Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009

2009-10-19 Thread Robert Wood
In general K3 owners bought for the high performance numbers

The ARRL numbers on the dynamic range for 1.8 filter in the QST review 
provide great results but that is subjective - subjective.  Far below 
expected numbers even if it is better then Brand x

The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no 
reposted test results
To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results
or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting test 
results is questionable
I doubt the story below was in response to the ARRL article

It's doubtful anyone will perform a retest - (ARRL certainly NOT)
a Retest by someone outside the firm like Sherwood, etc. would be good
( although we maybe too busy reading about firmware updates.hi)

The ARRL QST article as minimum indicates that not all xtal filters of same 
model are equal

back to RF,   Robert w5aj





- Original Message - 
From: Fred Atchley hamkt...@att.net
To: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter


At the recent Santa Barbara Hamfest, Eric addressed a problem with the 
early
filters in the K3.

The frequency would change unexpectedly. Eventually the problem was solved
by cleaning.

It was found that particles left over from the crystal manufacturing were
modifying the freq.

Inrad is just down the street from Elecraft and together they resolved the
issue.



I use the 1.8 in my K3 (#2241) with great results.



73, Fred AE6IC

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009

2009-10-19 Thread wb6rse1

On Oct 19, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Robert Wood wrote:

The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no
reposted test results
To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results
or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting  
test
results is questionable

_

If Elecraft is guilty of anything, it's complete transparency.

73 - Steve WB6RSE
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009

2009-10-19 Thread David Y.
I agree!  Yaesu, Icom, Kenwood, and even Ten-Tec, often get completely 
closed mouthed about flaws/problems.  Once you buy one of those radios, it's 
pretty much a done deal until the new and improved version comes out with 
some subtle feature additions, but also a bunch of glitch fixes!  Elecraft 
tends to lay it all out on the table when things like this happen. 
Sometimes they may drag their feet a bit, but that's usually to allow 
themselves time to really verify that the problem does exist.  Nobody is 
perfect, but you have to look long and hard to find a company that has been 
more forthright about issues, or more active in resolving them.  Some might 
think they are overly aggressive about it, as when they focus on issues 
that, at least some of us, don't think are issues at all!  I guess that's 
good though!  It makes you better realize just how versatile the radio is.

Dave W7AQK

- Original Message - 
From: wb6r...@mac.com
To: Elecraft List Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009



 On Oct 19, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Robert Wood wrote:

 The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no
 reposted test results
 To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results
 or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting
 test
 results is questionable

 _

 If Elecraft is guilty of anything, it's complete transparency.

 73 - Steve WB6RSE
 __
 Elecraft mailing list
 Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
 Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

 This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
 Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009

2009-10-19 Thread David Gilbert

Personally, I find it easier to believe that Inrad fixed the problem 
based upon Elecraft's subjective confirmation of such than I do your 
totally subjective implication that they might be collectively and 
intentionally lying to us.

Dave   AB7E



Robert Wood wrote:
 In general K3 owners bought for the high performance numbers

 The ARRL numbers on the dynamic range for 1.8 filter in the QST review 
 provide great results but that is subjective - subjective.  Far below 
 expected numbers even if it is better then Brand x

 The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no 
 reposted test results
 To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results
 or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting test 
 results is questionable
 I doubt the story below was in response to the ARRL article

 It's doubtful anyone will perform a retest - (ARRL certainly NOT)
 a Retest by someone outside the firm like Sherwood, etc. would be good
 ( although we maybe too busy reading about firmware updates.hi)

 The ARRL QST article as minimum indicates that not all xtal filters of same 
 model are equal

 back to RF,   Robert w5aj





 - Original Message - 
 From: Fred Atchley hamkt...@att.net
 To: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
 Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:14 AM
 Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter


 At the recent Santa Barbara Hamfest, Eric addressed a problem with the 
 early
 filters in the K3.

 The frequency would change unexpectedly. Eventually the problem was solved
 by cleaning.

 It was found that particles left over from the crystal manufacturing were
 modifying the freq.

 Inrad is just down the street from Elecraft and together they resolved the
 issue.



 I use the 1.8 in my K3 (#2241) with great results.



 73, Fred AE6IC

   
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009

2009-10-19 Thread Geoffrey Mackenzie-Kennedy
Dave,

Before I list a couple of home truths, may I say that I agree with your 
comment.

1)
The IMDDR3 data  from ARRL and others is a report of the receiver's IMDDR3 
performance, not that of the filter's IMDDR3 performance. The data does 
provide some indication that the IMDDR3 performance of filter A might be 
worse than that of filter B, C or D, but filter A itself might not 
be the cause of the problem. The filters should be tested as stand-alone 
items before putting blame on any particular filter.

The designer of a receiver should know the IIP3 of the filters to be used, 
otherwise he is flying blind.

2)
The effects of SLC (Surface Layer Contamination) on the performance of 
crystals have been known for many years, and methods used during the 
manufacture of crystals to avoid SLC have also been used for many years. SLC 
is usually caused by dirt or particles of quartz which has / have not been 
cleaned out during the manufacture of the crystal. So called computer 
grade crystals, which are cheap, can be expected to be contaminated, 
because most are produced for non-critical oscillator applications.

Dirty crystals if used in a filter will have a bad effect on the filter's 
IMD performance and its loss.

73,

Geoff
GM4ESD


David Gilbert wrote on Monday, October 19, 2009 at 8:13 PM

 Personally, I find it easier to believe that Inrad fixed the problem
 based upon Elecraft's subjective confirmation of such than I do your
 totally subjective implication that they might be collectively and
 intentionally lying to us.

 Dave   AB7E




__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009

2009-10-19 Thread Ron D'Eau Claire
Dave W7AQK wrote:

Sometimes they may drag their feet a bit, but that's usually to allow 
themselves time to really verify that the problem does exist.  Nobody is 
perfect, but you have to look long and hard to find a company that has been 
more forthright about issues, or more active in resolving them.  Some might 
think they are overly aggressive about it, as when they focus on issues 
that, at least some of us, don't think are issues at all!  I guess that's 
good though!  It makes you better realize just how versatile the radio is.

--
Dave makes excellent points - 

Fixing a 'glitch' is seldom as easy as it sounds (or, once done, as simple
as it looks). Often the underlying problem is not obvious, but hidden far
from the symptom. And then there's the issue of making sure that changing
something to fix it won't break something else. It becomes complicated
fast. 

I choose the people (and the companies they run) who I'll associate with not
by whether they make mistakes but rather by how they handle their mistakes. 

Ron AC7AC


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009

2009-10-19 Thread Merv Schweigert
Inrad selects the best filters for the K3,  the others which do not meet
K3 specs are sold as Yaesu filters. 
And thats the truth..
Merv KH7C 
 Personally, I find it easier to believe that Inrad fixed the problem 
 based upon Elecraft's subjective confirmation of such than I do your 
 totally subjective implication that they might be collectively and 
 intentionally lying to us.

 Dave   AB7E



 Robert Wood wrote:
   
 In general K3 owners bought for the high performance numbers

 The ARRL numbers on the dynamic range for 1.8 filter in the QST review 
 provide great results but that is subjective - subjective.  Far below 
 expected numbers even if it is better then Brand x

 The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no 
 reposted test results
 To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results
 or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting test 
 results is questionable
 I doubt the story below was in response to the ARRL article

 It's doubtful anyone will perform a retest - (ARRL certainly NOT)
 a Retest by someone outside the firm like Sherwood, etc. would be good
 ( although we maybe too busy reading about firmware updates.hi)

 The ARRL QST article as minimum indicates that not all xtal filters of same 
 model are equal

 back to RF,   Robert w5aj





 - Original Message - 
 From: Fred Atchley hamkt...@att.net
 To: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
 Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:14 AM
 Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter


 At the recent Santa Barbara Hamfest, Eric addressed a problem with the 
 early
 filters in the K3.

 The frequency would change unexpectedly. Eventually the problem was solved
 by cleaning.

 It was found that particles left over from the crystal manufacturing were
 modifying the freq.

 Inrad is just down the street from Elecraft and together they resolved the
 issue.



 I use the 1.8 in my K3 (#2241) with great results.



 73, Fred AE6IC

   
 
 __
 Elecraft mailing list
 Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
 Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

 This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
 Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

   

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter

2009-10-15 Thread Fred Atchley
At the recent Santa Barbara Hamfest, Eric addressed a problem with the early
filters in the K3. 

The frequency would change unexpectedly. Eventually the problem was solved
by cleaning. 

It was found that particles left over from the crystal manufacturing were
modifying the freq.

Inrad is just down the street from Elecraft and together they resolved the
issue.

 

I use the 1.8 in my K3 (#2241) with great results.

 

73, Fred AE6IC 

__
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