Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

[E.H. Russell]

In computer space 4ms is an eternity. I do wonder what is going on there. And 
also hope the K4 fixes it. Thanks again for the scope shot.

 

Ed / w2rf

 

 

 

From: Bob Wilson, N6TV  
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 10:37 AM
To: Elecraft Reflector 
Cc: E.H. Russell 
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

 

The plot in the QST review of the K3S shows the delay between "key closure" 
(the KEY jack of K3S) and RF out.  My plot shows the delay between "amp relay 
closure" (the KEY OUT jack of K3S) and RF, which is more critical.

 

Most folks assume there will be no delay between KEY closure and KEY OUT 
closure, but there is an extra delay (of about 5 ms, minimum) in the K3S.  The 
same applies to PTT IN closure and KEY OUT closure; that is, there is an 
unexplained fixed 5 ms delay in the K3S, probably due to slow firmware logic 
testing for TX Inhibit or an intentional enforcement of some minimum delay in 
RF output.

 

Most radios close KEY OUT immediately upon key closure of either the KEY jack 
or the PTT IN jack.  The K3 does not; it "hesitates" before closing KEY OUT.

 

I'm also hoping the K4 will eliminate this unusual behavior.




73,

Bob, N6TV

 

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 3:23 AM E.H. Russell mailto:e...@qrv.com> > wrote:

Bob,

 

Thanks for the scope shot and info. I compared the waveform to the QST K3S 
review, which seems to show a little over 10ms before RF appears. Is this 
because they used different settings?

 

Will be interesting to see how the new radio CW looks in time and frequency 
domains. Also how the turnaround latency is managed.

 

Tks,

73 Ed w2rf

 

 

 

From: Bob Wilson, N6TV mailto:n...@arrl.net> > 
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 2:05 PM
To: Elecraft Reflector mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> >
Cc: E.H. Russell mailto:e...@qrv.com> >
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

 

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 12:31 PM E.H. Russell mailto:e...@qrv.com> > wrote:

I suppose shaping of the curve corners removes harmonics introduced by the 
abrupt transitions, allowing an accelerated ramp inbetween. But does this 
really reduce the total rise time to 2.5ms? It seems that the softening process 
must take some time. Wish I had a K3 here to scope against other radios. 
Anything published out there?

 

Ed,

 

Per your request, I am publishing this scope screen capture which plots the CW 
rise time in my K3 with the KSYN3A synthesizer upgrade.  It's about 4 ms from 0 
RF to full RF (2 ms per horizontal division):

 

https://www.kkn.net/~n6tv/N6TV_K3_Ser_1494_FW_05.64_TX_DLY_8_CW_QRQ_OFF.png

 

The vertical markers are there to illustrate that CONFIG:TX DLY nor 008  
provides only about 6 ms of RF delay after "KEY OUT" goes to ground, not 8 ms, 
and there is jitter in that delay as well (not shown).  If CW QRQ mode is 
enabled, the delay drops to about 4.6 ms and the TX DLY setting is completely 
ignored.

 

This was discussed here two years ago.  See this post for suggestions on how to 
avoid hot-switching a non-Elecraft amplifier driven by a K3 or K3S:

 

http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Default-K3-transmit-delay-may-be-too-short-for-slow-QRO-amplifiers-td7641779.html
  

 

73,

Bob, N6TV

__
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] CW rise time setting

[Andy Durbin]

"Most folks assume there will be no delay between KEY closure and KEY OUT 
closure, but there is an extra delay (of about 5 ms, minimum) in the K3S."

I suppose I'm not in the "most folks" group.  I measured this delay when 
investigating the keying characterisitcs of my  Kenwood TS-590S.  Key down to 
amplifier relay closure was 2 ms for the configuration under test.  RF started 
rising about 14 ms after key closure.

73,
Andy k3wyc
__
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] CW rise time setting

[Bob Wilson, N6TV]

The plot in the *QST* review of the K3S shows the delay between "key
closure" (the KEY jack of K3S) and RF out.  My plot shows the delay between
"amp relay closure" (the KEY OUT jack of K3S) and RF, which is more
critical.

Most folks assume there will be no delay between KEY closure and KEY OUT
closure, but there is an extra delay (of about 5 ms, minimum) in the K3S.
The same applies to PTT IN closure and KEY OUT closure; that is, there is
an unexplained fixed 5 ms delay in the K3S, probably due to slow firmware
logic testing for TX Inhibit or an intentional enforcement of some minimum
delay in RF output.

Most radios close KEY OUT immediately upon key closure of either the KEY
jack or the PTT IN jack.  The K3 does not; it "hesitates" before closing
KEY OUT.

I'm also hoping the K4 will eliminate this unusual behavior.

73,
Bob, N6TV

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 3:23 AM E.H. Russell  wrote:

> Bob,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the scope shot and info. I compared the waveform to the QST K3S
> review, which seems to show a little over 10ms before RF appears. Is this
> because they used different settings?
>
>
>
> Will be interesting to see how the new radio CW looks in time and
> frequency domains. Also how the turnaround latency is managed.
>
>
>
> Tks,
>
> 73 Ed w2rf
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Bob Wilson, N6TV 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 11, 2020 2:05 PM
> *To:* Elecraft Reflector 
> *Cc:* E.H. Russell 
> *Subject:* Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 12:31 PM E.H. Russell  wrote:
>
> I suppose shaping of the curve corners removes harmonics introduced by the
> abrupt transitions, allowing an accelerated ramp inbetween. But does this
> really reduce the total rise time to 2.5ms? It seems that the softening
> process must take some time. Wish I had a K3 here to scope against other
> radios. Anything published out there?
>
>
>
> Ed,
>
>
>
> Per your request, I am publishing this scope screen capture which plots
> the CW rise time in my K3 with the KSYN3A synthesizer upgrade.  It's about
> 4 ms from 0 RF to full RF (2 ms per horizontal division):
>
>
>
> https://www.kkn.net/~n6tv/N6TV_K3_Ser_1494_FW_05.64_TX_DLY_8_CW_QRQ_OFF.png
>
>
>
> The vertical markers are there to illustrate that *CONFIG:TX DLY nor 008*
> provides only about *6 ms* of RF delay after "KEY OUT" goes to ground,
> not 8 ms, and there is jitter in that delay as well (not shown).  If CW QRQ
> mode is enabled, the delay drops to about 4.6 ms and the TX DLY setting is
> completely ignored.
>
>
>
> This was discussed here two years ago.  See this post for suggestions on
> how to avoid hot-switching a non-Elecraft amplifier driven by a K3 or K3S:
>
>
>
>
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Default-K3-transmit-delay-may-be-too-short-for-slow-QRO-amplifiers-td7641779.html
>
>
>
>
> 73,
>
> Bob, N6TV
>
__
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] CW rise time setting

[E.H. Russell]

Bob,

 

Thanks for the scope shot and info. I compared the waveform to the QST K3S 
review, which seems to show a little over 10ms before RF appears. Is this 
because they used different settings?

 

Will be interesting to see how the new radio CW looks in time and frequency 
domains. Also how the turnaround latency is managed.

 

Tks,

73 Ed w2rf

 

 

 

From: Bob Wilson, N6TV  
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 2:05 PM
To: Elecraft Reflector 
Cc: E.H. Russell 
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

 

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 12:31 PM E.H. Russell mailto:e...@qrv.com> > wrote:

I suppose shaping of the curve corners removes harmonics introduced by the 
abrupt transitions, allowing an accelerated ramp inbetween. But does this 
really reduce the total rise time to 2.5ms? It seems that the softening process 
must take some time. Wish I had a K3 here to scope against other radios. 
Anything published out there?

 

Ed,

 

Per your request, I am publishing this scope screen capture which plots the CW 
rise time in my K3 with the KSYN3A synthesizer upgrade.  It's about 4 ms from 0 
RF to full RF (2 ms per horizontal division):

 

https://www.kkn.net/~n6tv/N6TV_K3_Ser_1494_FW_05.64_TX_DLY_8_CW_QRQ_OFF.png

 

The vertical markers are there to illustrate that CONFIG:TX DLY nor 008  
provides only about 6 ms of RF delay after "KEY OUT" goes to ground, not 8 ms, 
and there is jitter in that delay as well (not shown).  If CW QRQ mode is 
enabled, the delay drops to about 4.6 ms and the TX DLY setting is completely 
ignored.

 

This was discussed here two years ago.  See this post for suggestions on how to 
avoid hot-switching a non-Elecraft amplifier driven by a K3 or K3S:

 

http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Default-K3-transmit-delay-may-be-too-short-for-slow-QRO-amplifiers-td7641779.html
  

 

73,

Bob, N6TV

__
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] CW rise time setting

[Bob Wilson, N6TV]

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 12:31 PM E.H. Russell  wrote:

> I suppose shaping of the curve corners removes harmonics introduced by the
> abrupt transitions, allowing an accelerated ramp inbetween. But does this
> really reduce the total rise time to 2.5ms? It seems that the softening
> process must take some time. Wish I had a K3 here to scope against other
> radios. Anything published out there?
>

Ed,

Per your request, I am publishing this scope screen capture which plots the
CW rise time in my K3 with the KSYN3A synthesizer upgrade.  It's about 4 ms
from 0 RF to full RF (2 ms per horizontal division):

https://www.kkn.net/~n6tv/N6TV_K3_Ser_1494_FW_05.64_TX_DLY_8_CW_QRQ_OFF.png


The vertical markers are there to illustrate that *CONFIG:TX DLY nor 008*
provides only about *6 ms* of RF delay after "KEY OUT" goes to ground, not
8 ms, and there is jitter in that delay as well (not shown).  If CW QRQ
mode is enabled, the delay drops to about 4.6 ms and the TX DLY setting is
completely ignored.

This was discussed here two years ago.  See this post for suggestions on
how to avoid hot-switching a non-Elecraft amplifier driven by a K3 or K3S:

http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Default-K3-transmit-delay-may-be-too-short-for-slow-QRO-amplifiers-td7641779.html


73,
Bob, N6TV
__
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] CW rise time setting

[E.H. Russell]

Jim,

 

Interesting results, especially the dramatic difference in the FTDX5000 after 
the firmware update. The K3 looks great. Hopefully the K4 will be at least as 
good.

 

Ed / w2rf

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net  On 
Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:46 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

 

On 6/9/2020 11:07 AM, Al Lorona wrote:

> The reduction in the sideband levels (what some folks here called 'clicks'... 
> not sure that's a good name for this) varies depending on where you measure 
> it, but in general the sidebands will drop anywhere from 0 to 12 dB-- 
> sometimes less, sometimes more--  when you go from 2 msec to 8 msec rise/fall 
> times. For instance, arbitrarily choosing an offset of 500 Hz from the 
> carrier, the sideband drops by 11 dB for the longer rise time. That turns out 
> to be a fairly typical value. And by the way, in general the sigmoid does a 
> better job than a raised cosine.

 

 

 

I've not looked at the math, but I've measured more than a half dozen radios, 
most with variable time constant shaping, and Elecraft with their fixed 
sigmoidal shaping. The data is here.

 

 <http://k9yc.com/P3_Spectrum_Measurements.pdf> 
http://k9yc.com/P3_Spectrum_Measurements.pdf

 

A K3 at 25W (driving a KPA500 to full power) is 50 dB down 230 Hz either side 
of the signal, 60 dB down at 305 Hz. At 40W driving a legal limit tube amp (Ten 
Tec Titan) sidebands at the power amp output are 50 dB down at 235 Hz, 60 dB 
down at 335 Hz.

 

A neighbor's FT1000 Mark V Field was 50 dB down at 665 Hz.

 

Another neighbor's FTDX5000 set for 6 msec was 50 dB down at 410 Hz, 60 dB down 
at 1.05 kHz before the firmware update. It improved to -50 dB at

310 Hz and -60 at 535 Hz after the update.

 

73, Jim K9YC

 

__

Elecraft mailing list

Home:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft> 
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm

Post:  <mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

 

This list hosted by:  <http://www.qsl.net> http://www.qsl.net

Please help support this email list:  <http://www.qsl.net/donate.html> 
http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to  <mailto:e...@qrv.com> 
e...@qrv.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] CW rise time setting

[Al Lorona]

I used:

1/(1+exp(-x))

where x = the pulse train. I then modulated a 7 MHz carrier with the result 
(although the results don't care what the RF frequency is, of course).

Al  W6LX


>>>Which sigmoid function did you model, Al?

__
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] CW rise time setting

[Jim Brown]

On 6/9/2020 11:07 AM, Al Lorona wrote:

The reduction in the sideband levels (what some folks here called 'clicks'... 
not sure that's a good name for this) varies depending on where you measure it, 
but in general the sidebands will drop anywhere from 0 to 12 dB-- sometimes 
less, sometimes more--  when you go from 2 msec to 8 msec rise/fall times. For 
instance, arbitrarily choosing an offset of 500 Hz from the carrier, the 
sideband drops by 11 dB for the longer rise time. That turns out to be a fairly 
typical value. And by the way, in general the sigmoid does a better job than a 
raised cosine.




I've not looked at the math, but I've measured more than a half dozen 
radios, most with variable time constant shaping, and Elecraft with 
their fixed sigmoidal shaping. The data is here.


http://k9yc.com/P3_Spectrum_Measurements.pdf

A K3 at 25W (driving a KPA500 to full power) is 50 dB down 230 Hz either 
side of the signal, 60 dB down at 305 Hz. At 40W driving a legal limit 
tube amp (Ten Tec Titan) sidebands at the power amp output are 50 dB 
down at 235 Hz, 60 dB down at 335 Hz.


A neighbor's FT1000 Mark V Field was 50 dB down at 665 Hz.

Another neighbor's FTDX5000 set for 6 msec was 50 dB down at 410 Hz, 60 
dB down at 1.05 kHz before the firmware update. It improved to -50 dB at 
310 Hz and -60 at 535 Hz after the update.


73, Jim K9YC

__
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] CW rise time setting

[Fred Jensen]

Which sigmoid function did you model, Al?

73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 6/9/2020 11:07 AM, Al Lorona wrote:

I used to think that the rise and fall times of the CW pulse didn't really 
matter much to the sideband levels; I believed that it was more a function of 
the waveshaping, especially at the corners of the pulse.

But I just ran a quick simulation of a pulse train going through both a raised 
cosine and then a sigmoid filter (because those two have been mentioned in this 
thread) and the rise time definitely does affect the pulse sidebands.

The reduction in the sideband levels (what some folks here called 'clicks'... 
not sure that's a good name for this) varies depending on where you measure it, 
but in general the sidebands will drop anywhere from 0 to 12 dB-- sometimes 
less, sometimes more--  when you go from 2 msec to 8 msec rise/fall times. For 
instance, arbitrarily choosing an offset of 500 Hz from the carrier, the 
sideband drops by 11 dB for the longer rise time. That turns out to be a fairly 
typical value. And by the way, in general the sigmoid does a better job than a 
raised cosine.

Arbitrarily defining the occupied bandwidth as the -60 dBc points of the 
spectrum, and using the sigmoid function with an exponent of -1, the bandwidth 
of the rise time = 8 msec pulse is 420 Hz versus 640 Hz for the pulse with 2 
msec rise time. It's not an enormous difference, but it is something.

Anyway, there's another data point for the discussion.

R,

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] CW rise time setting

[Al Lorona]

I used to think that the rise and fall times of the CW pulse didn't really 
matter much to the sideband levels; I believed that it was more a function of 
the waveshaping, especially at the corners of the pulse.

But I just ran a quick simulation of a pulse train going through both a raised 
cosine and then a sigmoid filter (because those two have been mentioned in this 
thread) and the rise time definitely does affect the pulse sidebands. 

The reduction in the sideband levels (what some folks here called 'clicks'... 
not sure that's a good name for this) varies depending on where you measure it, 
but in general the sidebands will drop anywhere from 0 to 12 dB-- sometimes 
less, sometimes more--  when you go from 2 msec to 8 msec rise/fall times. For 
instance, arbitrarily choosing an offset of 500 Hz from the carrier, the 
sideband drops by 11 dB for the longer rise time. That turns out to be a fairly 
typical value. And by the way, in general the sigmoid does a better job than a 
raised cosine.

Arbitrarily defining the occupied bandwidth as the -60 dBc points of the 
spectrum, and using the sigmoid function with an exponent of -1, the bandwidth 
of the rise time = 8 msec pulse is 420 Hz versus 640 Hz for the pulse with 2 
msec rise time. It's not an enormous difference, but it is something.

Anyway, there's another data point for the discussion.

R,

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] CW rise time setting

[Wayne Burdick]

Drew,

We apply exactly the same shape to the sidetone, mute on/off, and mark/space 
transitions in FSK and PSK modes.

Wayne
N6KR


> On Jun 8, 2020, at 6:54 PM, Drew AF2Z  wrote:
> 
> A little off topic but is the sidetone also shaped or is it just a plain old 
> sine wave?
> 
> Actually, I wouldn't mind having the option to select a sawtooth or 
> squarewave for the sidetone. I'm not sure why but it seems to make sending on 
> a manual key better, prompting the reflexes to be a little crisper maybe...
> 
> 73,
> Drew
> AF2Z
> 
> 
> 
> On 06/08/20 14:38, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>> It’s closer to 4 ms.
>> Wayne
>> N6KR
>> 
>> elecraft.com
>>> On Jun 8, 2020, at 12:32 PM, E.H. Russell  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I suppose shaping of the curve corners removes harmonics introduced by the 
>>> abrupt transitions, allowing an accelerated ramp inbetween. But does this 
>>> really reduce the total rise time to 2.5ms? It seems that the softening 
>>> process must take some time. Wish I had a K3 here to scope against other 
>>> radios. Anything published out there?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ed / w2rf
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Alan Bloom 
>>> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 3:15 PM
>>> To: E.H. Russell 
>>> Cc: 'Elecraft Reflector' 
>>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> In the "good old days" key shaping was done simply by adding a capacitor to 
>>> the key line or equivalent.  That results in an exponential rise and/or 
>>> fall time, which is not optimum, so the time constant had to be set pretty 
>>> slow to avoid key clicks.  Typically 5-10 ms.  10 ms results in "mushy" 
>>> keying, especially at high CW speeds.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Raised-cosine key shaping is close to optimum and is easy to implement with 
>>> a DSP.  It allows faster rise/fall times without key clicks.  I assume 
>>> Elecraft is using something like that.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Alan N1AL
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 2020-06-08 12:51, E.H. Russell wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'm used to CW rise times in th 4-7ms range. Is this 2.5ms arrived at by a
>>> different metric? Is the curve added by sigmoidal shaping somehow excluded
>>> from the measurement?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ed / w2rf
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net 
>>> <mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net>  
>>> mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net> 
>>> > On
>>> Behalf Of Richard Stutsman
>>> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:31 PM
>>> To: David Gilbert mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> >
>>> Cc: Elecraft Reflector >> <mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> >
>>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes, I would regard a 2.5 msec rise time (using appropriate sigmoid
>>> 
>>> shaping) to probably be ideal, in which case I would have no desire to
>>> modify or shorten it. I'll bet it will sound even better than a Drake or a
>>> Ten-Tec!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I hereby withdraw my previous request/opinion.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Rick N6IET
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 10:27 AM David Gilbert < <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> >
>>> ab7e...@gmail.com <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> You don't need to generate clicks to have a crisp CW tone.  Elecraft
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> uses a pretty much optimally shaped waveform (some version of a cosine
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> function) and if I remember correctly the rise time is only about 2.5
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> msec, although I could be wrong about that last part.  And while you
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>

Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

[Drew AF2Z]

A little off topic but is the sidetone also shaped or is it just a plain 
old sine wave?


Actually, I wouldn't mind having the option to select a sawtooth or 
squarewave for the sidetone. I'm not sure why but it seems to make 
sending on a manual key better, prompting the reflexes to be a little 
crisper maybe...


73,
Drew
AF2Z



On 06/08/20 14:38, Wayne Burdick wrote:

It’s closer to 4 ms.

Wayne
N6KR


elecraft.com


On Jun 8, 2020, at 12:32 PM, E.H. Russell  wrote:

I suppose shaping of the curve corners removes harmonics introduced by the 
abrupt transitions, allowing an accelerated ramp inbetween. But does this 
really reduce the total rise time to 2.5ms? It seems that the softening process 
must take some time. Wish I had a K3 here to scope against other radios. 
Anything published out there?



Ed / w2rf







From: Alan Bloom 
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 3:15 PM
To: E.H. Russell 
Cc: 'Elecraft Reflector' 
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting



In the "good old days" key shaping was done simply by adding a capacitor to the key line 
or equivalent.  That results in an exponential rise and/or fall time, which is not optimum, so the 
time constant had to be set pretty slow to avoid key clicks.  Typically 5-10 ms.  10 ms results in 
"mushy" keying, especially at high CW speeds.



Raised-cosine key shaping is close to optimum and is easy to implement with a 
DSP.  It allows faster rise/fall times without key clicks.  I assume Elecraft 
is using something like that.



Alan N1AL











On 2020-06-08 12:51, E.H. Russell wrote:

I'm used to CW rise times in th 4-7ms range. Is this 2.5ms arrived at by a
different metric? Is the curve added by sigmoidal shaping somehow excluded
from the measurement?



Ed / w2rf







-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net <mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net>  
mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net> > On
Behalf Of Richard Stutsman
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:31 PM
To: David Gilbert mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> >
Cc: Elecraft Reflector mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> 
>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting



Yes, I would regard a 2.5 msec rise time (using appropriate sigmoid

shaping) to probably be ideal, in which case I would have no desire to
modify or shorten it. I'll bet it will sound even better than a Drake or a
Ten-Tec!



I hereby withdraw my previous request/opinion.



Rick N6IET



On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 10:27 AM David Gilbert < <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com 
<mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> >
ab7e...@gmail.com <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> > wrote:






You don't need to generate clicks to have a crisp CW tone.  Elecraft





uses a pretty much optimally shaped waveform (some version of a cosine





function) and if I remember correctly the rise time is only about 2.5





msec, although I could be wrong about that last part.  And while you





may be careful not to use short rise/fall times when the band is





active, in the past there have been folks on the contesting reflector





who openly admitted they purposely generate clicks by shortening the





rise/fall times to give themselves elbow room.  I will always





appreciate that Elecraft doesn't give those miscreants the means to

pollute the band.





73,





Dave   AB7E






On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:23 AM Richard Stutsman <

<mailto:rast...@gmail.com <mailto:rast...@gmail.com> > rast...@gmail.com 
<mailto:rast...@gmail.com> > wrote:





I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.









You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a





crowded band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most





of my operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're





often the only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And





conditions are often noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us





operating in those circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit,





which makes it easier to copy in noisy conditions, when any close-in





clicks or thumps aren't going to bother anybody? Copying a 'soft'





weak CW signal is like trying to read a 'crisp' signal that's an





entire S-unit weaker, IMO.









My TS-590sg let's me do that, and I love it!









Will the K4 sound as good as a Drake T4C? (Just askin'.)









Rick N6IET









N4ZR wrote:









Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?





Hi Pete,





Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs





have an exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party





testing bears this





out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall





time





and





a hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.





Colonel Sanders closely guards his fr

Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

[Wayne Burdick]

It’s closer to 4 ms. 

Wayne
N6KR


elecraft.com

> On Jun 8, 2020, at 12:32 PM, E.H. Russell  wrote:
> 
> I suppose shaping of the curve corners removes harmonics introduced by the 
> abrupt transitions, allowing an accelerated ramp inbetween. But does this 
> really reduce the total rise time to 2.5ms? It seems that the softening 
> process must take some time. Wish I had a K3 here to scope against other 
> radios. Anything published out there?
> 
> 
> 
> Ed / w2rf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Alan Bloom  
> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 3:15 PM
> To: E.H. Russell 
> Cc: 'Elecraft Reflector' 
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting
> 
> 
> 
> In the "good old days" key shaping was done simply by adding a capacitor to 
> the key line or equivalent.  That results in an exponential rise and/or fall 
> time, which is not optimum, so the time constant had to be set pretty slow to 
> avoid key clicks.  Typically 5-10 ms.  10 ms results in "mushy" keying, 
> especially at high CW speeds.
> 
> 
> 
> Raised-cosine key shaping is close to optimum and is easy to implement with a 
> DSP.  It allows faster rise/fall times without key clicks.  I assume Elecraft 
> is using something like that.
> 
> 
> 
> Alan N1AL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2020-06-08 12:51, E.H. Russell wrote:
> 
> I'm used to CW rise times in th 4-7ms range. Is this 2.5ms arrived at by a
> different metric? Is the curve added by sigmoidal shaping somehow excluded
> from the measurement?
> 
> 
> 
> Ed / w2rf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net 
> <mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net>   <mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net> > On
> Behalf Of Richard Stutsman
> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:31 PM
> To: David Gilbert mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> >
> Cc: Elecraft Reflector  <mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> >
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I would regard a 2.5 msec rise time (using appropriate sigmoid
> 
> shaping) to probably be ideal, in which case I would have no desire to
> modify or shorten it. I'll bet it will sound even better than a Drake or a
> Ten-Tec!
> 
> 
> 
> I hereby withdraw my previous request/opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> Rick N6IET
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 10:27 AM David Gilbert < <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> >
> ab7e...@gmail.com <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't need to generate clicks to have a crisp CW tone.  Elecraft
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uses a pretty much optimally shaped waveform (some version of a cosine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> function) and if I remember correctly the rise time is only about 2.5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> msec, although I could be wrong about that last part.  And while you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> may be careful not to use short rise/fall times when the band is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> active, in the past there have been folks on the contesting reflector
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> who openly admitted they purposely generate clicks by shortening the
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rise/fall times to give themselves elbow room.  I will always
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> appreciate that Elecraft doesn't give those miscreants the means to
> 
> pollute the band.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 73,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dave   AB7E
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:23 AM Richard Stutsman <
> 
> <mailto:rast...@gmail.com <mailto:rast...@gmail.com> > rast...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:rast...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> crowded band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> of my operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> often the only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> conditions are often noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> operating in those circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> which makes it easier to copy in noisy conditions, when any close-in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> clicks or

Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

[E.H. Russell]

I suppose shaping of the curve corners removes harmonics introduced by the 
abrupt transitions, allowing an accelerated ramp inbetween. But does this 
really reduce the total rise time to 2.5ms? It seems that the softening process 
must take some time. Wish I had a K3 here to scope against other radios. 
Anything published out there?

 

Ed / w2rf

 

 

 

From: Alan Bloom  
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 3:15 PM
To: E.H. Russell 
Cc: 'Elecraft Reflector' 
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

 

In the "good old days" key shaping was done simply by adding a capacitor to the 
key line or equivalent.  That results in an exponential rise and/or fall time, 
which is not optimum, so the time constant had to be set pretty slow to avoid 
key clicks.  Typically 5-10 ms.  10 ms results in "mushy" keying, especially at 
high CW speeds.

 

Raised-cosine key shaping is close to optimum and is easy to implement with a 
DSP.  It allows faster rise/fall times without key clicks.  I assume Elecraft 
is using something like that.

 

Alan N1AL

 

 

 

 

 

On 2020-06-08 12:51, E.H. Russell wrote:

I'm used to CW rise times in th 4-7ms range. Is this 2.5ms arrived at by a
different metric? Is the curve added by sigmoidal shaping somehow excluded
from the measurement?

 

Ed / w2rf

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net 
<mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net>  mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net> > On
Behalf Of Richard Stutsman
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:31 PM
To: David Gilbert mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> >
Cc: Elecraft Reflector mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> >
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

 

Yes, I would regard a 2.5 msec rise time (using appropriate sigmoid

shaping) to probably be ideal, in which case I would have no desire to
modify or shorten it. I'll bet it will sound even better than a Drake or a
Ten-Tec!

 

I hereby withdraw my previous request/opinion.

 

Rick N6IET

 

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 10:27 AM David Gilbert < <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com 
<mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> >
ab7e...@gmail.com <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> > wrote:

 




You don't need to generate clicks to have a crisp CW tone.  Elecraft





uses a pretty much optimally shaped waveform (some version of a cosine





function) and if I remember correctly the rise time is only about 2.5





msec, although I could be wrong about that last part.  And while you





may be careful not to use short rise/fall times when the band is





active, in the past there have been folks on the contesting reflector





who openly admitted they purposely generate clicks by shortening the





rise/fall times to give themselves elbow room.  I will always





appreciate that Elecraft doesn't give those miscreants the means to

pollute the band.





73,





Dave   AB7E






On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:23 AM Richard Stutsman <

<mailto:rast...@gmail.com <mailto:rast...@gmail.com> > rast...@gmail.com 
<mailto:rast...@gmail.com> > wrote:





I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.









You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a





crowded band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most





of my operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're





often the only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And





conditions are often noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us





operating in those circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit,





which makes it easier to copy in noisy conditions, when any close-in





clicks or thumps aren't going to bother anybody? Copying a 'soft'





weak CW signal is like trying to read a 'crisp' signal that's an





entire S-unit weaker, IMO.









My TS-590sg let's me do that, and I love it!









Will the K4 sound as good as a Drake T4C? (Just askin'.)









Rick N6IET









N4ZR wrote:









Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?





Hi Pete,





Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs





have an exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party





testing bears this





out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall





time





and





a hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.





Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields





won't reveal what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only





selected firmware monks--sworn to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's





keying envelope coefficients :) 73, Wayne N6KR





__





Elecraft mailing list





Home:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft>

http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft




Help:  

Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

[Alan Bloom]

In the "good old days" key shaping was done simply by adding a capacitor
to the key line or equivalent.  That results in an exponential rise
and/or fall time, which is not optimum, so the time constant had to be
set pretty slow to avoid key clicks.  Typically 5-10 ms.  10 ms results
in "mushy" keying, especially at high CW speeds. 

Raised-cosine key shaping is close to optimum and is easy to implement
with a DSP.  It allows faster rise/fall times without key clicks.  I
assume Elecraft is using something like that. 

Alan N1AL 

On 2020-06-08 12:51, E.H. Russell wrote:

> I'm used to CW rise times in th 4-7ms range. Is this 2.5ms arrived at by a
> different metric? Is the curve added by sigmoidal shaping somehow excluded
> from the measurement?
> 
> Ed / w2rf
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net  On
> Behalf Of Richard Stutsman
> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:31 PM
> To: David Gilbert 
> Cc: Elecraft Reflector 
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting
> 
> Yes, I would regard a 2.5 msec rise time (using appropriate sigmoid
> 
> shaping) to probably be ideal, in which case I would have no desire to
> modify or shorten it. I'll bet it will sound even better than a Drake or a
> Ten-Tec!
> 
> I hereby withdraw my previous request/opinion.
> 
> Rick N6IET
> 
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 10:27 AM David Gilbert < <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com>
> ab7e...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> You don't need to generate clicks to have a crisp CW tone.  Elecraft
> 
>> uses a pretty much optimally shaped waveform (some version of a cosine
> 
>> function) and if I remember correctly the rise time is only about 2.5
> 
>> msec, although I could be wrong about that last part.  And while you
> 
>> may be careful not to use short rise/fall times when the band is
> 
>> active, in the past there have been folks on the contesting reflector
> 
>> who openly admitted they purposely generate clicks by shortening the
> 
>> rise/fall times to give themselves elbow room.  I will always
> 
>> appreciate that Elecraft doesn't give those miscreants the means to
> pollute the band.
> 
>> 73,
> 
>> Dave   AB7E
> 
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:23 AM Richard Stutsman <
> <mailto:rast...@gmail.com> rast...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.

> 

>> You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a

>> crowded band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most

>> of my operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're

>> often the only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And

>> conditions are often noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us

>> operating in those circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit,

>> which makes it easier to copy in noisy conditions, when any close-in

>> clicks or thumps aren't going to bother anybody? Copying a 'soft'

>> weak CW signal is like trying to read a 'crisp' signal that's an

>> entire S-unit weaker, IMO.

> 

>> My TS-590sg let's me do that, and I love it!

> 

>> Will the K4 sound as good as a Drake T4C? (Just askin'.)

> 

>> Rick N6IET

> 

> N4ZR wrote:

> 

> Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?

> Hi Pete,

> Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs

> have an exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party

> testing bears this

> out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall

> time

>> and

> a hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.

> Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields

> won't reveal what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only

> selected firmware monks--sworn to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's

> keying envelope coefficients :) 73, Wayne N6KR

>> __

>> Elecraft mailing list

>> Home:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft>
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

>> Help:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm>
 http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm

>> Post:  <mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

> 

>> This list hosted by:  <http://www.qsl.net> http://www.qsl.net Please help
 support this 

>> email list:  <http://www.qsl.net/donate.html>
 http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to 

>> <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> ab7e...@gmail.com

> 

___

Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

[E.H. Russell]

I'm used to CW rise times in th 4-7ms range. Is this 2.5ms arrived at by a
different metric? Is the curve added by sigmoidal shaping somehow excluded
from the measurement?

 

Ed / w2rf

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net  On
Behalf Of Richard Stutsman
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:31 PM
To: David Gilbert 
Cc: Elecraft Reflector 
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW rise time setting

 

Yes, I would regard a 2.5 msec rise time (using appropriate sigmoid

shaping) to probably be ideal, in which case I would have no desire to
modify or shorten it. I'll bet it will sound even better than a Drake or a
Ten-Tec!

 

I hereby withdraw my previous request/opinion.

 

Rick N6IET

 

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 10:27 AM David Gilbert < <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com>
ab7e...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

> You don't need to generate clicks to have a crisp CW tone.  Elecraft 

> uses a pretty much optimally shaped waveform (some version of a cosine 

> function) and if I remember correctly the rise time is only about 2.5 

> msec, although I could be wrong about that last part.  And while you 

> may be careful not to use short rise/fall times when the band is 

> active, in the past there have been folks on the contesting reflector 

> who openly admitted they purposely generate clicks by shortening the 

> rise/fall times to give themselves elbow room.  I will always 

> appreciate that Elecraft doesn't give those miscreants the means to
pollute the band.

> 

> 73,

> Dave   AB7E

> 

> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:23 AM Richard Stutsman <
<mailto:rast...@gmail.com> rast...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 

>> I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.

>> 

>> You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a 

>> crowded band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most 

>> of my operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're 

>> often the only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And 

>> conditions are often noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us 

>> operating in those circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit, 

>> which makes it easier to copy in noisy conditions, when any close-in 

>> clicks or thumps aren't going to bother anybody? Copying a 'soft' 

>> weak CW signal is like trying to read a 'crisp' signal that's an 

>> entire S-unit weaker, IMO.

>> 

>> My TS-590sg let's me do that, and I love it!

>> 

>> Will the K4 sound as good as a Drake T4C? (Just askin'.)

>> 

>> Rick N6IET

>> 

>> > N4ZR wrote:

>> > >

>> > > Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?

>> > Hi Pete,

>> > Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs 

>> > have an exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party 

>> > testing bears this

>> > out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall 

>> > time

>> and

>> > a hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.

>> > Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields 

>> > won't reveal what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only 

>> > selected firmware monks--sworn to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's 

>> > keying envelope coefficients :) 73, Wayne N6KR

>> __

>> Elecraft mailing list

>> Home:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft>
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

>> Help:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm>
http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm

>> Post:  <mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

>> 

>> This list hosted by:  <http://www.qsl.net> http://www.qsl.net Please help
support this 

>> email list:  <http://www.qsl.net/donate.html>
http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to 

>>  <mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com> ab7e...@gmail.com

>> 

> 

__

Elecraft mailing list

Home:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft>
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help:  <http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm

Post:  <mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

 

This list hosted by:  <http://www.qsl.net> http://www.qsl.net

Please help support this email list:  <http://www.qsl.net/donate.html>
http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to  <mailto:e...@qrv.com>
e...@qrv.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] CW rise time setting

[Jim Brown]

On 6/8/2020 9:21 AM, Richard Stutsman wrote:

I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.

You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a crowded
band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most of my
operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're often the
only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And conditions are often
noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us operating in those
circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit, which makes it easier to
copy in noisy conditions,


Because that's not how it works. Keying in all Elecraft rigs since the 
K3 has been carefully shaped for optimum copy AND minimum bandwidth. 
What Elecraft does is FAR superior to those rigs with adjustable rise time.


> My TS-590sg let's me do that, and I love it!

You should ALWAYS run it at the longest rise time setting.

>Will the K4 sound as good as a Drake T4C? (Just askin'.)

Although I worked for Drake doing final test of their first TR3s, I 
can't say that I know what a T4C sounds like. Do you?


73, Jim K9YC
__
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] CW rise time setting

[Richard Stutsman]

Yes, I would regard a 2.5 msec rise time (using appropriate sigmoid
shaping) to probably be ideal, in which case I would have no desire to
modify or shorten it. I'll bet it will sound even better than a Drake or a
Ten-Tec!

I hereby withdraw my previous request/opinion.

Rick N6IET

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 10:27 AM David Gilbert  wrote:

> You don't need to generate clicks to have a crisp CW tone.  Elecraft uses
> a pretty much optimally shaped waveform (some version of a cosine function)
> and if I remember correctly the rise time is only about 2.5 msec, although
> I could be wrong about that last part.  And while you may be careful not to
> use short rise/fall times when the band is active, in the past there have
> been folks on the contesting reflector who openly admitted they purposely
> generate clicks by shortening the rise/fall times to give themselves elbow
> room.  I will always appreciate that Elecraft doesn't give those miscreants
> the means to pollute the band.
>
> 73,
> Dave   AB7E
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:23 AM Richard Stutsman  wrote:
>
>> I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.
>>
>> You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a
>> crowded
>> band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most of my
>> operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're often the
>> only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And conditions are often
>> noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us operating in those
>> circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit, which makes it easier to
>> copy in noisy conditions, when any close-in clicks or thumps aren't going
>> to bother anybody? Copying a 'soft' weak CW signal is like trying to read
>> a
>> 'crisp' signal that's an entire S-unit weaker, IMO.
>>
>> My TS-590sg let's me do that, and I love it!
>>
>> Will the K4 sound as good as a Drake T4C? (Just askin'.)
>>
>> Rick N6IET
>>
>> > N4ZR wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?
>> > Hi Pete,
>> > Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs have an
>> > exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party testing bears this
>> > out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall time
>> and
>> > a hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.
>> > Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields won't
>> > reveal what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only selected firmware
>> > monks--sworn to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's keying envelope
>> > coefficients :)
>> > 73,
>> > Wayne
>> > N6KR
>> __
>> 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 ab7e...@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] CW rise time setting

[David Gilbert]

You don't need to generate clicks to have a crisp CW tone.  Elecraft uses a
pretty much optimally shaped waveform (some version of a cosine function)
and if I remember correctly the rise time is only about 2.5 msec, although
I could be wrong about that last part.  And while you may be careful not to
use short rise/fall times when the band is active, in the past there have
been folks on the contesting reflector who openly admitted they purposely
generate clicks by shortening the rise/fall times to give themselves elbow
room.  I will always appreciate that Elecraft doesn't give those miscreants
the means to pollute the band.

73,
Dave   AB7E

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:23 AM Richard Stutsman  wrote:

> I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.
>
> You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a crowded
> band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most of my
> operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're often the
> only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And conditions are often
> noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us operating in those
> circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit, which makes it easier to
> copy in noisy conditions, when any close-in clicks or thumps aren't going
> to bother anybody? Copying a 'soft' weak CW signal is like trying to read a
> 'crisp' signal that's an entire S-unit weaker, IMO.
>
> My TS-590sg let's me do that, and I love it!
>
> Will the K4 sound as good as a Drake T4C? (Just askin'.)
>
> Rick N6IET
>
> > N4ZR wrote:
> > >
> > > Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?
> > Hi Pete,
> > Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs have an
> > exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party testing bears this
> > out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall time
> and
> > a hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.
> > Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields won't
> > reveal what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only selected firmware
> > monks--sworn to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's keying envelope
> > coefficients :)
> > 73,
> > Wayne
> > N6KR
> __
> 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 ab7e...@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] CW rise time setting

[David Box]

Glad to hear that we can count on the K4 maintaining the excellent CW 
characteristics.  I frequently will look at signals I am receiving 
measuring the transmitted waveform based on what I see on the P3 and it 
never ceases to amaze me about how different brands can be identified 
based on the waveform shape and spectral width, not to mention the 
audible key clicks.


de Dave K5MWR

On 6/7/2020 20:45, Wayne Burdick wrote:

N4ZR wrote:

Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?

Hi Pete,

Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs have an 
exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party testing bears this out.) 
Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall time and a 
hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.

Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields won't reveal 
what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only selected firmware monks--sworn 
to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's keying envelope coefficients :)

73,
Wayne
N6KR




__
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 do...@suddenlink.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 

[Elecraft] CW rise time setting

[Richard Stutsman]

I for one would like to have some control over the rise/fall times.

You want the cleanest (narrowest) of CW signals when operating on a crowded
band or in a contest - unless you're a rare DX station. Most of my
operations are 22wpm rag chews on very uncrowded bands. We're often the
only discernible signals on an entire CW band. And conditions are often
noisy with deep QSB. Why not allow those of us operating in those
circumstances to shorten the rise times a bit, which makes it easier to
copy in noisy conditions, when any close-in clicks or thumps aren't going
to bother anybody? Copying a 'soft' weak CW signal is like trying to read a
'crisp' signal that's an entire S-unit weaker, IMO.

My TS-590sg let's me do that, and I love it!

Will the K4 sound as good as a Drake T4C? (Just askin'.)

Rick N6IET

> N4ZR wrote:
> >
> > Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?
> Hi Pete,
> Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs have an
> exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party testing bears this
> out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall time and
> a hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.
> Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields won't
> reveal what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only selected firmware
> monks--sworn to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's keying envelope
> coefficients :)
> 73,
> Wayne
> N6KR
__
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] CW rise time setting

[N4ZR]

Good!

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
at , now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

On 6/7/2020 9:45 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:

N4ZR wrote:

Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?

Hi Pete,

Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs have an 
exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party testing bears this out.) 
Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall time and a 
hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.

Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields won't reveal 
what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only selected firmware monks--sworn 
to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's keying envelope coefficients :)

73,
Wayne
N6KR





__
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] CW rise time setting

[David Gilbert]

Thank you.  I'd be really disappointed if the keying waveform for the K4
was made adjustable.  I consider the fact that it is not adjustable on my
K3 to be one of its best features.

On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 6:49 PM Wayne Burdick  wrote:

> > N4ZR wrote:
> >
> > Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?
>
> Hi Pete,
>
> Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs have an
> exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party testing bears this
> out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall time and
> a hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.
>
> Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields won't
> reveal what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only selected firmware
> monks--sworn to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's keying envelope
> coefficients :)
>
> 73,
> Wayne
> N6KR
>
>
>
>
> __
> 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 ab7e...@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] CW rise time setting

[Bob McGraw K4TAX]

Thanks Wayne for the excellent and exceptional clean keying.  

73
Bob, K4TAX


Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 7, 2020, at 8:49 PM, Wayne Burdick  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> N4ZR wrote:
>> 
>> Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?
> 
> Hi Pete,
> 
> Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs have an 
> exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party testing bears this 
> out.) Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall time and a 
> hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.
> 
> Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields won't 
> reveal what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only selected firmware 
> monks--sworn to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's keying envelope coefficients 
> :)
> 
> 73,
> Wayne
> N6KR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 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 rmcg...@blomand.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] CW rise time setting

[Wayne Burdick]

> N4ZR wrote:
> 
> Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times...?

Hi Pete,

Probably not. We've always been very careful to ensure our rigs have an 
exceptional clean, click-free CW signal. (Third-party testing bears this out.) 
Minimizing the bandwidth requires a very specific rise/fall time and a 
hand-crafted sigmoidal shaping function in DSP.

Colonel Sanders closely guards his fried chick recipe, Mrs. Fields won't reveal 
what's in her chocolate-chip cookies, and only selected firmware monks--sworn 
to secrecy--are privy to Elecraft's keying envelope coefficients :)

73,
Wayne
N6KR




__
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] CW rise time setting

[Fred Jensen]

I really hope the answer is "No."  Rise/Fall times and waveshape of the 
RF envelope should be tailored by the mfr for the best signal, not 
adjustable.


73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 6/7/2020 6:35 PM, N4ZR wrote:
Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times, not just 
TXDELAY like the K3?




__
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] CW rise time setting

[N4ZR]

Will the K4 have options for setting CW rise and fall times, not just 
TXDELAY like the K3?


--
73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
at , now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

__
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