, be happy. Anyway Ronnie, you might look into upgrading, I have been happy doing it. 73 de Dave, W5SV On 6/27/18 7:14 AM, Ronnie Hull wrote: Y ah imagine my surprise when I scrimped and saved for TWO YEARS to be able to purchase a K3 and then a month or so later the K3S appears. Of course they wouldn’t exchange. I havnt felt right about Elecraft since Sent from my iPhone On Jun 27, 2018, at 6:44 AM, Charlie T wrote: In my opinion, up-grading a K3 accomplishes nothing but generating a few useless PC boards that had virtually zero value. Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with them? Especially since as you know, an "up-graded" K3 still is NOT a K3S. Gold fingers, built-in pre-amp etc., ae a couple that come to mind. The only logical step to me, was to pull the accessories that were the same and sell the radio. Admittedly, I couldn't get as much for my K3 as I would have been able to if the K3S hadn't been released. But to me this is the normal cycle of newer radios. AND, I didn't have junk parts to deal with. Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with them? Anyway, I'm happy now with my "new" K3S and my old K3 is still on the air (somewhere?). 73, Charlie k3ICH -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On Behalf Of Nr4c Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 6:35 AM To: David Bunte Cc: Elecraft Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Back when the K3S was announced, I sold my existing radio for about $1200 less than the K3S price and ordered a new K3S and put up the $1200 it would have cost me to upgrade. I did keep my old K3 for FD and other portable activities. Sent from my iPhone ...nr4c. bill On Jun 26, 2018, at 11:55 PM, David Bunte wrote: Robert - I had mine done last year. The K3 cannot be fully upgraded to a K3s, and what all 'can' be done depends on such things as: Do you already have the new synthesizer board or boards, depending on having the sub receiver or not. And, are there options that you do not want. Perusing the Elecraft website will give you a pretty good idea, and if you have questions just email support and discuss what you have, what they can do, and what you want... then they can give you a much better idea than I can. I already had the new synths in my K3, and the upgrades I opted for came in at close to, but somewhat under $1000 including shipping. Best of luck, Dave - K9FN On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Robert G Strickland wrote: If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the approximate cost. Thanks. ...robert -- Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY rc...@verizon.net.usa Syracuse, New York, USA __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to dpbu...@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to pin...@erols.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to w5...@comcast.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
On the other hand, just changing the synthesizer(s) in the K3 makes a huge difference and is worth doing. Yes, there are plenty of other nice things about the K3S, but I already had a good external preamp and no need for a USB port. 73, Victor, 4X6GP Rehovot, Israel Formerly K2VCO CWops no. 5 http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/ On 27/06/2018 14:44, Charlie T wrote: In my opinion, up-grading a K3 accomplishes nothing but generating a few useless PC boards that had virtually zero value. Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with them? Especially since as you know, an "up-graded" K3 still is NOT a K3S. Gold fingers, built-in pre-amp etc., ae a couple that come to mind. The only logical step to me, was to pull the accessories that were the same and sell the radio. Admittedly, I couldn't get as much for my K3 as I would have been able to if the K3S hadn't been released. But to me this is the normal cycle of newer radios. AND, I didn't have junk parts to deal with. Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with them? Anyway, I'm happy now with my "new" K3S and my old K3 is still on the air (somewhere?). 73, Charlie k3ICH __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I bought a new K3s this year and moved the filters from the K3 to it and the 2.7KHz filters to the K3. Also moved the DVR to the K3s. Then I upgraded, did, all the mods to the K3 that kits were available for including the USB update. However, I did not upgrade the synthesizers. I used the K3 and the K3s the way I used them and feel more than satisfied with the K3 as a spare rig. My K3 is a 4xxx serial number from about 2010 and has the gold plated connectors. I did not buy the tuner for the K3s because I never used the one in the K3. I didn’t move it over either. The new tuner is improved and would just buy it if I felt I needed one. There are a few things that cannot be improved on the K3, like the audio amp, but I don’t seem to miss them when using it. Chuck KE9UW Sent from my iPhone, cjack > On Jun 27, 2018, at 6:44 AM, Charlie T wrote: > > In my opinion, up-grading a K3 accomplishes nothing but generating a few > useless PC boards that had virtually zero value. > Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with > them? > Especially since as you know, an "up-graded" K3 still is NOT a K3S. > Gold fingers, built-in pre-amp etc., ae a couple that come to mind. > > The only logical step to me, was to pull the accessories that were the same > and sell the radio. > Admittedly, I couldn't get as much for my K3 as I would have been able to if > the K3S hadn't been released. > But to me this is the normal cycle of newer radios. AND, I didn't have junk > parts to deal with. > Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with > them? > > Anyway, I'm happy now with my "new" K3S and my old K3 is still on the air > (somewhere?). > > 73, Charlie k3ICH > > > > > -Original Message- > From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On > Behalf Of Nr4c > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 6:35 AM > To: David Bunte > Cc: Elecraft > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) > > Back when the K3S was announced, I sold my existing radio for about $1200 > less than the K3S price and ordered a new K3S and put up the $1200 it would > have cost me to upgrade. I did keep my old K3 for FD and other portable > activities. > > Sent from my iPhone > ...nr4c. bill > > >> On Jun 26, 2018, at 11:55 PM, David Bunte wrote: >> >> Robert - >> >> I had mine done last year. The K3 cannot be fully upgraded to a K3s, >> and what all 'can' be done depends on such things as: Do you already >> have the new synthesizer board or boards, depending on having the sub >> receiver or not. And, are there options that you do not want. >> >> Perusing the Elecraft website will give you a pretty good idea, and if >> you have questions just email support and discuss what you have, what >> they can do, and what you want... then they can give you a much better >> idea than I can. >> >> I already had the new synths in my K3, and the upgrades I opted for >> came in at close to, but somewhat under $1000 including shipping. >> >> Best of luck, >> >> Dave - K9FN >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Robert G Strickland >> >> wrote: >> >>> If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) >>> upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the >>> approximate cost. Thanks. >>> ...robert >>> -- >>> Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY rc...@verizon.net.usa Syracuse, >>> New York, USA >>> __ >>> Elecraft mailing list >>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >>> >>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this >>> email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to >>> dpbu...@gmail.com > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message > delivered to pin...@erols.com > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to c-haw...@illinois.edu __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Y ah imagine my surprise when I scrimped and saved for TWO YEARS to be able to purchase a K3 and then a month or so later the K3S appears. Of course they wouldn’t exchange. I havnt felt right about Elecraft since Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 27, 2018, at 6:44 AM, Charlie T wrote: > > In my opinion, up-grading a K3 accomplishes nothing but generating a few > useless PC boards that had virtually zero value. > Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with > them? > Especially since as you know, an "up-graded" K3 still is NOT a K3S. > Gold fingers, built-in pre-amp etc., ae a couple that come to mind. > > The only logical step to me, was to pull the accessories that were the same > and sell the radio. > Admittedly, I couldn't get as much for my K3 as I would have been able to if > the K3S hadn't been released. > But to me this is the normal cycle of newer radios. AND, I didn't have junk > parts to deal with. > Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with > them? > > Anyway, I'm happy now with my "new" K3S and my old K3 is still on the air > (somewhere?). > > 73, Charlie k3ICH > > > > > -Original Message- > From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On > Behalf Of Nr4c > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 6:35 AM > To: David Bunte > Cc: Elecraft > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) > > Back when the K3S was announced, I sold my existing radio for about $1200 > less than the K3S price and ordered a new K3S and put up the $1200 it would > have cost me to upgrade. I did keep my old K3 for FD and other portable > activities. > > Sent from my iPhone > ...nr4c. bill > > >> On Jun 26, 2018, at 11:55 PM, David Bunte wrote: >> >> Robert - >> >> I had mine done last year. The K3 cannot be fully upgraded to a K3s, >> and what all 'can' be done depends on such things as: Do you already >> have the new synthesizer board or boards, depending on having the sub >> receiver or not. And, are there options that you do not want. >> >> Perusing the Elecraft website will give you a pretty good idea, and if >> you have questions just email support and discuss what you have, what >> they can do, and what you want... then they can give you a much better >> idea than I can. >> >> I already had the new synths in my K3, and the upgrades I opted for >> came in at close to, but somewhat under $1000 including shipping. >> >> Best of luck, >> >> Dave - K9FN >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Robert G Strickland >> >> wrote: >> >>> If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) >>> upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the >>> approximate cost. Thanks. >>> ...robert >>> -- >>> Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY rc...@verizon.net.usa Syracuse, >>> New York, USA >>> __ >>> Elecraft mailing list >>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >>> >>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this >>> email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to >>> dpbu...@gmail.com > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message > delivered to pin...@erols.com > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to w5...@comcast.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
In my opinion, up-grading a K3 accomplishes nothing but generating a few useless PC boards that had virtually zero value. Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with them? Especially since as you know, an "up-graded" K3 still is NOT a K3S. Gold fingers, built-in pre-amp etc., ae a couple that come to mind. The only logical step to me, was to pull the accessories that were the same and sell the radio. Admittedly, I couldn't get as much for my K3 as I would have been able to if the K3S hadn't been released. But to me this is the normal cycle of newer radios. AND, I didn't have junk parts to deal with. Yeah, I know, the boards aren't really worth zero, but what do I do with them? Anyway, I'm happy now with my "new" K3S and my old K3 is still on the air (somewhere?). 73, Charlie k3ICH -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On Behalf Of Nr4c Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 6:35 AM To: David Bunte Cc: Elecraft Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Back when the K3S was announced, I sold my existing radio for about $1200 less than the K3S price and ordered a new K3S and put up the $1200 it would have cost me to upgrade. I did keep my old K3 for FD and other portable activities. Sent from my iPhone ...nr4c. bill > On Jun 26, 2018, at 11:55 PM, David Bunte wrote: > > Robert - > > I had mine done last year. The K3 cannot be fully upgraded to a K3s, > and what all 'can' be done depends on such things as: Do you already > have the new synthesizer board or boards, depending on having the sub > receiver or not. And, are there options that you do not want. > > Perusing the Elecraft website will give you a pretty good idea, and if > you have questions just email support and discuss what you have, what > they can do, and what you want... then they can give you a much better > idea than I can. > > I already had the new synths in my K3, and the upgrades I opted for > came in at close to, but somewhat under $1000 including shipping. > > Best of luck, > > Dave - K9FN > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Robert G Strickland > > wrote: > >> If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) >> upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the >> approximate cost. Thanks. >> ...robert >> -- >> Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY rc...@verizon.net.usa Syracuse, >> New York, USA >> __ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this >> email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to >> dpbu...@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to pin...@erols.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
[Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
I have seen more than a few people selling a K3 but advertising it as a K3S. When you look into their radio more you learn that it was a K3 upgraded to a claimed K3S. While it is fantastic that an older K3 can be upgraded, it will still never be a K3S and should not be called one. John KK9A KE2WY wrote: If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the approximate cost. Thanks. ...robert -- Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY rcrgs at verizon.net.usa Syracuse, New York, USA __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Back when the K3S was announced, I sold my existing radio for about $1200 less than the K3S price and ordered a new K3S and put up the $1200 it would have cost me to upgrade. I did keep my old K3 for FD and other portable activities. Sent from my iPhone ...nr4c. bill > On Jun 26, 2018, at 11:55 PM, David Bunte wrote: > > Robert - > > I had mine done last year. The K3 cannot be fully upgraded to a K3s, and > what all 'can' be done depends on such things as: Do you already have the > new synthesizer board or boards, depending on having the sub receiver or > not. And, are there options that you do not want. > > Perusing the Elecraft website will give you a pretty good idea, and if you > have questions just email support and discuss what you have, what they can > do, and what you want... then they can give you a much better idea than I > can. > > I already had the new synths in my K3, and the upgrades I opted for came in > at close to, but somewhat under $1000 including shipping. > > Best of luck, > > Dave - K9FN > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Robert G Strickland > wrote: > >> If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) >> upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the approximate >> cost. Thanks. >> ...robert >> -- >> Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY >> rc...@verizon.net.usa >> Syracuse, New York, USA >> __ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to dpbu...@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
Robert - I had mine done last year. The K3 cannot be fully upgraded to a K3s, and what all 'can' be done depends on such things as: Do you already have the new synthesizer board or boards, depending on having the sub receiver or not. And, are there options that you do not want. Perusing the Elecraft website will give you a pretty good idea, and if you have questions just email support and discuss what you have, what they can do, and what you want... then they can give you a much better idea than I can. I already had the new synths in my K3, and the upgrades I opted for came in at close to, but somewhat under $1000 including shipping. Best of luck, Dave - K9FN On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Robert G Strickland wrote: > If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) > upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the approximate > cost. Thanks. > ...robert > -- > Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY > rc...@verizon.net.usa > Syracuse, New York, USA > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to dpbu...@gmail.com > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
[Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s)
If I send my K3 w/ new synthesizer into Elecraft for the full K3(s) upgrade, what will such an upgrade include and what will be the approximate cost. Thanks. ...robert -- Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY rc...@verizon.net.usa Syracuse, New York, USA __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
