Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Don KB1YBG]

Thanks Jim,  you were on the right track with power cable.  My problem was
current limiting set on the power suppy.  Calibration now successful.

73, Don

--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7559369.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Don KB1YBG]

I received my K3/10 kit on Friday and compleated the build yesterday. 
Everything went very smoothly and I believe very worthwhile to become
familar with the K3 construction.  Nothing like building the K2 but a good
experience none the less.

Today I began the calibration using the K3 Utility on Win XP, and
encountered the following.  While performing Calibrating Transmitter Gain,
it starts the 5W calibration and reports Calibrating at 1.900 MHz and then
the K3 powers off immediately.  I continued to the mw calibration and that
completed successfully.
I am using the Elecraft 20W dummy load and got the same results on both Ant
1 and Ant 2.  I tried this with same results with power set to 5W and 10W.

I also noticed that while trying to auto-tune on 20m the receiver also
powered off.  The auto-tune worked on other bands.  Currently I'm not
connected to my outside antennas, just a wire with counter poise cut for
17m.

The power supply is a 20Amp bench supply set at 13.8 V.  It shows a current
of 1.04 Amp.

The K3 MCU Ver is 4.48.  The utility is 1.12.3.28.

Anyone encountered this?

Thanks,
Don

--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7559365.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Don Wilhelm]

Congratulations.  My guess for your next addition is the KPA3.  Even if 
you are a dedicated QRP operator, there are times when you will want 
something in the 100 watt class.
That being said, I operated my K3 for a time at 5 and 10 watts, even 
talking with some on 80 meter SSB who operate at 1500 watts to talk 
across the street.  They were amazed to hear that I was only running 10 
or 12 watts (yes, I boosted to power for 80 meter SSB :-) )

73,
Don W3FPR

On 7/6/2012 9:56 PM, Don KB1YBG wrote:
> It's on the UPS Truck!
> K3/10 Kit, KAT3, KXV3A and KFL3A-400.
> Thanks again for all the great insight, comments and suggestions.
> I'm going with the 400 filter which may be all I need.  I'll start there and
> can always add one.
> Who knows what I may add next, so I'll probably be back with more questions.
>
> 73,
> Don
>

__
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 for CW

[Don KB1YBG]

It's on the UPS Truck!
K3/10 Kit, KAT3, KXV3A and KFL3A-400.
Thanks again for all the great insight, comments and suggestions.
I'm going with the 400 filter which may be all I need.  I'll start there and
can always add one.
Who knows what I may add next, so I'll probably be back with more questions.

73,
Don

--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7558759.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Robby.VY2SS]

Hmmm.  To me a 1000 filter is a waste of a slot. Make it 1.8 and it is a big
help in the occasional SSB contest.
 
I wonder if I need the 400 hz in my sub. I only use the sub in a split
operation and like to set my DSP up to 600-800 so I can hear more of the
pile in my right ear.
 
-Robby
#3804
 
From: dj3cq [via Elecraft] [mailto:ml-node+s365791n7558706...@n2.nabble.com]

Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 3:06 AM
To: Robby.VY2SS
Subject: Re: K3 for CW
 
1st K3 (#2812) 

2800 
1000 
400 
250 
No Sub 

2nd (#6119) 

2700 
1000 
400 
250 

Sub: 
2700 
400 

99% contest or DXpedition use, rarely any ragchewing. 

I normally hear as wide as possible, just in case the going gets tough I
crank the bandwith to the lower limit. 


73, Jo 
dj3cq 
  _  

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
below:
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7558706.html 
To start a new topic under [K3], email
ml-node+s365791n36579...@n2.nabble.com 
To unsubscribe from [K3], click here
 .
 
 NAML 
  _  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2193 / Virus Database: 2437/5112 - Release Date: 07/05/12


--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7558711.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Fred Jensen]

On 7/5/2012 11:08 AM, Edward R. Cole wrote:
>
> Today is semi-annual shack cleaning day (also wading into the "rats
> nest" of wires behind the console in preparation for hosting a "shack
> tour" at the end of our local hamfest in a couple weeks.

Always wondered why they call this "wireless."

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
- www.cqp.org


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

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Guy Olinger K2AV]

This applies to CW and particularly to contesting.

On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Vic K2VCO  wrote:

> I say 'much' because the effect of concatenating the DSP and the sharp
> filter will change
> the shape of the bandpass a little.
>

If the DSP width is set to the actual bandwidth of an 8 pole roofer and the
offset of the roofer is carefully adjusted to bring its *** 30 dB down ***
(not -6 dB) skirts to coincide with the 30 dB down skirts of the DSP, the
effect is quite more than a "little".

For the 400 hz 8 pole, this width is 450 Hz, and for the 250 Hz 8 pole this
width is 350, and to get the benefit you must install the "400" Hz as 450,
and the "250" as 350 width with the K3 utility.  It takes some time to get
the combination exactly "skirt-aligned", with the filter offset setting,
but it is worth it.

Until I discovered this procedure, my K3 had the best front end and some
really neat features over my Yaesu FT1000MP.  But the K3 did ***NOT*** have
the best selectivity.  Nor was it particularly close.  My MP had cascaded 8
pole INRAD filters in the 8 MHz and 455 kHz IF's.  I had that arrangement
for 1.8, 400 Hz and 250 Hz.  When someone was high or low but enough into
my bandpass to be a problem, a very small tune-tweak with RIT, with the
offending signal on really, really sharp skirts would put another 10 dB
 rejection on him without my moving my run frequency.

NOW, with the 8 pole offsets set for skirt alignment with DSP at -30 dB,
when I use 450 or 350 width I get the MP dual INRAD style skirt rejection.
 Note it's not so sharp away from the 450 or 350 settings.   That is
because while the DSP uses digital magic to retain it's shape factor with ,
the 8 pole at 400 or 300 is starting the level off process in the curve,
and it is not adding as much rejection to the DSP's rejection.

For my purposes, the rejection at 400 is acceptable, but having the "250"
roofer kick in at 350 really makes 450 to 300 width quite good, even if it
still remains a teensy bit broader than the cascaded INRADs  in the MP.

Now here's the other benefit:  The very sharp drop of the skirt aligned 8
pole/DSP at 450 and 350 converts an up or down frequency signal with key
clicks to LOWER amplitude, but VERY SHARP spikes, viewed on a scope.  Some
people have mistakenly thought this was making clicks worse, and perhaps
from an irritation point of view that was true. That was because the really
spikey part of the sound which irritates most was being held down by the
extra energy let in by broader selectivity.

Why is sharp spikes a benefit?  The K3 is WONDERFUL at handling spikes.
 More so after the spectacular improvements from firmware 4.51, even the
lowest NB setting of IF OFF and DSP t1-7 will simply eliminate all but
louder key clicks, and since 4.51, t2-7 has handled anything.  The AGC
already ignores short spikes, and so unless the key clicks in adjacent
channel are loud enough to get into the hardware AGC (15 or 20 over key
clicks?) , clicks become a non-issue.  In some cases, the clicks go from S7
or S8 to S nothing.  Suppression of five or six S units is more common.  I
sometimes get the clicks supressed only to hear the station's phase noise
or poorly suppressed carrier.

If you have ever held down a run frequency for 4 plus hours, it almost
inevitable to get a clicky signal up or down.  This click-elimination
feature of a K3 can be the difference between staying where all your spots
are, or having to move in self defense and really messing up your rate
until you can find another frequency.  There may not be any open
frequencies, particularly if the band you are on is the only one really
open (or a 160 contest).  Losing a run frequency can cost you 50 or 100
contacts.  Later in a contest, S&P is not an option.

I now just leave NB on all the time at t1-7, IF OFF.  My ear has gotten
used to the very slight truncation of CW bauds at t1-7.

The pair set at 450 and 350 has another use.  While I always settle into a
run frequency where I hear nothing in the 450 bandwidth, It frequently
these days gets squeezed as the K3 phenomenon is transforming traditional
1/2 kHz spacing to 1/3 kHz spacing. More and more frequently, after
starting at 450, I find myself running at 350 bandwidth in self-defense.
 Still with the great key click suppression, and with a 300 setting that
works nearly as good.

I have operated for hours with the (mandatory?) 30 over 9 Italian up 400 Hz
running a pair of 3CX5000's and bad key clicks, and kept it at high rates.
 Something my MP could never do, notwithstanding cascaded INRADs and
super-sharp selectivity.  The Italian still gets a dun after the contest,
but has never responded.  I think he looks for me because I DON'T have any
key clicks and don't respond with squeezing, etc.  With my K3, I just don't
care.  Some low level of clicks is irrelevant, and I can monitor his rate.
 He does turn in good scores.

So I have 5 pole 2.7 for conversational SSB, and for contests, 1.8 8 pole
for SSB (mandato

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Edward R. Cole]

At the risk of being repetitive, I chose the 2.8 KHz and 400-Hz 
8-pole filters for my main Rx and 2.8 for my sub-Rx.  I run CW on VHF 
and up so "crowded band phenomena" is rarely encountered.  On eme it 
is never seen.  But I reasoned having the steeper skirts would be 
handy for HF-SSB and cascading the 400-Hz with the DSP at 100-Hz 
might net a slight improvement with super-weak CW on eme.  I find the 
400-Hz filter is narrow enough to make tuning for CW difficult enough 
(usually tune in 2.1-DSP and narrow down once on freq.).  I added a 
13-KHz filter for running VHF-FM on the main-Rx (works nice on BC am).

I bought the dual-bw filter for the KX3 figuring it might make 
difference in reception with the direct-conversion SDR.  It appears 
to switch in at about 2.35 KHz. I can hear the change in band noise 
with it in.  I have not spent enough "play" time to come up with 
optimum menu settings (most still the original).

Today is semi-annual shack cleaning day (also wading into the "rats 
nest" of wires behind the console in preparation for hosting a "shack 
tour" at the end of our local hamfest in a couple weeks.  Now that I 
have the KX3 and all my new transverters installed, I can accomplish 
a more "permanent" wiring hookup!  (nothing in my shack is permanent!)

 From overcast, 50F, with gusty winds (in Alaska),


73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
==
BP40IQ   500 KHz - 10-GHz   www.kl7uw.com
EME: 50-1.1kw?, 144-1.4kw, 432-QRT, 1296-?, 3400-?
DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubus...@gmail.com
"Kits made by KL7UW" http://www.kl7uw.com/kits.htm
==
__
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 for CW

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Thomas,

On 7/5/2012 11:55 AM, Thomas Horsten wrote:
 >
> You may say this and it may be true in theory, but if you have a
> 400Hz filter and are listening on an otherwise clear segment of the
> band with a single relatively weak signal in the centre of the
> passband, try widening from 400Hz to 450Hz,

This is the wrong test as you significantly change bandwidth when
going from 400 Hz with the 400 Hz roofer to 450 Hz with the 2.7
or 2.8 KHz roofer.

The correct test is to set your DSP bandwidth to 300 Hz and switch
roofers while making no other changes.  Under those conditions -
unless you are listening to a very busy band with may strong local
signals - if you can hear a difference you are probably a science
fiction or fantasy writer.

> Personally I have not had any need for anything narrower than 400Hz,
> although I would love a 200Hz filter if there was room for 6, but my
> lineup is FM, AM 6kHz, 2.7, 2.1, 400, so I don't have room for any
> more.

It is an absolute shame that we are still stuck with the FM/AM filter
limitation after all this time.  The FM filter (+/-6.5 KHz @-6dB and
about +/- 10 KHz at -60dB) is more than satisfactory to remove any
transmit image at 30 KHz offset (after all, it works in FM).  I have
never been able to detect any image response (transmit or receive)
with the FM filter in AM or ESSB when I tell the K3 it's and AM
filter.


73,

... Joe, W4TV



On 7/5/2012 11:55 AM, Thomas Horsten wrote:
> Vic,
>
> You may say this and it may be true in theory, but if you have a 400Hz
> filter and are listening on an otherwise clear segment of the band with a
> single relatively weak signal in the centre of the passband, try widening
> from 400Hz to 450Hz, in my case switching to the 2.1kHz filter. If you
> still believe there is no reason for the narrower filter, IMHO you need
> your hearing checked [no offense intended]. Or try telling the K3 that it's
> really a 500Hz filter and do the same from 500 to 550Hz, same effect.
>
> Personally I have not had any need for anything narrower than 400Hz,
> although I would love a 200Hz filter if there was room for 6, but my lineup
> is FM, AM 6kHz, 2.7, 2.1, 400, so I don't have room for any more.
>
> 73, Thomas M0TRN
>
> On 5 July 2012 16:51, Vic K2VCO  wrote:
>
>> The ONLY time you need a narrower filter is when there is a signal that is
>> about S9+20 or
>> greater that is outside the DSP bandwidth that you have selected but still
>> within the
>> bandwidth of the selected filter.
>>
> __
> 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 for CW

[Thomas Horsten]

Vic,

You may say this and it may be true in theory, but if you have a 400Hz
filter and are listening on an otherwise clear segment of the band with a
single relatively weak signal in the centre of the passband, try widening
from 400Hz to 450Hz, in my case switching to the 2.1kHz filter. If you
still believe there is no reason for the narrower filter, IMHO you need
your hearing checked [no offense intended]. Or try telling the K3 that it's
really a 500Hz filter and do the same from 500 to 550Hz, same effect.

Personally I have not had any need for anything narrower than 400Hz,
although I would love a 200Hz filter if there was room for 6, but my lineup
is FM, AM 6kHz, 2.7, 2.1, 400, so I don't have room for any more.

73, Thomas M0TRN

On 5 July 2012 16:51, Vic K2VCO  wrote:

> The ONLY time you need a narrower filter is when there is a signal that is
> about S9+20 or
> greater that is outside the DSP bandwidth that you have selected but still
> within the
> bandwidth of the selected filter.
>
__
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 for CW

[Vic K2VCO]

I get the feeling from reading all of these messages that most of the writers 
do not 
understand the function of the filters in the K3. I know that AC7AC, W3FPR and 
others have 
explained it, but it doesn't seem to sink in.

The ONLY time you need a narrower filter is when there is a signal that is 
about S9+20 or 
greater that is outside the DSP bandwidth that you have selected but still 
within the 
bandwidth of the selected filter.

So if you have a 2.8 kHz filter and you have your DSP bandwidth set to 200 Hz 
then unless 
there is a *very* loud signal that is within 2.8 kHz, it will not be much 
different from 
what you would hear with a 200 Hz filter.

I say 'much' because the effect of concatenating the DSP and the sharp filter 
will change 
the shape of the bandpass a little.

I always advise CW operators to get the 400 Hz filter. Situations in which they 
will need 
a sharper one will be rare.

On 7/5/2012 12:03 AM, Arie Kleingeld PA3A wrote:
> Don,
>
> It seems that  you are an experienced CW op.
> See the selection of filters no different from other transceivers where
> xtal filters determine the BW.. Just pick your favourite BWs.
>
> For CW I have 400Hz en 200Hz in main RX  and 400Hz in SubRx to enable
> diversity mode.
> I use the 400Hz filter 99% of the time. The 200Hz only comes into play
> when I need to dig a signal out, often in combo with the APF.
>
> 73
> Arie PA3A
>
> Op 5-7-2012 1:36, Don KB1YBG schreef:
>I've been following P3, 2nd Rcvr here but am not ready for those yet.
>My question is 1) best filters for CW and 2) any other must-have
> options. I've read Wayne's article about filter selection but still
> unsure. It seems the 400 and 250 may be close to same and 1000 and 400 a
> better choice. Or 500 5-pole? I'll be adding Sec Rx so what about filter
> matching? 73, Don,  KB1YBG
>
> __
> 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
>

-- 
Vic, K2VCO
Fresno CA
http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/


__
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 for CW

[GDanner]

I ordered my sub-receiver with the 2.7 filter even though my main had the 
2.8 (my error when ordering the sub-receiver well after the original  K3).
I experimented a bit and found by setting the offsets for both filters half 
way between the 2 filters solved the wa-wa issue without any noticeable loss 
in fidelity. I do realize that the skirts are not ideal but the compromise 
does not seem to be audible.
If the user is mostly CW then I would use this method if you don't want the 
additional cost of matched 2.7s or 2.8s.
I regularly use diversity on a net and do not have an issue when the 2.7/2.8 
filters are selected. Obviously they are not exact but neither are the H & V 
signals.

George
AI4VZ

-Original Message- 
From: Joe Subich, W4TV
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 9:54 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW


> As for filters, I think I'll go with the 8-pole 400 and upgrade the
> 2.7 to the 2.8. It is my understanding that the 8-poles have zero
> offset and thus I can add these to the sub in the future without
> matching issues.

I went the 2.8, 400, 200 route in the main RX and 2.8, 400 only in
the sub RX.  If I had it to do over I would probably not bother to
"upgrade" the standard 2.7 KHz filters to 2.8.  The 2.7 is wide
enough than one can "split the difference" in order to maintain
phase lock in diversity.  If one absolutely needs better skirt
performance in a wider filter, adding the 1.8 KHz provides added
flexibility at very little added cost (replacing 2.7 with 2.8 is
$129.95, purchasing the 1.8 or 2.8 outright is only 139.95!).

73,

... Joe, W4TV



On 7/4/2012 9:15 PM, Don KB1YBG wrote:
> Hi All,
> Thanks for all the great info.  Just what I was looking for.  As suggested
> I'll scrap the dvr and add the KXV3A.  Who knows, I may add a P3 someday 
> but
> would like to put up a receive antenna soon.  I have it on the K2 but have
> not used it.  As for filters, I think I'll go with the 8-pole 400 and
> upgrade the 2.7 to the 2.8.  It is my understanding that the 8-poles have
> zero offset and thus I can add these to the sub in the future without
> matching issues.
>
> I still have to study all the info you've provided but sounds great.
>
> Thanks and 73,
> Don
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7558628.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

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

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

__
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 for CW

[Arie Kleingeld PA3A]

Don,

It seems that  you are an experienced CW op.
See the selection of filters no different from other transceivers where 
xtal filters determine the BW.. Just pick your favourite BWs.

For CW I have 400Hz en 200Hz in main RX  and 400Hz in SubRx to enable 
diversity mode.
I use the 400Hz filter 99% of the time. The 200Hz only comes into play 
when I need to dig a signal out, often in combo with the APF.

73
Arie PA3A

Op 5-7-2012 1:36, Don KB1YBG schreef:
  I've been following P3, 2nd Rcvr here but am not ready for those yet. 
  My question is 1) best filters for CW and 2) any other must-have 
options. I've read Wayne's article about filter selection but still 
unsure. It seems the 400 and 250 may be close to same and 1000 and 400 a 
better choice. Or 500 5-pole? I'll be adding Sec Rx so what about filter 
matching? 73, Don,  KB1YBG

__
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 for CW

[Lee Buller]

I like the 500 HZ roofing filter and use the dsp to do most of the work.  
Remember...these are roofing filters and the software does the work.

Lee

Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

__
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 for CW

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> As for filters, I think I'll go with the 8-pole 400 and upgrade the
> 2.7 to the 2.8. It is my understanding that the 8-poles have zero
> offset and thus I can add these to the sub in the future without
> matching issues.

I went the 2.8, 400, 200 route in the main RX and 2.8, 400 only in
the sub RX.  If I had it to do over I would probably not bother to
"upgrade" the standard 2.7 KHz filters to 2.8.  The 2.7 is wide
enough than one can "split the difference" in order to maintain
phase lock in diversity.  If one absolutely needs better skirt
performance in a wider filter, adding the 1.8 KHz provides added
flexibility at very little added cost (replacing 2.7 with 2.8 is
$129.95, purchasing the 1.8 or 2.8 outright is only 139.95!).

73,

... Joe, W4TV



On 7/4/2012 9:15 PM, Don KB1YBG wrote:
> Hi All,
> Thanks for all the great info.  Just what I was looking for.  As suggested
> I'll scrap the dvr and add the KXV3A.  Who knows, I may add a P3 someday but
> would like to put up a receive antenna soon.  I have it on the K2 but have
> not used it.  As for filters, I think I'll go with the 8-pole 400 and
> upgrade the 2.7 to the 2.8.  It is my understanding that the 8-poles have
> zero offset and thus I can add these to the sub in the future without
> matching issues.
>
> I still have to study all the info you've provided but sounds great.
>
> Thanks and 73,
> Don
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7558628.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

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

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Jim Miller]

My filter recommendation is 8-pole (zero offset issues) 250hz and 2.8
8-pole for the same reason.

I set my filter BW in the config to the actual BW of around 350hz. I
operate 99% CW. With the subRX and the P3 I find I use the P3 for the "big
picture" on pileups and to estimate the working pattern of the DX. I crank
the main down to focus on the DX to around 200hz and use 350hz on the sub
to ID and verify the station being worked. I'm pretty successful in putting
my signal right in the DX ops path within one or two tries. That assumes
the OP is working a pattern. Sometimes they appear to be just spinning the
dial... I worked 1A0C on 40 thru 17 CW with 100w and modest antennas using
this approach in the last few days.

I have a 1Khz filter in the main that I'll remove the next time I have the
rig open. Haven't found a use for it. I'll probably sell it and use the
proceeds for a FM filter to play on 6m.

I have a subRX in with the same two filters in case I get around to do
diversity which is likely this fall.

I really like my K3!

73

jim ab3cv
__
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 for CW

[Robert G. Strickland]

Don...

Seems like all of us who contemplate buying a K3 go through the filter 
agonies. I ended up with the 2.8/8-pole, 1.9/8-pole, 500/8-pole from 
Inrad, and 200/5-pole. I am almost totally a cw type, using ssb only for 
dx that isn't on cw. While not operating ssb much, I wanted a filter 
arrangement for that mode that would be "ever lasting." For cw, the 250 
and 400 from Elecraft seemed too close together to really be different. 
I remember the 500cps mechanical filters from Collins, so that's always 
been my standard for cw. Then, for tight work, the 200 seemed nice. As 
Don says elsewhere, the dsp sets the ultimate bandwidth, while the 
filters "protect the door." That said, I wanted filters that would 
provide the same long-term satisfaction as with the ssb filters. I've 
operated more ssb than ever in the past because the K3 does such a good 
job on receiving ssb. As it stands, the K3 here is set for the future 
with no looking back.

...robert

On 7/5/2012 00:36, Don KB1YBG wrote:
>
> I'm about to place order for k3 kit.  I'm currently only interested in CW,
> have a K2 I built, and want to spring for a K3.
> Currently my order includes the KAT3, KDVR3, 400 & 250 8-pole filters.
>
> I've been following P3, 2nd Rcvr here but am not ready for those yet.  My
> question is 1) best filters for CW and 2) any other must-have options.
>
> I've read Wayne's article about filter selection but still unsure.  It seems
> the 400 and 250 may be close to same and 1000 and 400 a better choice.  Or
> 500 5-pole?  I'll be adding Sec Rx so what about filter matching?
>
> 73,
> Don,  KB1YBG
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

-- 
Robert G. Strickland, PhD, ABPH - KE2WY
rc...@verizon.net
Syracuse, New York, USA


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

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Don KB1YBG]

Hi All,
Thanks for all the great info.  Just what I was looking for.  As suggested
I'll scrap the dvr and add the KXV3A.  Who knows, I may add a P3 someday but
would like to put up a receive antenna soon.  I have it on the K2 but have
not used it.  As for filters, I think I'll go with the 8-pole 400 and
upgrade the 2.7 to the 2.8.  It is my understanding that the 8-poles have
zero offset and thus I can add these to the sub in the future without
matching issues.

I still have to study all the info you've provided but sounds great.  

Thanks and 73,
Don

--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7558628.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Andrew Moore]

I too am CW only, have had a K2 for years, and when I went for the K3, went
through the usual "which filter" questions.

I come from a 250/500 Hz background (mostly Ten-Tecs).

I opted for 200 and 400 Hz along with the stock 2.7 kHz.

My thinking was that I wanted each filter to have, more or less, a
dedicated purpose, in the interest of simplicity.

2.7k: tuning around, casual listening, not engaged in QSO, not listening to
a specific QSO
400: listening to a specific QSO or engaged in one
200: engaged in a QSO and interference occurs or I need to pull weak signal
out

I was pretty certain that 400 was something I wanted, so the real problem
was whether to get 200 or 250.  I opted for 200 because 250 seemed "too
close" and I figured that if you need to kick in the 200, you really NEED
narrow.

I have zero regrets about the setup and will likely never consider another
for my style of CW ops. Nice knowing it's done and I can focus on the QSOs
instead of the filter choices. My only concern about the 200 was that it's
so narrow that I might hear ringing or some other undesirable
characteristics. I find this to be 100%, without a doubt, false.  The 200
on the K3 performs better than any 250 I've tried on other rigs
(admittedly, all Ten-Tecs plus an IC-706MkIIG)

My 2 cents.

--Andrew, NV1B
..





On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Don KB1YBG  wrote:

>
> I'm about to place order for k3 kit.  I'm currently only interested in CW,
> have a K2 I built, and want to spring for a K3.
> Currently my order includes the KAT3, KDVR3, 400 & 250 8-pole filters.
>
> I've been following P3, 2nd Rcvr here but am not ready for those yet.  My
> question is 1) best filters for CW and 2) any other must-have options.
>
> I've read Wayne's article about filter selection but still unsure.  It
> seems
> the 400 and 250 may be close to same and 1000 and 400 a better choice.  Or
> 500 5-pole?  I'll be adding Sec Rx so what about filter matching?
>
> 73,
> Don,  KB1YBG
>
>
__
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 for CW

[Mike K2MK]

Hi Don,

You don't need the KDVR3 for CW. The memory buttons work for CW without this
option. You might want to consider the KXV3A if you plan to use a separate
receive antenna or if you plan to add a P3 someday.

I have 400Hz and 200Hz filters. For CW I usually have my bandwidth set at
200Hz or lower. I use my 400Hz filter for RTTY where my bandwidth is usually
350Hz or 400Hz. You may want to consider just the 200Hz or 250Hz filter and
buy another filter later if your operating style warrants it. The same
argument can be used for buying only the 400Hz or 500Hz filter for CW and
getting a narrower filter later. If money is not an issue buy both.

I also have the 1000Hz filter and never find myself operating with a
bandwidth in the 400Hz to 1000Hz range. One day I'll pull it out and sell
it. Had I used my own advice I could have saved some money.

73,
Mike K2MK



Don KB1YBG wrote
> 
> I'm about to place order for k3 kit.  I'm currently only interested in CW,
> have a K2 I built, and want to spring for a K3.
> Currently my order includes the KAT3, KDVR3, 400 & 250 8-pole filters.
> 
> I've been following P3, 2nd Rcvr here but am not ready for those yet.  My
> question is 1) best filters for CW and 2) any other must-have options.
> 
> I've read Wayne's article about filter selection but still unsure.  It
> seems the 400 and 250 may be close to same and 1000 and 400 a better
> choice.  Or 500 5-pole?  I'll be adding Sec Rx so what about filter
> matching?
> 
> 73,
> Don,  KB1YBG
> 


--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7558626.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Don Wilhelm]

Don,

If you are only interested in CW, why are you including the KDVR3?
All the rest sounds OK.

One suggestion that I would offer (because you are not ordering the KRX3 
immediately) is to wait on your filters and go with only the stock 2.7 
kHz filter for now.  Once you have determined what filtering widths work 
best for your operating style, then you can order the needed filter 
widths for both your main receiver and the future SubRX.

The DSP filters set the ultimate "brick wall" filter width.  The roofing 
filters protect from  Hardware AGC pumping from signals in the roofing 
filter (2.7 kHz) passband which may not be heard unless you widen the 
DSP filter.  So if your initial operation is not heavily oriented to 
contesting or DX pileups, you will be able to make better filter choices 
after you become accustomed to the K3.

The only other thing you may want to consider is the 2.7 or 2.8 kHz SSB 
roofing filter.  If you think you will in the future want to use 
diversity reception for SSB, go with the 2.8 MHz filter because it 
reportedly has zero offset - meaning a future filter purchased should 
match it.

73,
Don W3FPR
On 7/4/2012 7:36 PM, Don KB1YBG wrote:
> I'm about to place order for k3 kit.  I'm currently only interested in CW,
> have a K2 I built, and want to spring for a K3.
> Currently my order includes the KAT3, KDVR3, 400 & 250 8-pole filters.
>
> I've been following P3, 2nd Rcvr here but am not ready for those yet.  My
> question is 1) best filters for CW and 2) any other must-have options.
>
> I've read Wayne's article about filter selection but still unsure.  It seems
> the 400 and 250 may be close to same and 1000 and 400 a better choice.  Or
> 500 5-pole?  I'll be adding Sec Rx so what about filter matching?
>
> 73,
> Don,  KB1YBG
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


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

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

Re: [Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Robby.VY2SS]

I had the same dilemma. I went for the 250 and 500 for the reason you 
mentioned. I normally listen at 350 hz but 250 in contests.
 
If you are mostly interested in CW why bother with the DVR?
 
The 2nd RX is very nice but I find that I seldom use it after the first few 
months.
 
I don’t think you need to match them. I have a 400 hz filter in my sub RX and 
have had good success with diversity etc. 
 
Just my 2 cents worth.
 
73,
 
-Robby
VY2SS
 
From: Don KB1YBG [via Elecraft] 
[mailto:ml-node+s365791n7558622...@n2.nabble.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 8:37 PM
To: Robby.VY2SS
Subject: K3 for CW
 

I'm about to place order for k3 kit.  I'm currently only interested in CW, have 
a K2 I built, and want to spring for a K3. 
Currently my order includes the KAT3, KDVR3, 400 & 250 8-pole filters. 

I've been following P3, 2nd Rcvr here but am not ready for those yet.  My 
question is 1) best filters for CW and 2) any other must-have options. 

I've read Wayne's article about filter selection but still unsure.  It seems 
the 400 and 250 may be close to same and 1000 and 400 a better choice.  Or 500 
5-pole?  I'll be adding Sec Rx so what about filter matching? 

73, 
Don,  KB1YBG 


  _  

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622.html 
To start a new topic under [K3], email ml-node+s365791n36579...@n2.nabble.com 
To unsubscribe from [K3], click here 

 .
 

 NAML 
  _  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2193 / Virus Database: 2437/5111 - Release Date: 07/04/12


--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622p7558623.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

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

[Elecraft] K3 for CW

[Don KB1YBG]

I'm about to place order for k3 kit.  I'm currently only interested in CW,
have a K2 I built, and want to spring for a K3.
Currently my order includes the KAT3, KDVR3, 400 & 250 8-pole filters.

I've been following P3, 2nd Rcvr here but am not ready for those yet.  My
question is 1) best filters for CW and 2) any other must-have options.

I've read Wayne's article about filter selection but still unsure.  It seems
the 400 and 250 may be close to same and 1000 and 400 a better choice.  Or
500 5-pole?  I'll be adding Sec Rx so what about filter matching?

73,
Don,  KB1YBG


--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-for-CW-tp7558622.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

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