Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 14:35 -0700, Bob Cunnings wrote: > Sorry, I was confusing the two, you did say *Sideband* 9.001 after all. > > So in the case where the IF is 5 MHz and the VFO is 9 MHz, we have: > > Subtract 5 MHz IF: > VFO 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > VFO 9.000 - Sideband 5.001 = 3.999 MHz > ==> LSB > > where we do see the inversion of the sideband. Right. If the ***VFO*** is at 9 MHz and the ***IF*** is at 5 MHz then the sidebands are inverted on the two bands. Alan > Bob NW8L > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Alan Bloom wrote: > > No, we're talking about sideband direction, not VFO tuning direction. > > > > Al > > > > > > On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 08:15 -0700, Bob Cunnings wrote: > >> Er, hold on. you write: > >> > >> > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > >> > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > >> > Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz > >> > ==> USB > >> > >> but shouldn't it be: > >> > >> Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > >> Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > >> Sideband 9.000 - 5.001 = 3.999 MHz > >> ==> LSB > >> > >> Since we changing the VFO, not the IF freq? > >> > >> Bob NW8L > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Alan Bloom wrote: > >> > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 21:06 -0800, Alan Bloom wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 18:36 -0800, wb6r...@mac.com wrote: > >> >> > LSB on the lower bands and USB on the higher bands is an artifact of > >> >> > the mixing scheme, from the early days of SSB, of a 9 Mc IF mixed with > >> >> > a 5.0 - 5.5 Mc VFO. (Yes, it was Mc in those days, not MHz.) Add and > >> >> > you get 20m. Subtract and you get 80m. The subtraction results in > >> >> > sideband reversal and so LSB became the "standard" for 80m. There is > >> >> > really no reason now to not to just operate USB on all bands other > >> >> > than tradition. > >> >> > >> >> I've heard people say that many times over the years but clearly it's > >> >> not true. A 9 MHz IF set up for (let's say) USB will still be USB no > >> >> matter whether you add or subtract the 5-5.5 MHz VFO. > >> > > >> > I just did a little Googling on the Internet (AC6V.com and elsewhere) > >> > and discovered to my astonishment that this is an actual bona-fide > >> > controversial subject among radio amateurs. Despite the fact that a > >> > simple 2-minute back-of-the-envelope calculation is all it takes to > >> > disprove the myth. For the record: > >> > > >> > Intermediate frequency: > >> > Carrier 9.000 MHz > >> > Sideband 9.001 MHz > >> > ==> USB > >> > > >> > Add 5 MHz VFO: > >> > Carrier 9.000 + 5.000 = 14.000 MHz > >> > Sideband 9.001 + 5.000 = 14.001 MHz > >> > ==> USB > >> > > >> > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > >> > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > >> > Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz > >> > ==> USB > >> > > >> > I can't believe people are actually arguing about this! > >> > > >> > Al N1AL > >> > > >> > > >> > __ > >> > Elecraft mailing list > >> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > >> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > >> > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > >> > > >> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > >> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > >> > > >> __ > >> Elecraft mailing list > >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > >> > >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > > > > > > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
Sorry, I was confusing the two, you did say *Sideband* 9.001 after all. So in the case where the IF is 5 MHz and the VFO is 9 MHz, we have: Subtract 5 MHz IF: VFO 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz VFO 9.000 - Sideband 5.001 = 3.999 MHz ==> LSB where we do see the inversion of the sideband. Bob NW8L On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Alan Bloom wrote: > No, we're talking about sideband direction, not VFO tuning direction. > > Al > > > On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 08:15 -0700, Bob Cunnings wrote: >> Er, hold on. you write: >> >> > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: >> > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz >> > Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz >> > ==> USB >> >> but shouldn't it be: >> >> Subtract 5 MHz VFO: >> Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz >> Sideband 9.000 - 5.001 = 3.999 MHz >> ==> LSB >> >> Since we changing the VFO, not the IF freq? >> >> Bob NW8L >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Alan Bloom wrote: >> > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 21:06 -0800, Alan Bloom wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 18:36 -0800, wb6r...@mac.com wrote: >> >> > LSB on the lower bands and USB on the higher bands is an artifact of >> >> > the mixing scheme, from the early days of SSB, of a 9 Mc IF mixed with >> >> > a 5.0 - 5.5 Mc VFO. (Yes, it was Mc in those days, not MHz.) Add and >> >> > you get 20m. Subtract and you get 80m. The subtraction results in >> >> > sideband reversal and so LSB became the "standard" for 80m. There is >> >> > really no reason now to not to just operate USB on all bands other >> >> > than tradition. >> >> >> >> I've heard people say that many times over the years but clearly it's >> >> not true. A 9 MHz IF set up for (let's say) USB will still be USB no >> >> matter whether you add or subtract the 5-5.5 MHz VFO. >> > >> > I just did a little Googling on the Internet (AC6V.com and elsewhere) >> > and discovered to my astonishment that this is an actual bona-fide >> > controversial subject among radio amateurs. Despite the fact that a >> > simple 2-minute back-of-the-envelope calculation is all it takes to >> > disprove the myth. For the record: >> > >> > Intermediate frequency: >> > Carrier 9.000 MHz >> > Sideband 9.001 MHz >> > ==> USB >> > >> > Add 5 MHz VFO: >> > Carrier 9.000 + 5.000 = 14.000 MHz >> > Sideband 9.001 + 5.000 = 14.001 MHz >> > ==> USB >> > >> > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: >> > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz >> > Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz >> > ==> USB >> > >> > I can't believe people are actually arguing about this! >> > >> > Al N1AL >> > >> > >> > __ >> > Elecraft mailing list >> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> > >> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> > >> __ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > > > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
Ron, Almost, but not complete IMHO - the 9 MHz IF and 5 to 5.5 MHz VFO does not invert the sideband, but the 5 MHz IF with a 9 MHz VFO will invert the sidebands. IIRC, Hallicrafters had a SSB transmitter that used a 5 MHz IF that way. The sideband inversion thing was not a problem with phasing exciters because the sideband was easy to swap, the operator just had to remember which was SB1 and SB2 on the old MultiPhase exciters. The filter based exciters of that day often used a crystal filter that had a steep slope on the upper side of the filter, but the lower side tapered off slowly - these were known as Lower Sideband Filters. For an exciter that used that kind of filter, the sideband reversal created by the mixing process was very important to maintaning carrier and unwanted sideband rejection, and did contribute to our current 'standard' of LSB on 75 and USB on 20. OR, maybe my OT memory is confused too - it has been a long time since I played with those old rigs, but I built a phasing exciter way back when. 73, Don W3FPR Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > I think that's because the story's gotten confused. Much SSB was generated > using low-frequency xtal filters (in the 455 kHz and below) range and > heterodyned into the HF range. Images were a serious problem at higher > frequencies. > > I believe the popular 1950's surplus conversion for 75/20 meter SSB > generated the SSB signal at 5 MHz. Then it was heterodyned with a 9 MHz VFO > to produce output on 75M or 20M. Having the VFO above one band and below the > other inverts the sidebands, putting the USB on 20M and LSB on 75M. > > This was all long before the popular 9 MHz crystal filters became available. > > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
No, we're talking about sideband direction, not VFO tuning direction. Al On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 08:15 -0700, Bob Cunnings wrote: > Er, hold on. you write: > > > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > > Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz > > ==> USB > > but shouldn't it be: > > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > Sideband 9.000 - 5.001 = 3.999 MHz > ==> LSB > > Since we changing the VFO, not the IF freq? > > Bob NW8L > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Alan Bloom wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 21:06 -0800, Alan Bloom wrote: > >> On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 18:36 -0800, wb6r...@mac.com wrote: > >> > LSB on the lower bands and USB on the higher bands is an artifact of > >> > the mixing scheme, from the early days of SSB, of a 9 Mc IF mixed with > >> > a 5.0 - 5.5 Mc VFO. (Yes, it was Mc in those days, not MHz.) Add and > >> > you get 20m. Subtract and you get 80m. The subtraction results in > >> > sideband reversal and so LSB became the "standard" for 80m. There is > >> > really no reason now to not to just operate USB on all bands other > >> > than tradition. > >> > >> I've heard people say that many times over the years but clearly it's > >> not true. A 9 MHz IF set up for (let's say) USB will still be USB no > >> matter whether you add or subtract the 5-5.5 MHz VFO. > > > > I just did a little Googling on the Internet (AC6V.com and elsewhere) > > and discovered to my astonishment that this is an actual bona-fide > > controversial subject among radio amateurs. Despite the fact that a > > simple 2-minute back-of-the-envelope calculation is all it takes to > > disprove the myth. For the record: > > > > Intermediate frequency: > > Carrier 9.000 MHz > > Sideband 9.001 MHz > > ==> USB > > > > Add 5 MHz VFO: > > Carrier 9.000 + 5.000 = 14.000 MHz > > Sideband 9.001 + 5.000 = 14.001 MHz > > ==> USB > > > > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > > Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz > > ==> USB > > > > I can't believe people are actually arguing about this! > > > > Al N1AL > > > > > > __ > > Elecraft mailing list > > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
I think that's because the story's gotten confused. Much SSB was generated using low-frequency xtal filters (in the 455 kHz and below) range and heterodyned into the HF range. Images were a serious problem at higher frequencies. I believe the popular 1950's surplus conversion for 75/20 meter SSB generated the SSB signal at 5 MHz. Then it was heterodyned with a 9 MHz VFO to produce output on 75M or 20M. Having the VFO above one band and below the other inverts the sidebands, putting the USB on 20M and LSB on 75M. This was all long before the popular 9 MHz crystal filters became available. The problem with O.T. memories is that they aren't always complete. Now where did I put my shoes last night? Ron AC7AC -Original Message- On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 21:06 -0800, Alan Bloom wrote: I've heard people say that many times over the years but clearly it's > not true. A 9 MHz IF set up for (let's say) USB will still be USB no > matter whether you add or subtract the 5-5.5 MHz VFO. I just did a little Googling on the Internet (AC6V.com and elsewhere) and discovered to my astonishment that this is an actual bona-fide controversial subject among radio amateurs. Despite the fact that a simple 2-minute back-of-the-envelope calculation is all it takes to disprove the myth. For the record: Intermediate frequency: Carrier 9.000 MHz Sideband 9.001 MHz ==> USB Add 5 MHz VFO: Carrier 9.000 + 5.000 = 14.000 MHz Sideband 9.001 + 5.000 = 14.001 MHz ==> USB Subtract 5 MHz VFO: Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz ==> USB I can't believe people are actually arguing about this! Al N1AL __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
This is a question in the December 2009 QST article "The Doctor is In" on page 45. He explains that the calculation with a VFO range of 5 to 5.5 Mhz is: 9 + 5 = 14 9 + 5.5 = 14.5 9 - 5 = 4 9 - 5.5 = 3.5 >From the article: "The subtractive translation reversed the frequency >relations (and the VFO tuning direction) to result in LSB." The circuit >design apparently saved quite a bit of cost in those days. Byron KI6NUL On Dec 3, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Bob Cunnings wrote: > Er, hold on. you write: > >> Subtract 5 MHz VFO: >> Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz >> Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz >> ==> USB > > but shouldn't it be: > > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > Sideband 9.000 - 5.001 = 3.999 MHz > ==> LSB > > Since we changing the VFO, not the IF freq? __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
Er, hold on. you write: > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz > ==> USB but shouldn't it be: Subtract 5 MHz VFO: Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz Sideband 9.000 - 5.001 = 3.999 MHz ==> LSB Since we changing the VFO, not the IF freq? Bob NW8L On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Alan Bloom wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 21:06 -0800, Alan Bloom wrote: >> On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 18:36 -0800, wb6r...@mac.com wrote: >> > LSB on the lower bands and USB on the higher bands is an artifact of >> > the mixing scheme, from the early days of SSB, of a 9 Mc IF mixed with >> > a 5.0 - 5.5 Mc VFO. (Yes, it was Mc in those days, not MHz.) Add and >> > you get 20m. Subtract and you get 80m. The subtraction results in >> > sideband reversal and so LSB became the "standard" for 80m. There is >> > really no reason now to not to just operate USB on all bands other >> > than tradition. >> >> I've heard people say that many times over the years but clearly it's >> not true. A 9 MHz IF set up for (let's say) USB will still be USB no >> matter whether you add or subtract the 5-5.5 MHz VFO. > > I just did a little Googling on the Internet (AC6V.com and elsewhere) > and discovered to my astonishment that this is an actual bona-fide > controversial subject among radio amateurs. Despite the fact that a > simple 2-minute back-of-the-envelope calculation is all it takes to > disprove the myth. For the record: > > Intermediate frequency: > Carrier 9.000 MHz > Sideband 9.001 MHz > ==> USB > > Add 5 MHz VFO: > Carrier 9.000 + 5.000 = 14.000 MHz > Sideband 9.001 + 5.000 = 14.001 MHz > ==> USB > > Subtract 5 MHz VFO: > Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz > Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz > ==> USB > > I can't believe people are actually arguing about this! > > Al N1AL > > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 21:06 -0800, Alan Bloom wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 18:36 -0800, wb6r...@mac.com wrote: > > LSB on the lower bands and USB on the higher bands is an artifact of > > the mixing scheme, from the early days of SSB, of a 9 Mc IF mixed with > > a 5.0 - 5.5 Mc VFO. (Yes, it was Mc in those days, not MHz.) Add and > > you get 20m. Subtract and you get 80m. The subtraction results in > > sideband reversal and so LSB became the "standard" for 80m. There is > > really no reason now to not to just operate USB on all bands other > > than tradition. > > I've heard people say that many times over the years but clearly it's > not true. A 9 MHz IF set up for (let's say) USB will still be USB no > matter whether you add or subtract the 5-5.5 MHz VFO. I just did a little Googling on the Internet (AC6V.com and elsewhere) and discovered to my astonishment that this is an actual bona-fide controversial subject among radio amateurs. Despite the fact that a simple 2-minute back-of-the-envelope calculation is all it takes to disprove the myth. For the record: Intermediate frequency: Carrier 9.000 MHz Sideband 9.001 MHz ==> USB Add 5 MHz VFO: Carrier 9.000 + 5.000 = 14.000 MHz Sideband 9.001 + 5.000 = 14.001 MHz ==> USB Subtract 5 MHz VFO: Carrier 9.000 - 5.000 = 4.000 MHz Sideband 9.001 - 5.000 = 4.001 MHz ==> USB I can't believe people are actually arguing about this! Al N1AL __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 18:36 -0800, wb6r...@mac.com wrote: > LSB on the lower bands and USB on the higher bands is an artifact of > the mixing scheme, from the early days of SSB, of a 9 Mc IF mixed with > a 5.0 - 5.5 Mc VFO. (Yes, it was Mc in those days, not MHz.) Add and > you get 20m. Subtract and you get 80m. The subtraction results in > sideband reversal and so LSB became the "standard" for 80m. There is > really no reason now to not to just operate USB on all bands other > than tradition. I've heard people say that many times over the years but clearly it's not true. A 9 MHz IF set up for (let's say) USB will still be USB no matter whether you add or subtract the 5-5.5 MHz VFO. What DOES result in opposite sidebands is to swap the IF and VFO frequencies, that is, using an IF in the 5 MHz range and a VFO in the 9 MHz range to get 80 and 20 meters without having to band-switch the VFO. I believe some early SSB rigs used that scheme, so that may be the origin of the current standard. Al N1AL __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
On the other hand, maybe you'd want to use someone else's K3 and they might object to having their settings changed. At one time, I was a fairly big gun contester; I'm not now but I might operate multi-op which I've done before. My old rig is a very modified FT-101E with good dynamic range as a result of mixer, blanker, and IF changes, great selectivity owing to adding the speech clipper to the IF, plus other changes and the same opposite tuning plus the orignal finals lasted34 years. For an analog rig, it still does pretty much what I want. That said, it hasn't been turned on since I got my K3. I've considered using it as a second "IF" for second receiver purposes and for noise clipper/blanker experiments but that priority is declining steadily. It's not worth selling and the mods would frighten almost all potential buyers. I hand made a board to follow the speech processor that Yaesu didn't include until later and it's UGLY. I can still repair it, it still works. I'm sure Yaesu wouldn't touch it; will they still repair the 1000; I've heard some discouraging things about part availability. I've offered it to a semi-interested grand-daughter but she's too busy with school, soccer, bicycle racing, drama, etc.. Let it be a beloved spare or maybe just.tune it with the other hand (saith the left hand person who was forced to be right handed in elementary school, the consequence of living in the third world). I currently have the 101 in it's usual spot on my left and the K3 in a new spot on my right. Both work; dyslexia isn't all bad. Maybe I should run coax to the 101 and use both simultaneously. If only I was schizophrenic. The question that Wayne and crew are perhaps asking is what's the priority and how much work is it. I'm happy; it's taken me to months to adjust. ;-)) Dunc, W5DC Randy Farmer wrote: >> I am with you on this. Too many years tuning the band in one direction to >> change now. >> > > Me, too. I'm getting used to the way the K3 tunes, but for ergonomic > reasons it would really be nice to have a way to make both of my > radios tune the same direction. Since my second radio is an old > FT-1000D that doesn't have the CW Reverse functionality, I suppose > it's up to the K3 to do the changing -- just because it can (or will > be able to someday). > > 73... > Randy, W8FN > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
LSB on the lower bands and USB on the higher bands is an artifact of the mixing scheme, from the early days of SSB, of a 9 Mc IF mixed with a 5.0 - 5.5 Mc VFO. (Yes, it was Mc in those days, not MHz.) Add and you get 20m. Subtract and you get 80m. The subtraction results in sideband reversal and so LSB became the "standard" for 80m. There is really no reason now to not to just operate USB on all bands other than tradition. On CW, the standard among CW DXers has always been USB CW because it means that the higher the tone, the higher the frequency. Intuitively useful when tuning a split pile up. Just as clockwise rotation of the VFO knob means higher frequency. I operate USB on RTTY for that same reason, even though the "standard" is LSB. The stations I work on RTTY don't know that I'm USB. It is curious that normal CW for the K3 is LSB. I'm sure Elecraft had their reasons. My K3 is always in CW REV mode. 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] K3: CW feature request
>I am with you on this. Too many years tuning the band in one direction to >change now. Me, too. I'm getting used to the way the K3 tunes, but for ergonomic reasons it would really be nice to have a way to make both of my radios tune the same direction. Since my second radio is an old FT-1000D that doesn't have the CW Reverse functionality, I suppose it's up to the K3 to do the changing -- just because it can (or will be able to someday). 73... Randy, W8FN __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
I am with you on this. Too many years tuning the band in one direction to change now. Randy, K5ZD > -Original Message- > From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net > [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ralph Parker > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 6:43 AM > To: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > Subject: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request > > I've tried really hard to adjust to CW on LSB, but it just > doesn't work for me. > To make matters worse, much software (eg. N1MM) insists on > re-setting the CW mode to 'normal' (after I've set it to > 'REV') at the most inopportune moments. > > I plead for a CONFIG option to set CW 'normal' to USB. > I'd even pay money for this! > > VE7XF > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
N1MM Logger and DX Lab Suite both give you the option. On N1MM Logger, open the Configuration panel, choose the Other tab and check the "Use Reverse CW" box in the lower right-hand corner. -- 73 -- Brian -- K1LI On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 1:43 AM, Ralph Parker wrote: > I've tried really hard to adjust to CW on LSB, but it just doesn't work for > me. > To make matters worse, much software (eg. N1MM) insists on re-setting the > CW mode to 'normal' (after I've set it to 'REV') at the most inopportune > moments. > > I plead for a CONFIG option to set CW 'normal' to USB. > I'd even pay money for this! > > VE7XF > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
Added to the list -- thanks for the suggestion. 73, Wayne N6KR On Dec 1, 2009, at 10:43 PM, Ralph Parker wrote: > I've tried really hard to adjust to CW on LSB, but it just doesn't > work for > me. > To make matters worse, much software (eg. N1MM) insists on re- > setting the > CW mode to 'normal' (after I've set it to 'REV') at the most > inopportune > moments. > > I plead for a CONFIG option to set CW 'normal' to USB. > I'd even pay money for this! > > VE7XF __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
[Elecraft] K3: CW feature request
I've tried really hard to adjust to CW on LSB, but it just doesn't work for me. To make matters worse, much software (eg. N1MM) insists on re-setting the CW mode to 'normal' (after I've set it to 'REV') at the most inopportune moments. I plead for a CONFIG option to set CW 'normal' to USB. I'd even pay money for this! VE7XF __ 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
