subject:"\[Elecraft\] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated"

Interesting conversation.  There are 2 800 lb gorillas at the top of the list 
one of them is Elecraft and many Elecraft peripherals such as the KPA500 and 
KAT500, W2 etc work great with the other.  I own several radios  from both 
companies.  they are both awesome. They both have similar management and 
engineer interaction and support.  Neither of them are Yaesu, Kenwood or Icom. 

They are both great in their own right but they are definitely different 
animals (or fruits.. as in apples and oranges) and have different advantages 
and disadvantages.

IC 7300 is in a completely different class.

I am fortunate to have both top platforms to play with.

I am looking forward to playing with a Kpod soon!

Chris
N6WM

From: Elecraft [elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] on behalf of Jim Brown 
[j...@audiosystemsgroup.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 10:02 AM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

On Tue,4/26/2016 9:31 AM, EricJ wrote:
> I stand by what I said. Comparisons between Elecraft and other amateur
> manufacturers are unfair, apples to oranges, in large part because of
> the personal interaction of Eric and Wayne with those of us who enjoy
> their products.

I don't think the comparison is at all unfair -- the owners of ICOM,
Yaesu, and Kenwood can just as easily have the same level of
communication with their customers IF THEY WANT TO.

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 ct...@ewnetinc.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Bob

I think Chris has hit it on the head.  Looking at a high-performance direct
sampling rig vs. a high-performance superhet with digital features is
looking at "definitely different animals".  Exactly the same sort of
problem that comes from a question that begins "if you could have only
one...".

I love my K3, but own a Flex 1500 as well (dipped my toe in to test the
water).  I could happily live with only the K3.  However, I haven't jumped
into the different world of the Flex 6700.  I suspect if I did, I wouldn't
want to part with either of them.  They are different tools -- each excels
in certain situations.

The key thing that strikes me as a real advantage of Elecraft is how well
an old K3 performs when upgraded. You can't do that to a Flex
1500/3000/5000.  Elecraft is the only company that consistently looks after
their customer base by providing continuous improvements.

73, Bob, WB4SON
__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Doug Turnbull

Dear OMs and YLs,
 I think Bob says it well.  How can you compare a fine radio like the
7300 with a loaded K3.   They are not the same yet the 7300 will probably
work most of the DX that the K3 will for less money.A Cadillac is no
more functional than a Chevy.   They both go from A to B.   Okay, I would
prefer a Porsche but it does the same thing but in a more stylish and
exciting manner.   Your pocketbook decides.

  A good few hams have both Flex and Elecraft radios - we are fortunate
to see these newer USA companies providing such good products.   For now I
am an Elecraft man and suspect this will be the case till the pine box but
different strokes for different folks.A TS930 will still do a good job
on HF CW.   Let us not seriously compare an entry level radio with the K3
and at the same time do not let the previous KX3 and K3 Sherwood ratings
lead one to believe that the KX3 is a better radio than the K3.   One needs
to consider the whole package and yes Elecraft provides the magic of
allowing access to the principle design engineers.   I sure do like this
company.

   73 Doug EI2CN

-Original Message-
From: Elecraft [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Bob
Sent: 26 April 2016 18:34
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

I think Chris has hit it on the head.  Looking at a high-performance direct
sampling rig vs. a high-performance superhet with digital features is
looking at "definitely different animals".  Exactly the same sort of
problem that comes from a question that begins "if you could have only
one...".

I love my K3, but own a Flex 1500 as well (dipped my toe in to test the
water).  I could happily live with only the K3.  However, I haven't jumped
into the different world of the Flex 6700.  I suspect if I did, I wouldn't
want to part with either of them.  They are different tools -- each excels
in certain situations.

The key thing that strikes me as a real advantage of Elecraft is how well
an old K3 performs when upgraded. You can't do that to a Flex
1500/3000/5000.  Elecraft is the only company that consistently looks after
their customer base by providing continuous improvements.

73, Bob, WB4SON
__
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 turnb...@net1.ie

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Jim Rodenkirch

Don: requiring a wide ranging ATU is half of the question, Don!! What is
truly "significant" is this - many hams, new or otherwise, fail to
understand whether they really need an ATU in the shack or do they really,
REALLY need an ATU out at the antenna. For me, THAT's the mystifying piece
of the "ATU question" that always shows up.

71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV


Don Wilhelm wrote
> Wunder,
> 
> The only reason I can understand is that they can get away by stating 
> that they have an internal ATU.  Sadly many hams (particularly newer 
> hams) gloss over the significance of the need for a wide range ATU.  
> They don't discover that they need an external tuner for their 
> "multiband" antenna until after they buy the transceiver and discover 
> that it is inadequate.
> 
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
> 
> On 4/25/2016 7:25 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:
>>> On Apr 25, 2016, at 4:08 PM, Wayne Burdick <

> n6kr@

> > wrote:
>>>
>>>- *Wide-range ATU (> 10:1 at 100 W; > 20:1 at low power) and two
>>> antenna jacks
>> I am really mystified about why transceivers include a 3:1 range ATU. It
>> adds $150-200 to the end cost to get an external ATU. It might add $50-75
>> to make the internal ATU wide-range. It is especially odd for an
>> entry-level rig, where people are likely to be using a low-slung dipole.
>> OK, it is very strange for the IC-7851, too.
>>
>>
> 
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:

> Elecraft@.qth

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

> lists+1215531472858-365791@.nabble





--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616743.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
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Jim Brown


On Tue,4/26/2016 12:53 PM, Doug Turnbull wrote:

Dear OMs and YLs,
  I think Bob says it well.  How can you compare a fine radio like the
7300 with a loaded K3.


How do we KNOW that it's a "fine radio?" I haven't seen a review by ARRL 
or RSGB. We have only Rob's measurements of the RECEIVER.



  They are not the same yet the 7300 will probably
work most of the DX that the K3 will for less money.A Cadillac is no
more functional than a Chevy.   They both go from A to B.   Okay, I would
prefer a Porsche but it does the same thing but in a more stylish and
exciting manner.   Your pocketbook decides.


Yep.


   A good few hams have both Flex and Elecraft radios - we are fortunate
to see these newer USA companies providing such good products.   For now I
am an Elecraft man and suspect this will be the case till the pine box but
different strokes for different folks.A TS930 will still do a good job
on HF CW.   Let us not seriously compare an entry level radio with the K3
and at the same time do not let the previous KX3 and K3 Sherwood ratings
lead one to believe that the KX3 is a better radio than the K3.   One needs
to consider the whole package and yes Elecraft provides the magic of
allowing access to the principle design engineers.


Well said, Doug.

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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Jim Brown


On Tue,4/26/2016 1:12 PM, James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr. via Elecraft wrote:

What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct entry of a 
frequency by touching the waterfall display.


To the accuracy of the width of your finger. :)   I looked at the 7300 
at Visalia. Nice LOOKING radio at an entry level price.



  The P-3 does not offer that feature,


While it doesn't have a touch screen, direct frequency entry can be done 
by moving the marker to the blip on the screen and pushing the Menu 
button. And to FAR greater precision.


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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Phil Hystad

I find it interesting that a “touch” interface seems to be popular with radios 
and some users.  It is certainly useful on a device like a smart phone and even 
a pad and some other kinds of interfaces (e.g. bank ATM screen).  But, a touch 
screen for a radio that already has uses for actual dials and buttons seems to 
me to be unnecessary.  And, that does not even consider the fact that touch 
screens need to be periodically cleaned from oily finger prints.

Of course, this is indeed an unsolicited opinion and comment.

73, phil, K7PEH


> On Apr 26, 2016, at 1:29 PM, Jim Brown  wrote:
> 
> On Tue,4/26/2016 1:12 PM, James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr. via Elecraft wrote:
>> What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct entry of a 
>> frequency by touching the waterfall display.
> 
> To the accuracy of the width of your finger. :)   I looked at the 7300 at 
> Visalia. Nice LOOKING radio at an entry level price.
> 
>>  The P-3 does not offer that feature,
> 
> While it doesn't have a touch screen, direct frequency entry can be done by 
> moving the marker to the blip on the screen and pushing the Menu button. And 
> to FAR greater precision.
> 
> 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 phys...@mac.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Wayne Burdick

The P3 also has far more screen height dedicated to the spectrum and waterfall 
displays, I believe. Aren't the 7300's displays a total of only 1/2" or 1" 
tall, depending on the display mode?

Wayne

On Apr 26, 2016, at 1:29 PM, Jim Brown  wrote:

> On Tue,4/26/2016 1:12 PM, James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr. via Elecraft wrote:
>> What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct entry of a 
>> frequency by touching the waterfall display.
> 
> To the accuracy of the width of your finger. :)   I looked at the 7300 at 
> Visalia. Nice LOOKING radio at an entry level price.
> 
>>  The P-3 does not offer that feature,
> 
> While it doesn't have a touch screen, direct frequency entry can be done by 
> moving the marker to the blip on the screen and pushing the Menu button. And 
> to FAR greater precision.
> 
> 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 n...@elecraft.com

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread John Kramer

I own Elecraft, Flex and for the past few weeks an IC-7300. Yes, Jim, it is a 
fine radio,
I have personally experienced this and own a KX3 and 3 Flex rigs to compare it 
with.
And, for what it costs, it is a damn fine rig. I don’t know of any other rig 
currently available
that is such good value for money. 
Perhaps the K3S would be better in terms of performance…but for the money, the 
IC-7300 is very capable, and has a brilliant UI.

73
John





How do we KNOW that it's a "fine radio?" I haven't seen a review by ARRL or 
RSGB. We have only Rob's measurements of the RECEIVER.


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 jkra...@iafrica.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread John Kramer


Jim, you don’t have to use your finger, you can use a stylus if you are 
pedantic about accuracy :)
and if you are a few hertz off, it just takes a gentle nudge of the VFO to get 
it spot on.


73
John


On 26 Apr 2016, at 9:45 PM, Wayne Burdick  wrote:

The P3 also has far more screen height dedicated to the spectrum and waterfall 
displays, I believe. Aren't the 7300's displays a total of only 1/2" or 1" 
tall, depending on the display mode?

Wayne

On Apr 26, 2016, at 1:29 PM, Jim Brown  wrote:

> On Tue,4/26/2016 1:12 PM, James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr. via Elecraft wrote:
>> What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct entry of a 
>> frequency by touching the waterfall display.
> 
> To the accuracy of the width of your finger. :)   I looked at the 7300 at 
> Visalia. Nice LOOKING radio at an entry level price.
> 
>> The P-3 does not offer that feature,
> 
> While it doesn't have a touch screen, direct frequency entry can be done by 
> moving the marker to the blip on the screen and pushing the Menu button. And 
> to FAR greater precision.
> 
> 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 n...@elecraft.com

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to jkra...@iafrica.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread John Kramer

Phil, in reality having a touch screen is not all that bad as you make out. You 
really need
to try it. An advantage is that it reduces the clutter on the front panel of a 
rig, by assigning 
knobs/buttons to the display screen. The one used in the IC-7300 is really good 
- sensitive
to the touch, but not quite as sensitive as some smartphones. The display of 
the 7300 is
a major leap forward from older generation 7600, 7700 rigs. Very clear and 
responsive.
And smear marks on the screen ? absolutely not - I have had my 7300 for 2 weeks 
now,
and have not yet had the need to clean the display - the display is not that 
glossy mirror 
finish like smart phones have. Besides…I prod my touch phone FAR more than I 
touch the 
screen of my 7300, and I have no problem with finger marks on my phone….maybe 
once a 
month I might clean my phone with a lint cloth…no big deal. Perhaps I might 
clean my 7300
display once every 3 months at this rate…no biggie

73
John




On 26 Apr 2016, at 9:40 PM, Phil Hystad  wrote:

I find it interesting that a “touch” interface seems to be popular with radios 
and some users.  It is certainly useful on a device like a smart phone and even 
a pad and some other kinds of interfaces (e.g. bank ATM screen).  But, a touch 
screen for a radio that already has uses for actual dials and buttons seems to 
me to be unnecessary.  And, that does not even consider the fact that touch 
screens need to be periodically cleaned from oily finger prints.

Of course, this is indeed an unsolicited opinion and comment.

73, phil, K7PEH


> On Apr 26, 2016, at 1:29 PM, Jim Brown  wrote:
> 
> On Tue,4/26/2016 1:12 PM, James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr. via Elecraft wrote:
>> What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct entry of a 
>> frequency by touching the waterfall display.
> 
> To the accuracy of the width of your finger. :)   I looked at the 7300 at 
> Visalia. Nice LOOKING radio at an entry level price.
> 
>> The P-3 does not offer that feature,
> 
> While it doesn't have a touch screen, direct frequency entry can be done by 
> moving the marker to the blip on the screen and pushing the Menu button. And 
> to FAR greater precision.
> 
> 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 phys...@mac.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 jkra...@iafrica.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Don Wilhelm

Jim,

The problem with your question is that the answer really is "it all
depends".
If the feedline from the antenna is short and relatively low loss, then
the ATU in the shack is fine.
Or if the feedline is very low loss (say open wire line, well supported
and away from conductors), then the length of the feedline does not
matter much at all, and again the ATU in the shack is the more
convenient answer.

OTOH, if the feedline is coax, and the length is for instance 150 feet,
then you would want to consider something at the antenna. Whether that
is a remote ATU, or some type of fixed matching section to bring the
antenna feedpoint impedance down to a range of 30 to 150 ohms would be
in order. With the fixed matching section (antenna loading), you would
also want to have an ATU in the shack.

I have generalized on the antenna type - but the answer remains the same
no matter what the antenna type. Look at a beam with a matching section
at the driven element - that is one example of a fixed matching section,
it will not likely be flat SWR over the entire band and an ATU in the
shack can keep the PA transistors working into a 50 ohm load as you QSY.

Another example of a fixed matching section is a matching inductor (and
possibly capacitor) that is used on many of the popular 43 foot
verticals - but you still need an ATU in the shack.

One solution for a vertical antenna is to feed it with low loss parallel
feedline. Before you scream 'heresy' because the vertical is
unbalanced, there is nothing wrong with using a parallel feedline for a
vertical, the RF will figure it out - the radials are merely the "other
half" of the monopole. If your feedline run is long, consider using
open wire line if you can, or ladderline as a close second. Yes, you
need a current choke at the vertical antenna, and that takes care of the
'balance' situation - use a 1:1 choke, you are simply choking common
mode current and not trying to match the impedance of the feedline.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/26/2016 4:09 PM, Jim Rodenkirch wrote:

Don: requiring a wide ranging ATU is half of the question, Don!! What is
truly "significant" is this - many hams, new or otherwise, fail to
understand whether they really need an ATU in the shack or do they really,
REALLY need an ATU out at the antenna. For me, THAT's the mystifying piece
of the "ATU question" that always shows up.

71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV

Don Wilhelm wrote

Wunder,

The only reason I can understand is that they can get away by stating
that they have an internal ATU. Sadly many hams (particularly newer
hams) gloss over the significance of the need for a wide range ATU.
They don't discover that they need an external tuner for their
"multiband" antenna until after they buy the transceiver and discover
that it is inadequate.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/25/2016 7:25 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:

On Apr 25, 2016, at 4:08 PM, Wayne Burdick <

n6kr@
> wrote:

- *Wide-range ATU (> 10:1 at 100 W; > 20:1 at low power) and two
antenna jacks

I am really mystified about why transceivers include a 3:1 range ATU. It
adds $150-200 to the end cost to get an external ATU. It might add $50-75
to make the internal ATU wide-range. It is especially odd for an
entry-level rig, where people are likely to be using a low-slung dipole.
OK, it is very strange for the IC-7851, too.

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:
Elecraft@.qth
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to
lists+1215531472858-365791@.nabble

--
View this message in context:
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616743.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
Message delivered to donw...@embarqmail.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Rick WA6NHC


On 4/26/2016 1:45 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:

The P3 also has far more screen height dedicated to the spectrum and waterfall displays, 
I believe. Aren't the 7300's displays a total of only 1/2" or 1" tall, 
depending on the display mode?

Wayne

Something around that size yes (played with one but not here yet to 
verify).  But that brings up another issue not mentioned.


Most rigs sit on a table for easy access by the operator hand.  That 
location does allow comfortable continuous viewing of the display for 
long term, even if the bale tips the radio up (for that it should be eye 
level).  One can equate this to the KX3 on a tabletop.  The 7300 display 
is a cute feature that should have had an external video out port.  [A 
single antenna port is another shortcoming for HF/6M operations.]


But that brings up a feature of the 7300; for $100 more (the one time 
expense of software shared with many other Icom radios) the display can 
be seen on a computer screen and the waterfall can be separate to the 
display.  In fact the waterfall can be moved to a second computer screen 
while running the control software on the primary screen.  The other 
added costs here are the computer and second screen, not trivial but 
ballpark of the P3 with SVGA and monitor.  [One can use a sound card and 
the IQ from the KX3 too, cheaper still.]


I like a filled toolbox and Elecraft is clearly my favorite brand. For 
home, I use the entire K3 line with reasonable DX success (272 entities 
worked from a dipole over the last few years).  It's a well integrated 
collection that plays EXTREMELY well.  While it isn't 'cheap' it is well 
worth the expense and I won't give it up (well maybe shift to a K3S 
later but for now no).


While I'd love to duplicate the home station in the RV (sometimes as 
brutal traveling conditions as many DXpeditions), it's more practical 
(because of antenna limitations, weight, space and budget) to use 
something else.  I considered the K3S/100 for the home station and 
moving the (stripped down) K3/100 with tuner to the RV. I looked at the 
KX3, PX3 and the amp (or even another amp brand).  I looked at other 
brands too.  The end goal is a decent, basic 100 watt radio that was low 
budget for FD and portable use with ability to use nearly anything for 
the antenna.


The IC-7300 ($1425) with the AH-4 ($239) tuner (matches nearly any 23'+ 
wire 80-6M and if enough wire or near resonance for 160M, there too) 
compares to a K3S/100 with tuner for just above half the cost. Of course 
there are other options, brands etc.  But unless something negative 
appears suddenly from the folks using them (i.e. if it barely meets 
transmitter cleanliness, horrendous key clicks) makes the Icom package 
hard to beat for a portable 100 watt second station (RV) given the 
current prices.  For that environment, I'd rather beat up a cheaper 
radio in the RV than one that costs more.  So it meets the needs; it's 
the correct tool for my need.


[If the antenna is resonant, the internal tuner can be used; another 
7300 feature is that at half power, the tuner is rated for 10:1 mismatch.]


I don't expect the stellar K3 performance from the 7300; it's NOT 
Elecraft.  However, I expect it to be more than 'adequate' and on the 
very rare occasion that I'm the DX, it will be fine.  It may well have 
to be Elecraft on the other end to complete that QSO, we'll see.  :-)


If it turns out to be a poor choice, I can sell it at a slight loss or 
(more likely) I can put it in my kids place for his use and I'll operate 
it remotely.  In any case, it's fun to play.


73,
Rick wa6nhc




__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Yep... Jim has it correct

I regularly use Marker A and B to set frequencies.  If I am doing it
right, it sets to the exact frequency even though the P3 only shows
to the 10 Hz resolution.

And I don't have to put fingerprints on my screen/bezel...

Why ANYONE wants to touch the screen they are VIEWING data on escapes me
COMPLETELY.  I want my screen ABSOLUTELY clean...

__
Clay Autery, KG5LKV
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389

On 4/26/2016 3:29 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
> On Tue,4/26/2016 1:12 PM, James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr. via Elecraft
> wrote:
>> What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct entry
>> of a frequency by touching the waterfall display.
>
> To the accuracy of the width of your finger. :)   I looked at the 7300
> at Visalia. Nice LOOKING radio at an entry level price.
>
>>   The P-3 does not offer that feature,
>
> While it doesn't have a touch screen, direct frequency entry can be
> done by moving the marker to the blip on the screen and pushing the
> Menu button. And to FAR greater precision.
>
> 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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Walter Underwood

Good touch screens have lipophobic coatings that repel finger oil. Apple 
started using them in 2009. Some screens still don’t have them. They make a big 
difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipophobicity 


wunder
K6WRU
Walter Underwood
CM87wj
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 3:01 PM, Clay Autery  wrote:
> 
> Yep... Jim has it correct
> 
> I regularly use Marker A and B to set frequencies.  If I am doing it
> right, it sets to the exact frequency even though the P3 only shows
> to the 10 Hz resolution.
> 
> And I don't have to put fingerprints on my screen/bezel...
> 
> Why ANYONE wants to touch the screen they are VIEWING data on escapes me
> COMPLETELY.  I want my screen ABSOLUTELY clean...
> 
> __
> Clay Autery, KG5LKV
> MONTAC Enterprises
> (318) 518-1389
> 
> On 4/26/2016 3:29 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
>> On Tue,4/26/2016 1:12 PM, James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr. via Elecraft
>> wrote:
>>> What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct entry
>>> of a frequency by touching the waterfall display.
>> 
>> To the accuracy of the width of your finger. :)   I looked at the 7300
>> at Visalia. Nice LOOKING radio at an entry level price.
>> 
>>>  The P-3 does not offer that feature,
>> 
>> While it doesn't have a touch screen, direct frequency entry can be
>> done by moving the marker to the blip on the screen and pushing the
>> Menu button. And to FAR greater precision.
>> 
>> 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 wun...@wunderwood.org

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Coat it however you want...  Doesn't stop dirt and grime being put on
the screen possibly scratching and/or gooping up the corners and edges...

I've been in IS/IT for 25+ years...  Screens are not for touching.

Bottom Line...  I'll stick with buttons, dials, and switches, thank you.  :)

__
Clay Autery, KG5LKV
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389

On 4/26/2016 5:24 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:
> Good touch screens have lipophobic coatings that repel finger oil. Apple 
> started using them in 2009. Some screens still don’t have them. They make a 
> big difference.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipophobicity 
> 
>
> wunder
> K6WRU
> Walter Underwood
> CM87wj
> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
>
>> On Apr 26, 2016, at 3:01 PM, Clay Autery  wrote:
>>
>> Yep... Jim has it correct
>>
>> I regularly use Marker A and B to set frequencies.  If I am doing it
>> right, it sets to the exact frequency even though the P3 only shows
>> to the 10 Hz resolution.
>>
>> And I don't have to put fingerprints on my screen/bezel...
>>
>> Why ANYONE wants to touch the screen they are VIEWING data on escapes me
>> COMPLETELY.  I want my screen ABSOLUTELY clean...
>>
>> __
>> Clay Autery, KG5LKV
>> MONTAC Enterprises
>> (318) 518-1389
>>
>>

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Edward R Cole

Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 16:12:54 -0400
From: "James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr." 
To: Elecraft Reflector 
Subject: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Just addressing the direct frequency entry issue:

I can do that with my K3 by use of Trakbox sw written by 
IK7EZN.  When coupled with the panoramic display of MAP65 I can click 
on a signal in the waterfall and click a box in MAP65 to transfer 
that to the K3.  Its not a finger touch screen but does the task 
pretty effectively.  MAP65 is a widescreen adaptation of JT65 for 
2m-eme.  MAP65 displays up to 90-KHz of bandwidth at a time and 
simultaneously decodes all JT65 signals in that bw.

Soo...I would guess all that is needed is sw to be able to accomplish 
this for HF users (maybe even that exists?? - I do so little HF).

General reply:  Found the comparison interesting.  As long as K3 has 
Elecraft support for innovation and upgrade - I have no reason to buy 
anything else - ditto KX3.

Sidenote:  Many VHF/microwave hams have tried the Flex1500 and 
abandoned it subsequently. Appears not all Flex is  of equal 
utility.  Direct VHF SDR are coming on the scene so this may affect 
the VHF-mw/eme market eventually.

For now the combo of very good HF transceiver with very good 
transverter is still setting the standards of performance for 
VHF+.  None of the all-band HF/VHF/UHF in a box come close, though 
many use them (including me in the past).

73, Ed - KL7UW
K3/10 SN 4340
KX3 SN 475
KXPA-100 SN1865
previously owned: FT-847, FT-817, FT-840, Tentec-Scout, Argonaut405, 
TS180S, IC211, SB110, etc.

==snip

What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct entry 
of a frequency by touching the waterfall display. The P-3 does not 
offer that feature, and I?m told that it will not be available. With 
due regard to the superior performance of the K-3 receivers, I 
believe that state of the art now requires a more responsive 
Panadapter for the casual operator. BTW, I?m not expecting to part 
with my K-3.

Jimmy, WA4ILO

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
"Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
dubus...@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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Kevin Stover


Ditto we still don't use them.
Our users have a choice of laptop or iPad/Surface other than a desktop 
thin client on our VM Ware network.
90% choose the Win7 laptop. They're more expensive, slower, and break 
more often than the thin client but not as often as the iPads. The 
Surface's are new so no experience base with them yet. Our hardware 
group absolutely hate touch screens. I'm a Network Engineer...I have no 
use for them either.


My brother does IT for a school district that equipped all of their 
middle school kids with cutting edge iPads. 700 of them. My brother had 
to get good at replacing the very expensive coated touch screens that 
the evil empire said mere mortals couldn't replace. He got no help from 
Apple other than expensive parts. That experiment lasted three years and 
they switched to Chrome books.


I guarantee as sure as I'm sitting here *that touch screen will fail 
within a year...if not sooner*, and you've got no chance to fix it 
yourself. I can order parts from Elecraft for all my rigs and fix them. 
No sweat.


I'm curious why is direct sampling SDR's like the 7300 are supposed to 
be the second coming why Icom stuck with the traditional superhet 
architecture on it's "flagship" 7851? Maybe they realize the technology 
is at least 5 years away from being competitive. Everybody is ignoring 
W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC overload.


On 4/26/2016 5:28 PM, Clay Autery wrote:

Coat it however you want...  Doesn't stop dirt and grime being put on
the screen possibly scratching and/or gooping up the corners and edges...

I've been in IS/IT for 25+ years...  Screens are not for touching.

Bottom Line...  I'll stick with buttons, dials, and switches, thank you.  :)

__
Clay Autery, KG5LKV
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389




--
R. Kevin Stover
AC0H
ARRL
FISTS #11993
SKCC #215
NAQCC #3441



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Richard Fjeld


Here is a YouTube video of a K3 with a touch screen monitor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6usy-0257NQ

Dick, n0ce


On 4/26/2016 4:16 PM, John Kramer wrote:

Phil, in reality having a touch screen is not all that bad as you make out. You 
really need
to try it. An advantage is that it reduces the clutter on the front panel of a 
rig, by assigning
knobs/buttons to the display screen. The one used in the IC-7300 is really good 
- sensitive
to the touch, but not quite as sensitive as some smartphones. The display of 
the 7300 is
a major leap forward from older generation 7600, 7700 rigs. Very clear and 
responsive.
And smear marks on the screen ? absolutely not - I have had my 7300 for 2 weeks 
now,
and have not yet had the need to clean the display - the display is not that 
glossy mirror
finish like smart phones have. Besides…I prod my touch phone FAR more than I 
touch the
screen of my 7300, and I have no problem with finger marks on my phone….maybe 
once a
month I might clean my phone with a lint cloth…no big deal. Perhaps I might 
clean my 7300
display once every 3 months at this rate…no biggie

73
John







__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Tony Estep

> "25+ years  Screens are not for touching..."


H. By one estimate, there were more than 2.5 billion smartphones in use
last year (and more today, of course), all with touchscreens. If each
screen is used just for a few minutes a day, the total usage-years is in
the hundreds of millions.

Touchscreen-equipped devices, including phones and tablets, are among the
most widely-used consumer electronic devices of all time. If there is some
undiscovered flaw in the concept of a touchscreen, it hasn't shown up so
far.

Tony KT0NY
__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Gary

Hmmhow long is the life expectancy of a smart phone?

My k3 ain't goin anywhere
Gary

-Original Message-
From: "Tony Estep" 
Sent: ‎27/‎04/‎2016 10:21 AM
To: "Elecraft" 
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

> "25+ years  Screens are not for touching..."

H. By one estimate, there were more than 2.5 billion smartphones in use
last year (and more today, of course), all with touchscreens. If each
screen is used just for a few minutes a day, the total usage-years is in
the hundreds of millions.

Touchscreen-equipped devices, including phones and tablets, are among the
most widely-used consumer electronic devices of all time. If there is some
undiscovered flaw in the concept of a touchscreen, it hasn't shown up so
far.

Tony KT0NY
__
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 vk1zzg...@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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Bill Frantz

I think it is better to compare the IC-7300 with the KX3 rather 
than the K3(S) as their price and performance are a bit closer.


As for touchscreens, they don't like my fingers and frequently 
don't recognize when I them. (My fingers are big so where is 
another problem.) Working with my iPhone is always a bit painful 
compared with the mouse on my computer.


73 Bill AE6JV

---
Bill Frantz| Since the IBM Selectric, keyboards have gotten
408-356-8506   | steadily worse. Now we have touchscreen keyboards.
www.pwpconsult.com | Can we make something even worse?

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Nr4c

Hmmm.  A 100 Watt KX3 isn't that far from the price of a 100 Watt K3S. 

Sent from my iPhone
...nr4c. bill


> On Apr 26, 2016, at 8:28 PM, Bill Frantz  wrote:
> 
> I think it is better to compare the IC-7300 with the KX3 rather than the 
> K3(S) as their price and performance are a bit closer.
> 
> As for touchscreens, they don't like my fingers and frequently don't 
> recognize when I them. (My fingers are big so where is another problem.) 
> Working with my iPhone is always a bit painful compared with the mouse on my 
> computer.
> 
> 73 Bill AE6JV
> 
> ---
> Bill Frantz| Since the IBM Selectric, keyboards have gotten
> 408-356-8506   | steadily worse. Now we have touchscreen keyboards.
> www.pwpconsult.com | Can we make something even worse?
> 
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to n...@widomaker.com

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Walter Underwood

IBM has been rolling out Macs as fast as they can, about 2000 per week. The 
tech support savings are massive. And Macs have long been at the top of the 
list for most reliable laptops. 

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2998315/apple-mac/every-mac-we-buy-is-making-and-saving-ibm-money-ibm.html
 


Our family has been using iPhones and iPads for a decade and never had a 
touchscreen failure, even with our developmentally-disabled adult son. He’s a 
wizard with the touch screen, but tough on hardware.

Also, please sign with your call sign.

wunder
K6WRU
Walter Underwood
CM87wj
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 5:08 PM, Kevin Stover  wrote:
> 
> Ditto we still don't use them.
> Our users have a choice of laptop or iPad/Surface other than a desktop thin 
> client on our VM Ware network.
> 90% choose the Win7 laptop. They're more expensive, slower, and break more 
> often than the thin client but not as often as the iPads. The Surface's are 
> new so no experience base with them yet. Our hardware group absolutely hate 
> touch screens. I'm a Network Engineer...I have no use for them either.
> 
> My brother does IT for a school district that equipped all of their middle 
> school kids with cutting edge iPads. 700 of them. My brother had to get good 
> at replacing the very expensive coated touch screens that the evil empire 
> said mere mortals couldn't replace. He got no help from Apple other than 
> expensive parts. That experiment lasted three years and they switched to 
> Chrome books.
> 
> I guarantee as sure as I'm sitting here *that touch screen will fail within a 
> year...if not sooner*, and you've got no chance to fix it yourself. I can 
> order parts from Elecraft for all my rigs and fix them. No sweat.
> 
> I'm curious why is direct sampling SDR's like the 7300 are supposed to be the 
> second coming why Icom stuck with the traditional superhet architecture on 
> it's "flagship" 7851? Maybe they realize the technology is at least 5 years 
> away from being competitive. Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC 
> overload.
> 
> On 4/26/2016 5:28 PM, Clay Autery wrote:
>> Coat it however you want...  Doesn't stop dirt and grime being put on
>> the screen possibly scratching and/or gooping up the corners and edges...
>> 
>> I've been in IS/IT for 25+ years...  Screens are not for touching.
>> 
>> Bottom Line...  I'll stick with buttons, dials, and switches, thank you.  :)
>> 
>> __
>> Clay Autery, KG5LKV
>> MONTAC Enterprises
>> (318) 518-1389
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> R. Kevin Stover
> AC0H
> ARRL
> FISTS #11993
> SKCC #215
> NAQCC #3441
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to wun...@wunderwood.org

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Wes

My son is the IT Manager for a midsized nationwide corporation.  He doesn't like 
touch screens either.


But he uses iPhones and iPads.  Go figure.

On 4/26/2016 3:28 PM, Clay Autery wrote:

Coat it however you want...  Doesn't stop dirt and grime being put on
the screen possibly scratching and/or gooping up the corners and edges...

I've been in IS/IT for 25+ years...  Screens are not for touching.




__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Maybe apples and oranges is not the best comparison.. how about this

Elecraft K3s = Porsche 
Flex 6000 = Tesla
IC-7300 = Nissan Leaf
Kenwood TS-590 =Toyota pickup

~C./WM

-Original Message-
From: Elecraft [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Kevin 
Stover
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 5:08 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Ditto we still don't use them.
Our users have a choice of laptop or iPad/Surface other than a desktop thin 
client on our VM Ware network.
90% choose the Win7 laptop. They're more expensive, slower, and break more 
often than the thin client but not as often as the iPads. The Surface's are new 
so no experience base with them yet. Our hardware group absolutely hate touch 
screens. I'm a Network Engineer...I have no use for them either.

My brother does IT for a school district that equipped all of their middle 
school kids with cutting edge iPads. 700 of them. My brother had to get good at 
replacing the very expensive coated touch screens that the evil empire said 
mere mortals couldn't replace. He got no help from Apple other than expensive 
parts. That experiment lasted three years and they switched to Chrome books.

I guarantee as sure as I'm sitting here *that touch screen will fail within a 
year...if not sooner*, and you've got no chance to fix it yourself. I can order 
parts from Elecraft for all my rigs and fix them. 
No sweat.

I'm curious why is direct sampling SDR's like the 7300 are supposed to be the 
second coming why Icom stuck with the traditional superhet architecture on it's 
"flagship" 7851? Maybe they realize the technology is at least 5 years away 
from being competitive. Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC 
overload.

On 4/26/2016 5:28 PM, Clay Autery wrote:
> Coat it however you want...  Doesn't stop dirt and grime being put on 
> the screen possibly scratching and/or gooping up the corners and edges...
>
> I've been in IS/IT for 25+ years...  Screens are not for touching.
>
> Bottom Line...  I'll stick with buttons, dials, and switches, thank 
> you.  :)
>
> __
> Clay Autery, KG5LKV
> MONTAC Enterprises
> (318) 518-1389
>

--
R. Kevin Stover
AC0H
ARRL
FISTS #11993
SKCC #215
NAQCC #3441

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
__
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 ct...@ewnetinc.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Mike Dodd


On 4/26/2016 8:35 PM, Nr4c wrote:

Hmmm.  A 100 Watt KX3 isn't that far from the price of a 100 Watt K3S.


Indeed. However, after using my KX3/PX3/KPXA100 for thousands of Qs, I 
bought a K3s.


The KX3 is retired into shielded wrappings, in case of an emergency. I 
sold the PX3 and KXPA100.


The K3s has features that make it far nicer for me than the KX3 setup:

1. Built-in amp with temperature-controlled cooling fans. The KXPA100 
was OK, but I never liked the exposed heat sink as the sole means of 
cooling.


2. Front/rear mic/speaker/phones jacks. I use a Heil boom mic and a 
Yamaha headset. With the KX3, I needed to unplug/plug the mic/phones 
connections on the side panel. Then I had to turn on/off the mic bias 
and adjust the mic gain for the currently plugged mic. never more with 
the K3s.


Plus I had to crawl under my desk to swap the foot switch plug into a 
cable jack to match the current mic. The K3's rear panel PTT jack 
eliminates this hassle.


To use AFSK-A with the KX3, I needed to unplug/plug yet another pair of 
mic/phones plugs to the SignaLink USB codec. The K3's built-in codec is 
wonderful!


Bottom line: If I'd had the money and if the "s" were available in 2013, 
I would have gone with the K3s. I'm not sorry I started with the KX3 
gear, but the K3s setup gives me a lot more.


--
73, Mike N4CF
Louisa County, VA USA
Elecraft K3s/100
Carolina Windom up 45'
http://n4cf.mdodd.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Chortek Bob via Elecraft

 blockquote, div.yahoo_quoted { margin-left: 0 !important; border-left:1px 
#715FFA solid !important; padding-left:1ex !important; background-color:white 
!important; }  Depends how many times you drop it.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Tuesday, April 26, 2016, 5:32 PM, Gary  wrote:

Hmmhow long is the life expectancy of a smart phone?

My k3 ain't goin anywhere
Gary

-Original Message-
From: "Tony Estep" 
Sent: ‎27/‎04/‎2016 10:21 AM
To: "Elecraft" 
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

> "25+ years  Screens are not for touching..."


H. By one estimate, there were more than 2.5 billion smartphones in use
last year (and more today, of course), all with touchscreens. If each
screen is used just for a few minutes a day, the total usage-years is in
the hundreds of millions.

Touchscreen-equipped devices, including phones and tablets, are among the
most widely-used consumer electronic devices of all time. If there is some
undiscovered flaw in the concept of a touchscreen, it hasn't shown up so
far.

Tony KT0NY
__
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 vk1zzg...@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 bobchor...@yahoo.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Are you trying to be obtuse, or is it an accident.

I carry a smart phone, too.  For a manageable sized phone, the touch
screen is a necessity, and the crap on the screen STILL bugs the crap
out of me.

I do NOT however carry and HF-6M radio around in my pocket, so it does
NOT need a touch screen, and one isn't desired.

I never SAID there was a FLAW in the "concept".  The concept is fine, I
just don't like them... and I have LOTS of company.

You want a touch screen... cool, buy one  but I wouldn't be your
IS/IT support...  I HIGHLY discourage the use of touch screens by my
clients... and charge a premium to those who INSIST on using them.

"That's why they have vanilla and chocolate ice cream."  -- Mamaw Autery
in response to a discussion about preferences on one thing or another.

__
Clay Autery, KG5LKV
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389

On 4/26/2016 7:20 PM, Tony Estep wrote:
>> "25+ years  Screens are not for touching..."
>
> H. By one estimate, there were more than 2.5 billion smartphones in use
> last year (and more today, of course), all with touchscreens. If each
> screen is used just for a few minutes a day, the total usage-years is in
> the hundreds of millions.
>
> Touchscreen-equipped devices, including phones and tablets, are among the
> most widely-used consumer electronic devices of all time. If there is some
> undiscovered flaw in the concept of a touchscreen, it hasn't shown up so
> far.
>
> Tony KT0NY

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Would not use an Apple product if it was given to me free...   ;-)

__
Clay Autery, KG5LKV
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389

On 4/26/2016 7:43 PM, Wes wrote:
> My son is the IT Manager for a midsized nationwide corporation.  He
> doesn't like touch screens either.
>
> But he uses iPhones and iPads.  Go figure.
>
> On 4/26/2016 3:28 PM, Clay Autery wrote:
>> Coat it however you want...  Doesn't stop dirt and grime being put on
>> the screen possibly scratching and/or gooping up the corners and
>> edges...
>>
>> I've been in IS/IT for 25+ years...  Screens are not for touching.

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft

> I'm curious why is direct sampling SDR's like the 7300 are supposed to be the 
> second coming why Icom stuck with the traditional superhet architecture on 
> it's "flagship" 7851? Maybe they realize the technology is at least 5 years 
> away from being competitive. Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC 
> overload



What suggests you that direct-sampling SDRs are 5 years away from being 
competitive? Elecraft will likely have moved to this architecture in less time 
than that to remain competitive. I suspect that one of the reason Icom stuck 
with the superheat on the IC-7851 is because this product was already in 
production by the time they made the decision to design a direct-sampling SDR. 
Now this is all speculation. What matters is that many of us who have high-end 
direct-sampling SDRs haven't experienced the overload issues. I don't doubt 
some operators have (maybe W4TV one of them), but these are probably isolated 
case. BTW, all receivers have weakness (every design has trade-offs), including 
the ones designed by Elecraft (I can hear images on KX3 sometimes). Just that 
you know, K9CT has one of the finest contesting station in the US. He has 
switched to direct-sampling SDRs (Flex-6700). Just ask him if this architecture 
is 5 years away from being competitive.

73,
Robert-KP4Y/W4


Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 8:08 PM, Kevin Stover  wrote:
> 
> Ditto we still don't use them.
> Our users have a choice of laptop or iPad/Surface other than a desktop thin 
> client on our VM Ware network.
> 90% choose the Win7 laptop. They're more expensive, slower, and break more 
> often than the thin client but not as often as the iPads. The Surface's are 
> new so no experience base with them yet. Our hardware group absolutely hate 
> touch screens. I'm a Network Engineer...I have no use for them either.
> 
> My brother does IT for a school district that equipped all of their middle 
> school kids with cutting edge iPads. 700 of them. My brother had to get good 
> at replacing the very expensive coated touch screens that the evil empire 
> said mere mortals couldn't replace. He got no help from Apple other than 
> expensive parts. That experiment lasted three years and they switched to 
> Chrome books.
> 
> I guarantee as sure as I'm sitting here *that touch screen will fail within a 
> year...if not sooner*, and you've got no chance to fix it yourself. I can 
> order parts from Elecraft for all my rigs and fix them. No sweat.
> 
> I'm curious why is direct sampling SDR's like the 7300 are supposed to be the 
> second coming why Icom stuck with the traditional superhet architecture on 
> it's "flagship" 7851? Maybe they realize the technology is at least 5 years 
> away from being competitive. Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC 
> overload.
> 
>> On 4/26/2016 5:28 PM, Clay Autery wrote:
>> Coat it however you want...  Doesn't stop dirt and grime being put on
>> the screen possibly scratching and/or gooping up the corners and edges...
>> 
>> I've been in IS/IT for 25+ years...  Screens are not for touching.
>> 
>> Bottom Line...  I'll stick with buttons, dials, and switches, thank you.  :)
>> 
>> __
>> Clay Autery, KG5LKV
>> MONTAC Enterprises
>> (318) 518-1389
> 
> 
> -- 
> R. Kevin Stover
> AC0H
> ARRL
> FISTS #11993
> SKCC #215
> NAQCC #3441
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> __
> 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 k...@yahoo.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Joe Subich, W4TV


On 4/26/2016 8:08 PM, Kevin Stover wrote:

Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC overload.


I can't take credit for that ... the warning comes from some of the
best RF designers in the world.  Direct sampling receivers are very
good in controlled situations.  Unfortunately, those who are used to
analog superhetrodyne receivers do not recognize the symptoms of ADC
overload/overflow in many cases.

The overflow can show up as an occasional click or pop if the number
and strength of signals continues to increase conditions go down hill
very rapidly.  The best 16 bit ADC based SDRs can and do show very
significant overload issues when run without effective front end
bandpass filtering in high RF environments (160 meters near AM BC
stations, 40 meters in Europe, 160 meters in New England during a
contest, etc.).

One can apply filtering (which Icom seems to have done in the 7300),
apply attenuation (which Flex seems to have done in the 6000 series)
or both.  Filtering limits the number and width of "slice receivers"
while attenuation kills weak signal performance.

I find Icom's implementation interesting in that they are using the
technology as a single band, single channel receiver (they could have
added Dual RX within the same band at practically no hardware cost) - an 
application where, with tight bandpass filtering, direct sampling

may be ready to compete as indicated by the fact that Sherwood's tests
place the 7300's above some "good" conventional rigs like the Ten-Tec
Eagle, Kenwood TS-590SG and TS-990 in MDS, LO Phase noise and IMD DR.

However, for the ultimate multi-channel receiver, ADC technology is
still 4 to 6 bits short as witnessed by the need for 12 to 20 dB of
attenuation in the Flex 6000 or the 0 to 30 dB electronically stepped
attenuators in some of the other products like the Anan, Hermes, etc.
Sherwood's results hint at this when comparing the MDS with the
preamp on and preamp off ... even with its preamp on the Flex 6700
MDS is the same as the K3S with *no preamp*!

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 8:08 PM, Kevin Stover  wrote:

> I'm curious why is direct sampling SDR's like the 7300 are supposed to be the 
> second coming why Icom stuck with the traditional superhet architecture on 
> it's "flagship" 7851? Maybe they realize the technology is at least 5 years 
> away from being competitive. Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC 
> overload.

What suggests you that direct-sampling SDRs are 5 years away from being 
competitive? Elecraft will likely have moved to this architecture in less time 
than that to remain competitive. I suspect that one of the reason Icom stuck 
with the superheat on the IC-7851 is because this product was already in 
production by the time they made the decision to design a direct-sampling SDR. 
Now this is all speculation. What matters is that many of us who have high-end 
direct-sampling SDRs haven't experienced the overload issues. I don't doubt 
some operators have (maybe W4TV one of them), but these are probably isolated 
case. BTW, all receivers have weakness (every design has trade-offs), including 
the ones designed by Elecraft (I can hear images on KX3 sometimes). Just that 
you know, K9CT has one of the finest contesting station in the US. He has 
switched to direct-sampling SDRs (Flex-6700). Just ask him if this architecture 
is 5 years away from being competitive.

73,
Robert-KP4Y/W4
Sent from my iPhone

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Joe Subich, W4TV

On 4/26/2016 10:15 PM, Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft wrote:

Just that you know, K9CT has one of the finest contesting station in

> the US. He has switched to direct-sampling SDRs (Flex-6700). Just ask
> him if this architecture is 5 years away from being competitive.

While I do not know for sure, I suspect K9CT is using bandpass filters
and stubs to prevent inter-station interference in his multi-multi
operation just as he did when he used conventional transceivers.  With
properly designed bandpass filters, stubs and the preselectors in his
6700s he's not likely to have a severe overload issue unless he happens
to be close to some high power AM stations (on 160 meters) and even
then indications are that a good highpass filter and 10 to 15 dB of
attenuation will resolve the problems with a 16 bit ADC.

I have not heard any reports of large multi-multi stations switching to
direct sampling transceivers in areas of Europe where the 40 meter SW
broadcast was a problem for many decades.

The point is that direct conversion receivers need either good filters
*ahead of the ADC*, attenuation or both to prevent problems.  When one
uses a Flex 6300 *which has no preselector*,  Flex 6500 on multiple
bands (which bypasses the preselector), an ELAD DUO which has no
preselector, etc. one must make a choice between sensitivity and
dynamic range.  The ARRL lab tests show that, Sherwood's tests show
that, Adam Farson's noise power ratio testing shows that, and other
reviewers hint at the problem but they simply don't understand direct
sampling well enough to recognize its limits when they see them.

One needs to understand the nature of direct sampling receivers and the
way they react to overload to recognize the behavior but the test data
is unequivocal.  16 bit ADCs are probably 4 to 6 bits "short" of being
able to handle worst case signal levels while simultaneously providing
maximum sensitivity (MDS of -135 to -140 dBm in 500 Hz) and fully broad
band performance (multiple slice receivers on multiple amateur bands).

73,

  ... Joe, W4TV

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Barry LaZar


Joe,
I agree with you basically. I think it's just the manor in which you 
state the problem.


You touch on the real problem 14-16 bits of sampling vice having 
more bits in the sample. It's not specifically the direct sampling 
architecture. I think the radio companies just can't get 24 bit ADCs 
fast enough to do direct sampling at commodity pricing which would allow 
direct sampling with out the baggage. If I can do 24 bit sampling and 
high and low pass filtering, I can simplify receiver design AND have a 
an acceptable dynamic range. Multiple instances of DSP processing of the 
24 bit samples will allow as many virtual receivers, slices, as 
processor power will allow. My guess is we are on the verge of getting 
to where we would like to be.


Flex is using a 16 bit ADC and I'm not sure what the 7300 is using, 
but I infer it, too, is 16 bit. I do believe that the Elecraft 
architectures are all based on 24 bit sampling. The Elecraft designs 
should be tolerant to serious environmental abuse short of a local 
thunderstorm.


Our comments reflect a rigorous tech discussion. But, there is 
another issue that has not been discussed in anything I've read so far, 
ultimate filter rejection. Flex, Kenwood, and Elecraft have filtering 
that runs in the 100 db region, or a little better. I saw that the 
IC-7300 is about 20 db worse. What that means if you are a CW operator, 
serious or otherwise, and there is a pile up on a DX station, a contest, 
or just a really busy weekend, you may have problems from strong 
stations not too far away while you are trying to work an S1-3 station. 
SSB operators have other problems like splatter and no amount of superb 
design will fix that.


I'm pleased there is a vigorous discussion on the new radios. It 
helps push the designers and the technology.


73,
Barry
K3NDM


-- Original Message --
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" 
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: 4/26/2016 10:10:32 PM an
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated


On 4/26/2016 8:08 PM, Kevin Stover wrote:

Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC overload.


I can't take credit for that ... the warning comes from some of the
best RF designers in the world.  Direct sampling receivers are very
good in controlled situations.  Unfortunately, those who are used to
analog superhetrodyne receivers do not recognize the symptoms of ADC
overload/overflow in many cases.

The overflow can show up as an occasional click or pop if the number
and strength of signals continues to increase conditions go down hill
very rapidly.  The best 16 bit ADC based SDRs can and do show very
significant overload issues when run without effective front end
bandpass filtering in high RF environments (160 meters near AM BC
stations, 40 meters in Europe, 160 meters in New England during a
contest, etc.).

One can apply filtering (which Icom seems to have done in the 7300),
apply attenuation (which Flex seems to have done in the 6000 series)
or both.  Filtering limits the number and width of "slice receivers"
while attenuation kills weak signal performance.

I find Icom's implementation interesting in that they are using the
technology as a single band, single channel receiver (they could have
added Dual RX within the same band at practically no hardware cost) - 
an application where, with tight bandpass filtering, direct sampling

may be ready to compete as indicated by the fact that Sherwood's tests
place the 7300's above some "good" conventional rigs like the Ten-Tec
Eagle, Kenwood TS-590SG and TS-990 in MDS, LO Phase noise and IMD DR.

However, for the ultimate multi-channel receiver, ADC technology is
still 4 to 6 bits short as witnessed by the need for 12 to 20 dB of
attenuation in the Flex 6000 or the 0 to 30 dB electronically stepped
attenuators in some of the other products like the Anan, Hermes, etc.
Sherwood's results hint at this when comparing the MDS with the
preamp on and preamp off ... even with its preamp on the Flex 6700
MDS is the same as the K3S with *no preamp*!

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV

__
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 k3...@comcast.net


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Joet, interesting comments but perhaps misses a few conditions of the higher 
end Direct conversion systems.  And thanks to Eric for allowing a relatively 
architecturally agnostic discussion on the reflector.


My responses below.  I will stick to my guns that both platforms have different 
advantages and disadvantages..   and its probably most accurate to leave it at 
that.


While I do not know for sure, I suspect K9CT is using bandpass filters and 
stubs to prevent inter-station interference in his multi-multi operation just 
as he did when he used conventional transceivers.  With properly designed 
bandpass filters, stubs and the preselectors in his 6700s he's not likely to 
have a severe overload issue unless he happens to be close to some high power 
AM stations (on 160 meters) and even then indications are that a good highpass 
filter and 10 to 15 dB of attenuation will resolve the problems with a 16 bit 
ADC.

N6WM-  Most certainly.  I have operated a flex 6500 in one major multi-op 
contest at N6RO and a 6700 in another one.  In both cases external filtering 
was used.  It was unbothered by near field interstation interference any more 
or less than a K3, and I did operate 40m for WPX SSB (and nearly broke the 
station record for that band).

I have not heard any reports of large multi-multi stations switching to direct 
sampling transceivers in areas of Europe where the 40 meter SW broadcast was a 
problem for many decades.

N6WM- This is a good point I would be interested in hearing data or testing on 
this.

The point is that direct conversion receivers need either good filters *ahead 
of the ADC*, attenuation or both to prevent problems.  When one uses a Flex 
6300 *which has no preselector*,  Flex 6500 on multiple bands (which bypasses 
the preselector), an ELAD DUO which has no preselector, etc. one must make a 
choice between sensitivity and dynamic range.  The ARRL lab tests show that, 
Sherwood's tests show that, Adam Farson's noise power ratio testing shows that, 
and other reviewers hint at the problem but they simply don't understand direct 
sampling well enough to recognize its limits when they see them.

N6WM- ah a good point.  These options are available in one form or another 
(external filtering)  and of course we use this with our K3's or any radio in a 
multi.  Also, many of the high end ones have 2 scu (6700) allowing dual band 
operation simultaneously without disengaging the band preselectors.

One needs to understand the nature of direct sampling receivers and the way 
they react to overload to recognize the behavior but the test data is 
unequivocal.  16 bit ADCs are probably 4 to 6 bits "short" of being able to 
handle worst case signal levels while simultaneously providing maximum 
sensitivity (MDS of -135 to -140 dBm in 500 Hz) and fully broad band 
performance (multiple slice receivers on multiple amateur bands).

N6WM-  This does create some limits, but In the case of the 6700 you can have 
multiple slices on 2 simultaneous bands and avoid disengaging the 
preselectors  how many does one need to operate at a time?  2 needed for 
SO2R.

N6WM- these are different architectures with different challenges.  The Direct 
conversion architecture is the new kid on the block and many of the features to 
enhance them are not there yet or are in an infant state.  That does not say 
that the technology is unusable or if one or the other is better.. they are 
just different.   

Make no mistake.. I love my Elecraft K line.  It has won me many contests and 
has served me well for (omg!) 8 years. I remember all the different mods we 
needed to add to the K3 in the beginning.. and the numerous software updates 
that fixed bugs and added features I also find the higher end Direct 
conversion systems fascinating as they solve a number of challenges I have run 
into over the years and they are on the fast track to coming of age.   

 Also make no mistake..  despite the differences in architecture, challenges 
and advantages, both the systems in this email are competition grade 
transceivers.  Check 3830. 

Ineresting stuff!




__
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 ct...@ewnetinc.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Sorry Freudian slip near the end corrected..   direct conversion changed to 
direct sampling ;-).

-Original Message-
From: Elecraft [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
Tate - N6WM
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 9:08 PM
To: Joe Subich, W4TV ; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Joet, interesting comments but perhaps misses a few conditions of the higher 
end Direct conversion systems.  And thanks to Eric for allowing a relatively 
architecturally agnostic discussion on the reflector.

My responses below.  I will stick to my guns that both platforms have different 
advantages and disadvantages..   and its probably most accurate to leave it at 
that.

While I do not know for sure, I suspect K9CT is using bandpass filters and 
stubs to prevent inter-station interference in his multi-multi operation just 
as he did when he used conventional transceivers.  With properly designed 
bandpass filters, stubs and the preselectors in his 6700s he's not likely to 
have a severe overload issue unless he happens to be close to some high power 
AM stations (on 160 meters) and even then indications are that a good highpass 
filter and 10 to 15 dB of attenuation will resolve the problems with a 16 bit 
ADC.

N6WM-  Most certainly.  I have operated a flex 6500 in one major multi-op 
contest at N6RO and a 6700 in another one.  In both cases external filtering 
was used.  It was unbothered by near field interstation interference any more 
or less than a K3, and I did operate 40m for WPX SSB (and nearly broke the 
station record for that band).

I have not heard any reports of large multi-multi stations switching to direct 
sampling transceivers in areas of Europe where the 40 meter SW broadcast was a 
problem for many decades.

N6WM- This is a good point I would be interested in hearing data or testing on 
this.

The point is that direct conversion receivers need either good filters *ahead 
of the ADC*, attenuation or both to prevent problems.  When one uses a Flex 
6300 *which has no preselector*,  Flex 6500 on multiple bands (which bypasses 
the preselector), an ELAD DUO which has no preselector, etc. one must make a 
choice between sensitivity and dynamic range.  The ARRL lab tests show that, 
Sherwood's tests show that, Adam Farson's noise power ratio testing shows that, 
and other reviewers hint at the problem but they simply don't understand direct 
sampling well enough to recognize its limits when they see them.

N6WM- ah a good point.  These options are available in one form or another 
(external filtering)  and of course we use this with our K3's or any radio in a 
multi.  Also, many of the high end ones have 2 scu (6700) allowing dual band 
operation simultaneously without disengaging the band preselectors.

One needs to understand the nature of direct sampling receivers and the way 
they react to overload to recognize the behavior but the test data is 
unequivocal.  16 bit ADCs are probably 4 to 6 bits "short" of being able to 
handle worst case signal levels while simultaneously providing maximum 
sensitivity (MDS of -135 to -140 dBm in 500 Hz) and fully broad band 
performance (multiple slice receivers on multiple amateur bands).

N6WM-  This does create some limits, but In the case of the 6700 you can have 
multiple slices on 2 simultaneous bands and avoid disengaging the 
preselectors  how many does one need to operate at a time?  2 needed for 
SO2R.

N6WM- these are different architectures with different challenges.  The Direct 
conversion architecture is the new kid on the block and many of the features to 
enhance them are not there yet or are in an infant state.  That does not say 
that the technology is unusable or if one or the other is better.. they are 
just different.   

Make no mistake.. I love my Elecraft K line.  It has won me many contests and 
has served me well for (omg!) 8 years. I remember all the different mods we 
needed to add to the K3 in the beginning.. and the numerous software updates 
that fixed bugs and added features I also find the higher end Direct 
sampling systems fascinating as they solve a number of challenges I have run 
into over the years and they are on the fast track to coming of age.   

 Also make no mistake..  despite the differences in architecture, challenges 
and advantages, both the systems in this email are competition grade 
transceivers.  Check 3830. 

Ineresting stuff!

__
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 ct...@ewnetinc.com 
__
Elecraft mailing l

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-26 Thread Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft

Joe, I have an MSEE, so I perfectly understand the design aspects and math 
behind a direct-sampling SDR. That's why I stated previously that this 
architecture has some wrinkles that will eventually be ironed out as more 
capable and affordable ( this is a key factor to be competitive in the  amateur 
radio market) ADC and DSP chips become available in the future. Also, just that 
we are clear, I'm familiar with the way how the ADC overload issue that you are 
describing would manifest in a direct-sampling SDR. However, I'm yet to 
experience this issue during actual operating conditions. 

BTW, I don't see the need for preselector filter as a deficiency in a 
direct-sampling architecture. That would be sort of equivalent to seeing the 
need for roofing filters in the K3 to put out impressive blocking dynamic range 
numbers as a deficiency.

Finally, I have seen great reviews about the Flex-6300, and I'm actually 
impressed by the fact that it has not preselector filters. However, as 
satisfied Elecraft customer, I'm confident they will be able to produce a much 
better implementation of direct-sampling radio in the no so distant future.

73,
Robert-KP4Y/W4

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 11:35 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 4/26/2016 10:15 PM, Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft wrote:
>> Just that you know, K9CT has one of the finest contesting station in
> > the US. He has switched to direct-sampling SDRs (Flex-6700). Just ask
> > him if this architecture is 5 years away from being competitive.
> 
> While I do not know for sure, I suspect K9CT is using bandpass filters
> and stubs to prevent inter-station interference in his multi-multi
> operation just as he did when he used conventional transceivers.  With
> properly designed bandpass filters, stubs and the preselectors in his
> 6700s he's not likely to have a severe overload issue unless he happens
> to be close to some high power AM stations (on 160 meters) and even
> then indications are that a good highpass filter and 10 to 15 dB of
> attenuation will resolve the problems with a 16 bit ADC.
> 
> I have not heard any reports of large multi-multi stations switching to
> direct sampling transceivers in areas of Europe where the 40 meter SW
> broadcast was a problem for many decades.
> 
> The point is that direct conversion receivers need either good filters
> *ahead of the ADC*, attenuation or both to prevent problems.  When one
> uses a Flex 6300 *which has no preselector*,  Flex 6500 on multiple
> bands (which bypasses the preselector), an ELAD DUO which has no
> preselector, etc. one must make a choice between sensitivity and
> dynamic range.  The ARRL lab tests show that, Sherwood's tests show
> that, Adam Farson's noise power ratio testing shows that, and other
> reviewers hint at the problem but they simply don't understand direct
> sampling well enough to recognize its limits when they see them.
> 
> One needs to understand the nature of direct sampling receivers and the
> way they react to overload to recognize the behavior but the test data
> is unequivocal.  16 bit ADCs are probably 4 to 6 bits "short" of being
> able to handle worst case signal levels while simultaneously providing
> maximum sensitivity (MDS of -135 to -140 dBm in 500 Hz) and fully broad
> band performance (multiple slice receivers on multiple amateur bands).
> 
> 73,
> 
>  ... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
> __
> 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 k...@yahoo.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Barry N1EU

The IC-7300 uses a 14-bit ADC.

My ANAN-100D uses 16-bit ADC and overload of ADC occurs at a signal level
of -10dBm, which I never see in my single transmitter environment.  I do
prefer the K3s for contesting, but not for lack of front-end robustness on
the part of the ANAN.

73, Barry N1EU

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 3:48 AM, Barry LaZar  wrote:

> Joe,
> I agree with you basically. I think it's just the manor in which you
> state the problem.
>
> You touch on the real problem 14-16 bits of sampling vice having more
> bits in the sample. It's not specifically the direct sampling architecture.
> I think the radio companies just can't get 24 bit ADCs fast enough to do
> direct sampling at commodity pricing which would allow direct sampling with
> out the baggage. If I can do 24 bit sampling and high and low pass
> filtering, I can simplify receiver design AND have a an acceptable dynamic
> range. Multiple instances of DSP processing of the 24 bit samples will
> allow as many virtual receivers, slices, as processor power will allow. My
> guess is we are on the verge of getting to where we would like to be.
>
> Flex is using a 16 bit ADC and I'm not sure what the 7300 is using,
> but I infer it, too, is 16 bit. I do believe that the Elecraft
> architectures are all based on 24 bit sampling. The Elecraft designs should
> be tolerant to serious environmental abuse short of a local thunderstorm.
>
> Our comments reflect a rigorous tech discussion. But, there is another
> issue that has not been discussed in anything I've read so far, ultimate
> filter rejection. Flex, Kenwood, and Elecraft have filtering that runs in
> the 100 db region, or a little better. I saw that the IC-7300 is about 20
> db worse. What that means if you are a CW operator, serious or otherwise,
> and there is a pile up on a DX station, a contest, or just a really busy
> weekend, you may have problems from strong stations not too far away while
> you are trying to work an S1-3 station. SSB operators have other problems
> like splatter and no amount of superb design will fix that.
>
> I'm pleased there is a vigorous discussion on the new radios. It helps
> push the designers and the technology.
>
> 73,
> Barry
> K3NDM
>
>
> ------ Original Message --
> From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" 
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Sent: 4/26/2016 10:10:32 PM an
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated
>
> On 4/26/2016 8:08 PM, Kevin Stover wrote:
>>
>>> Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC overload.
>>>
>>
>> I can't take credit for that ... the warning comes from some of the
>> best RF designers in the world.  Direct sampling receivers are very
>> good in controlled situations.  Unfortunately, those who are used to
>> analog superhetrodyne receivers do not recognize the symptoms of ADC
>> overload/overflow in many cases.
>>
>> The overflow can show up as an occasional click or pop if the number
>> and strength of signals continues to increase conditions go down hill
>> very rapidly.  The best 16 bit ADC based SDRs can and do show very
>> significant overload issues when run without effective front end
>> bandpass filtering in high RF environments (160 meters near AM BC
>> stations, 40 meters in Europe, 160 meters in New England during a
>> contest, etc.).
>>
>> One can apply filtering (which Icom seems to have done in the 7300),
>> apply attenuation (which Flex seems to have done in the 6000 series)
>> or both.  Filtering limits the number and width of "slice receivers"
>> while attenuation kills weak signal performance.
>>
>> I find Icom's implementation interesting in that they are using the
>> technology as a single band, single channel receiver (they could have
>> added Dual RX within the same band at practically no hardware cost) - an
>> application where, with tight bandpass filtering, direct sampling
>> may be ready to compete as indicated by the fact that Sherwood's tests
>> place the 7300's above some "good" conventional rigs like the Ten-Tec
>> Eagle, Kenwood TS-590SG and TS-990 in MDS, LO Phase noise and IMD DR.
>>
>> However, for the ultimate multi-channel receiver, ADC technology is
>> still 4 to 6 bits short as witnessed by the need for 12 to 20 dB of
>> attenuation in the Flex 6000 or the 0 to 30 dB electronically stepped
>> attenuators in some of the other products like the Anan, Hermes, etc.
>> Sherwood's results hint at this when comparing the MDS with the
>> preamp on and preamp off ... even with its preamp on the Flex 6700
>

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Gene Gabry

On 4/26/2016 10:15 PM, Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft wrote:
> Just that you know, K9CT has one of the finest contesting station in
 > the US. He has switched to direct-sampling SDRs (Flex-6700). Just ask  >
him if this architecture is 5 years away from being competitive.

>While I do not know for sure, I suspect K9CT is using bandpass filters and
stubs to prevent inter-station interference in his multi-multi operation
just >as he did when he used conventional transceivers.  With properly
designed bandpass filters, stubs and the preselectors in his 6700s he's not
likely to >have a severe overload issue unless he happens to be close to
some high power AM stations (on 160 meters) and even then indications are
that a good >highpass filter and 10 to 15 dB of attenuation will resolve the
problems with a 16 bit ADC.

Yes, I can confirm K9CT uses BP filters on his 6700's. His main reason for
switching to mostly 6700's at his contest station was for the "simplicity"
of being able to operate SO2R or multi -2  without the need for all the
access cables and extras required with the K3 set up. The WiFi ability that
comes with the Maestro made networking wireless as well. I believe he still
uses a K3S or two at his home station and uses K3S's on DXpeditions. 

There are conditions and reasons where each platform can win, with proper
configurations, tools  and expectations.

Gene, N9TF
Society of Midwest Contesters 

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Joe Subich, W4TV

On 4/26/2016 11:48 PM, Barry LaZar wrote:
> You touch on the real problem 14-16 bits of sampling vice having
> more bits in the sample. It's not specifically the direct sampling
> architecture.

The real problem is not enough bits.  DSR proponents continue to ignore
the sensitivity vs. overload trade-off.  They tout their "top of the
list" IMD performance and "multiple slice receiver" capabilities while
completely hiding the fact that those items can only be accomplished by
reducing sensitivity some 30 dB compared to a conventional superhet
receiver in the presence of strong signals.

I have nothing against direct sampling receivers and I'm intrigued by
the performance/features balance Icom made - to the extent that I'm
likely to replace the IC-706mkIIg I use as an Icom proxy in my CAT test
bench with a 7300 once the "new" price moderates.

But, there is another issue that has not been discussed in anything
I've read so far, ultimate filter rejection. Flex, Kenwood, and
Elecraft have filtering that runs in the 100 db region, or a little
better.

Top of the line rigs with dual (distributed) filtering may reach the
100 dB region.  However, that is not the case in all rigs.  The IC-7300
is competitive with rigs such as the Yaesu FTdx3000 (80 dB), Icom
IC-7600 (78 dB), Icom 706 mkIIg (78dB) or K2 (80 dB) and not all that
far from the TS-590 (92 dB) or TS-990 (90 dB).  Remember, most of the
crystal filters flatten out around -80 to-90 dB (with tighter filters
having even less ultimate rejection and - see the K3/Inrad curves) -
circuit layout often causes leakage above those levels in many rigs.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV

On 4/26/2016 11:48 PM, Barry LaZar wrote:

Joe,
I agree with you basically. I think it's just the manor in which you
state the problem.

You touch on the real problem 14-16 bits of sampling vice having
more bits in the sample. It's not specifically the direct sampling
architecture. I think the radio companies just can't get 24 bit ADCs
fast enough to do direct sampling at commodity pricing which would allow
direct sampling with out the baggage. If I can do 24 bit sampling and
high and low pass filtering, I can simplify receiver design AND have a
an acceptable dynamic range. Multiple instances of DSP processing of the
24 bit samples will allow as many virtual receivers, slices, as
processor power will allow. My guess is we are on the verge of getting
to where we would like to be.

Flex is using a 16 bit ADC and I'm not sure what the 7300 is using,
but I infer it, too, is 16 bit. I do believe that the Elecraft
architectures are all based on 24 bit sampling. The Elecraft designs
should be tolerant to serious environmental abuse short of a local
thunderstorm.

Our comments reflect a rigorous tech discussion. But, there is
another issue that has not been discussed in anything I've read so far,
ultimate filter rejection. Flex, Kenwood, and Elecraft have filtering
that runs in the 100 db region, or a little better. I saw that the
IC-7300 is about 20 db worse. What that means if you are a CW operator,
serious or otherwise, and there is a pile up on a DX station, a contest,
or just a really busy weekend, you may have problems from strong
stations not too far away while you are trying to work an S1-3 station.
SSB operators have other problems like splatter and no amount of superb
design will fix that.

I'm pleased there is a vigorous discussion on the new radios. It
helps push the designers and the technology.

73,
Barry
K3NDM

-- Original Message --
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" 
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: 4/26/2016 10:10:32 PM an
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

On 4/26/2016 8:08 PM, Kevin Stover wrote:

Everybody is ignoring W4TV's 800lb Gorilla, ADC overload.

I can't take credit for that ... the warning comes from some of the
best RF designers in the world.  Direct sampling receivers are very
good in controlled situations.  Unfortunately, those who are used to
analog superhetrodyne receivers do not recognize the symptoms of ADC
overload/overflow in many cases.

The overflow can show up as an occasional click or pop if the number
and strength of signals continues to increase conditions go down hill
very rapidly.  The best 16 bit ADC based SDRs can and do show very
significant overload issues when run without effective front end
bandpass filtering in high RF environments (160 meters near AM BC
stations, 40 meters in Europe, 160 meters in New England during a
contest, etc.).

One can apply filtering (which Icom seems to have done in the 7300),
apply attenuation (which Flex seems to have done in the 6000 series)
or both.  Filtering limits the number and width of "slice receivers"
while attenuation kills weak signal performance.

I find Icom's implementation interesting in that they are using the
te

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Buck via Elecraft

Very comprehensive review of the 7300 explaining how it handles ADC 
overload at


http://www.ab4oj.com/icom/ic7300/7300notes.pdf

K4ia
Buck
Honor Roll 335
8BDXCC

On 4/27/2016 8:17 AM, Gene Gabry wrote:

On 4/26/2016 10:15 PM, Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft wrote:

Just that you know, K9CT has one of the finest contesting station in

  > the US. He has switched to direct-sampling SDRs (Flex-6700). Just ask  >
him if this architecture is 5 years away from being competitive.


While I do not know for sure, I suspect K9CT is using bandpass filters and

stubs to prevent inter-station interference in his multi-multi operation
just >as he did when he used conventional transceivers.  With properly
designed bandpass filters, stubs and the preselectors in his 6700s he's not
likely to >have a severe overload issue unless he happens to be close to
some high power AM stations (on 160 meters) and even then indications are
that a good >highpass filter and 10 to 15 dB of attenuation will resolve the
problems with a 16 bit ADC.

Yes, I can confirm K9CT uses BP filters on his 6700's. His main reason for
switching to mostly 6700's at his contest station was for the "simplicity"
of being able to operate SO2R or multi -2  without the need for all the
access cables and extras required with the K3 set up. The WiFi ability that
comes with the Maestro made networking wireless as well. I believe he still
uses a K3S or two at his home station and uses K3S's on DXpeditions.

There are conditions and reasons where each platform can win, with proper
configurations, tools  and expectations.

Gene, N9TF
Society of Midwest Contesters


__
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 k...@aol.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Jim Sheldon

 Geez guys, I thought this was the Elecraft List.  Getting a tired 
finger hitting the delete button on all the IC 7300 ICOM discussion 
totally irrelevant to any Elecraft information.  I'm sure Eric would 
have stepped in and closed this thread long ago if they weren't all 
extremely busy getting ready for Dayton.


I, and many others, have absolutely no interest in extolling the virtues 
of the IC 7300.


Jim - W0EB

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft

Folks - In the interest of relieving our list readers from severe single topic 
email overload, let's end this thread now.

While an interesting topic with lots of good comments, its had a -huge- number 
of postings. It is time to give it a rest.

(I would have jumped in earlier yesterday, but I was extremely busy at my other 
job - making the best all around radios in the world :-)

73,

Eric
Elecraft list moderator
/elecraft.com/

On 4/27/2016 5:26 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

On 4/26/2016 11:48 PM, Barry LaZar wrote:
> You touch on the real problem 14-16 bits of sampling vice having
> more bits in the sample. It's not specifically the direct sampling
> architecture.

The real problem is not enough bits.  DSR proponents continue to ignore
the sensitivity vs. overload trade-off.  They tout their "top of the
list" IMD performance and "multiple slice receiver" capabilities while
completely hiding the fact that those items can only be accomplished by
reducing sensitivity some 30 dB compared to a conventional superhet
receiver in the presence of strong signals.

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Jim Rodenkirch

"It all depends" is/was the premise for my reply, Don.

 If new and old hams don't understand the potential problems with long runs
of coax to/from an antenna they want to operate on multiple bands and an ATU
in the shack they will be surprised at how inefficient their system is. 

P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share 

Note 1: I had a 43' vertical with top loading wires in a NORD-style config
with my external ATU at the base of the vertical and 120' of coax back to
the shack  never saw a VSWR delta of more than .2 between what was
"seen" at the input to the tuner and what was "seen" at the xmtr while
operating on 160 through 20 meters. 



--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616802.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
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Dave Cole

I'm with you Clay, the very last thing I want is a touch screen, which
is always dirty.  

The concept of a touch screen rig is interesting though, perhaps a
touch screen that is separate from the rig would be good...  Soft Keys
you can program, thin, wireless, now that I could get behind.  Maybe
controlled via a smart device, like a phone or pad.  Bluetooth
connected...
-- 
73's, and thanks,
Dave (NK7Z)

For software/hardware reviews see:
http://www.nk7z.net

For MixW support see:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info

For SSTV help see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info


On Tue, 2016-04-26 at 17:01 -0500, Clay Autery wrote:
> Yep... Jim has it correct
> 
> I regularly use Marker A and B to set frequencies.  If I am doing it
> right, it sets to the exact frequency even though the P3 only
> shows
> to the 10 Hz resolution.
> 
> And I don't have to put fingerprints on my screen/bezel...
> 
> Why ANYONE wants to touch the screen they are VIEWING data on escapes
> me
> COMPLETELY.  I want my screen ABSOLUTELY clean...
> 
> __
> Clay Autery, KG5LKV
> MONTAC Enterprises
> (318) 518-1389
> 
> On 4/26/2016 3:29 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue,4/26/2016 1:12 PM, James D. (Jimmy) Walker, Jr. via Elecraft
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > What interests me most in the IC-7300 is the ability for direct
> > > entry
> > > of a frequency by touching the waterfall display.
> > To the accuracy of the width of your finger. :)   I looked at the
> > 7300
> > at Visalia. Nice LOOKING radio at an entry level price.
> > 
> > > 
> > >   The P-3 does not offer that feature,
> > While it doesn't have a touch screen, direct frequency entry can be
> > done by moving the marker to the blip on the screen and pushing the
> > Menu button. And to FAR greater precision.
> > 
> > 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 d...@nk7z.net
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Bert Craig

Why can't we let the folks who are engaged in the discussion, as well as those 
who find it not only interesting, but very relevant to Elecraft, enjoy the 
discussion. That's precisely what the delete key is for. 

Imagine coming across a roundtable QSO and asking the participants to cease 
their discussion rather than just QSY. Strange times these are.

Vy 73 de Bert
WA2SI 

Sent from my android device.

-Original Message-
From: Jim Sheldon 
To: Gene Gabry , "'Joe Subich, W4TV'" , 
elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 8:42
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

  Geez guys, I thought this was the Elecraft List.  Getting a tired 
finger hitting the delete button on all the IC 7300 ICOM discussion 
totally irrelevant to any Elecraft information.  I'm sure Eric would 
have stepped in and closed this thread long ago if they weren't all 
extremely busy getting ready for Dayton.

I, and many others, have absolutely no interest in extolling the virtues 
of the IC 7300.

Jim - W0EB

__
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 wa...@arrl.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Joe Subich, W4TV



Thanks for the link, Buck.  I had not checked Adam's site since the
7300 became generally available.

Adam adds a lot to the discussion.  The 7300 is actually a "hybrid"
DSR ... direct down conversion being used to drive the SDR "back end"
typical of Icom's current generation of transceivers.  In essence,
the direct sampling front end replaces the traditional analog up-
conversion front end and is responsible for a much "cleaner" (less
phase noise, etc.) transceiver.  The selectivity, AGC and features
are derived from the 36 KHz DSP "back end".

All in all very smart design as it leverages Icom's experience and
design costs.  It also explains the lack of dual receive as that
would have required a second, frequency agile "IF DSP" or complete
receiver chain like the KRX3.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 4/27/2016 8:28 AM, Buck via Elecraft wrote:

Very comprehensive review of the 7300 explaining how it handles ADC
overload at

http://www.ab4oj.com/icom/ic7300/7300notes.pdf

K4ia
Buck
Honor Roll 335
8BDXCC



__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Doug Person via Elecraft


My thoughts on the IC-7300 after using it for several days:

1. The tuner is a lot more capable than 3:1. Much better than older Icoms.

2. Achieving correct viewing angle can almost always be corrected by a 
little Shop 101.


3. The height of the display is limited to the size of the screen and 
that by the size of the radio. That said - the screen is a wonder of 
organization of things needed to control a complex system


4. Two antenna ports, video output, receive only antenna port are all 
the things you will see in the next step-up model


5. Touch screens allow a hierarchical and updateable organization of 
functions and properties - this is a fundamental principle of user 
interface design


6. Sit down with say a TS-590SG (Same basic price) and operate for an 
hour.  Then repeat with IC-7300.  You'll instantly see a 20th century 
user interface and a 21st century user interface. The IC-7300 will blow 
you a way.  So much information at your fingertips.  The IC-7300 is a 
wonderful example of how 21st century technology pervades everything. 
(Get used to it)


Fortunately, I have two separate operating positions.  The K-Line 
occupies my main position.  Stocking the second position is always fun.  
Been through K2 (best), TS-450, IC-746, TS-590SG, FTdx-1200 (Nice rig) 
and now the IC-7300.  The 7300 leaves all the other entry level radios 
in the dust.  It has placed a strong stack in the ground of 
technological advancement and will be the pivotal product for the next 
10 to 20 years.  Just like the K2 was when it hit the market.  Even more 
like the K3 which was *truly* a pivotal product.


Doug -- K0DXV





__
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 k0...@aol.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft

> On Apr 27, 2016, at 9:31 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV  wrote

> Adam adds a lot to the discussion.  The 7300 is actually a "hybrid"
> DSR ... direct down conversion being used to drive the SDR "back end"
> typical of Icom's current generation of transceivers.  In essence,
> the direct sampling front end replaces the traditional analog up-
> conversion front end and is responsible for a much "cleaner" (less
> phase noise, etc.) transceiver.  The selectivity, AGC and features
> are derived from the 36 KHz DSP "back end".



Joe, I know this thread was closed earlier today, but I just wanted to clarify 
that the IC-7300 is a "pure" direct-sampling SDR. The architecture that you 
described is more in line with direct-conversion SDRs such as the KX3. 
I also asked myself why ICOM did not go the extra mile and provided more than 
one receiver on the IC-7300 since the whole spectrum is available on a 
direct-sampling SDR. The only reason that occurred to me is that its FPGA is 
not big enough to handled/process the stream of data arriving from the ADC that 
is necessary to produce more than one of receiver (slices).

73,
Robert-KP4Y/W4

Sent from my iPhone

__
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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Ken K6MR

“P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share”

Jim:

Google “transmission line bounce diagram”. This is a simple concept easily 
proven by mathematics.

On a practical level, this is the concept behind the use of open wire feed 
lines. It’s been done for decades. The type of feed line does not change the 
theory.

Ken K6MR






From: Jim Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 06:21
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

"It all depends" is/was the premise for my reply, Don.

 If new and old hams don't understand the potential problems with long runs
of coax to/from an antenna they want to operate on multiple bands and an ATU
in the shack they will be surprised at how inefficient their system is.

P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share

Note 1: I had a 43' vertical with top loading wires in a NORD-style config
with my external ATU at the base of the vertical and 120' of coax back to
the shack  never saw a VSWR delta of more than .2 between what was
"seen" at the input to the tuner and what was "seen" at the xmtr while
operating on 160 through 20 meters.



--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616802.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
Message delivered to k...@outlook.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

It is not "the principle behind the use of open  wire feed line," Ken IF, I 
place an antenna auto tuner at the base of, for instance, a vertical and feed 
the tuner with low loss coax


I understand the use of open wire feed line and an ATU prior to attaching to 
the xmtrBUT...see above - works as well, if not better 'cuz I don't have to 
worry about the open wire feed line running too close to metal objects...




From: Ken K6MR 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:36 AM
To: Jim Rodenkirch; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated


"P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share"



Jim:



Google "transmission line bounce diagram". This is a simple concept easily 
proven by mathematics.



On a practical level, this is the concept behind the use of open wire feed 
lines. It's been done for decades. The type of feed line does not change the 
theory.



Ken K6MR












From: Jim Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 06:21
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated



"It all depends" is/was the premise for my reply, Don.

 If new and old hams don't understand the potential problems with long runs
of coax to/from an antenna they want to operate on multiple bands and an ATU
in the shack they will be surprised at how inefficient their system is.

P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share

Note 1: I had a 43' vertical with top loading wires in a NORD-style config
with my external ATU at the base of the vertical and 120' of coax back to
the shack  never saw a VSWR delta of more than .2 between what was
"seen" at the input to the tuner and what was "seen" at the xmtr while
operating on 160 through 20 meters.



--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616802.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
Message delivered to k...@outlook.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Wowlots of good stuff emanating from this discussion - tnx to all for 
participating

For Jerry - there are other reasons for employing an ATU in the shack - e.g., 
using open wire line feed line from the antenna back to the xmtr. 

_
From: Jerry 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:10 AM
To: Ken K6MR
Cc: Jim Rodenkirch; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

I always thought the ATU in the shack was specifically to allow operation where 
there's an impedance mismatch (not necessarily non-resonant) specifically to 
protect solid state equipment from the high voltages that can be present.

Obviously an antenna system can be resonant and still not match impedance of 
the feed line and/or Radio.

Sent from my iPad

> On Apr 27, 2016, at 11:36 AM, Ken K6MR  wrote:
>
> “P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
> make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
> multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
> share”
>
> Jim:
>
> Google “transmission line bounce diagram”. This is a simple concept easily 
> proven by mathematics.
>
> On a practical level, this is the concept behind the use of open wire feed 
> lines. It’s been done for decades. The type of feed line does not change the 
> theory.
>
> Ken K6MR
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Jim Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 06:21
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated
>
> "It all depends" is/was the premise for my reply, Don.
>
> If new and old hams don't understand the potential problems with long runs
> of coax to/from an antenna they want to operate on multiple bands and an ATU
> in the shack they will be surprised at how inefficient their system is.
>
> P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
> make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
> multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
> share
>
> Note 1: I had a 43' vertical with top loading wires in a NORD-style config
> with my external ATU at the base of the vertical and 120' of coax back to
> the shack  never saw a VSWR delta of more than .2 between what was
> "seen" at the input to the tuner and what was "seen" at the xmtr while
> operating on 160 through 20 meters.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616802.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
> Message delivered to k...@outlook.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 je...@carolinaheli.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Ken K6MR

But the theory works whether you have open wire line or coax: the additional 
loss due to SWR on the feedline is only a function of the matched feedline 
loss. There is a good graph in ON4UNs book (and probably others) that shows the 
additional loss caused by SWR vs. matched line loss. For example, a 5:1 SWR on 
a line with 0.5 dB matched loss results in an additional 0.6 dB of loss. The 
type of feedline is immaterial.  Is 0.6 dB worth installing a tuner at the 
antenna given the added complexity? Maybe. Maybe not. It’s all a matter of $/dB.

Ken K6MR



From: James Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 09:38
To: Ken K6MR<mailto:k...@outlook.com>; 
elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

It is not "the principle behind the use of open  wire feed line," Ken IF, I 
place an antenna auto tuner at the base of, for instance, a vertical and feed 
the tuner with low loss coax


I understand the use of open wire feed line and an ATU prior to attaching to 
the xmtrBUT...see above - works as well, if not better 'cuz I don't have to 
worry about the open wire feed line running too close to metal objects...




From: Ken K6MR 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:36 AM
To: Jim Rodenkirch; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated


"P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share"



Jim:



Google "transmission line bounce diagram". This is a simple concept easily 
proven by mathematics.



On a practical level, this is the concept behind the use of open wire feed 
lines. It's been done for decades. The type of feed line does not change the 
theory.



Ken K6MR












From: Jim Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 06:21
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated



"It all depends" is/was the premise for my reply, Don.

 If new and old hams don't understand the potential problems with long runs
of coax to/from an antenna they want to operate on multiple bands and an ATU
in the shack they will be surprised at how inefficient their system is.

P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share

Note 1: I had a 43' vertical with top loading wires in a NORD-style config
with my external ATU at the base of the vertical and 120' of coax back to
the shack  never saw a VSWR delta of more than .2 between what was
"seen" at the input to the tuner and what was "seen" at the xmtr while
operating on 160 through 20 meters.



--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616802.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
Message delivered to k...@outlook.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Did not mean to sound argumentative, Ken.apologize if it came out that 
wayI am "involved" in this discussion becuz' of Don's initial post about 
new hams not understanding the advantageous aspects of open wire feed line

From: James Rodenkirch
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:38 AM
To: Ken K6MR; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

It is not "the principle behind the use of open  wire feed line," Ken IF, I 
place an antenna auto tuner at the base of, for instance, a vertical and feed 
the tuner with low loss coax

I understand the use of open wire feed line and an ATU prior to attaching to 
the xmtrBUT...see above - works as well, if not better 'cuz I don't have to 
worry about the open wire feed line running too close to metal objects...

From: Ken K6MR 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:36 AM
To: Jim Rodenkirch; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

"P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share"

Jim:

Google "transmission line bounce diagram". This is a simple concept easily 
proven by mathematics.

On a practical level, this is the concept behind the use of open wire feed 
lines. It's been done for decades. The type of feed line does not change the 
theory.

Ken K6MR

From: Jim Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 06:21
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

"It all depends" is/was the premise for my reply, Don.

 If new and old hams don't understand the potential problems with long runs
of coax to/from an antenna they want to operate on multiple bands and an ATU
in the shack they will be surprised at how inefficient their system is.

P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share

Note 1: I had a 43' vertical with top loading wires in a NORD-style config
with my external ATU at the base of the vertical and 120' of coax back to
the shack  never saw a VSWR delta of more than .2 between what was
"seen" at the input to the tuner and what was "seen" at the xmtr while
operating on 160 through 20 meters.

--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616802.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
Message delivered to k...@outlook.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

I agree the theory works, Ken, and your reference of/to John Devoldere's book 
is timely - it sets on my desk right nowI'll rummage through the 
appropriate chapter(s) to ensure I am not "out on a limb" here71.5/72 de 
K9JWV


P.S. I've stayed away from open wire line simply 'cuz a) difficult to run long 
lengths at my QTH and b) can't avoid running it very close to metal at three 
points 'tween the base of my antenna and the shack.


P.S.S. I stated earlier I experience .2 delta in measured VSWR at the input to 
the tuner and at the coax end plugged in to my KX3 -make .4 db delta, depending 
on the band in use...





From: Ken K6MR 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 11:31 AM
To: James Rodenkirch; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated


But the theory works whether you have open wire line or coax: the additional 
loss due to SWR on the feedline is only a function of the matched feedline 
loss. There is a good graph in ON4UNs book (and probably others) that shows the 
additional loss caused by SWR vs. matched line loss. For example, a 5:1 SWR on 
a line with 0.5 dB matched loss results in an additional 0.6 dB of loss. The 
type of feedline is immaterial.  Is 0.6 dB worth installing a tuner at the 
antenna given the added complexity? Maybe. Maybe not. It’s all a matter of $/dB.



Ken K6MR







From: James Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 09:38
To: Ken K6MR<mailto:k...@outlook.com>; 
elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated



It is not "the principle behind the use of open  wire feed line," Ken IF, I 
place an antenna auto tuner at the base of, for instance, a vertical and feed 
the tuner with low loss coax


I understand the use of open wire feed line and an ATU prior to attaching to 
the xmtrBUT...see above - works as well, if not better 'cuz I don't have to 
worry about the open wire feed line running too close to metal objects...




From: Ken K6MR 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:36 AM
To: Jim Rodenkirch; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated


“P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share”



Jim:



Google “transmission line bounce diagram”. This is a simple concept easily 
proven by mathematics.



On a practical level, this is the concept behind the use of open wire feed 
lines. It’s been done for decades. The type of feed line does not change the 
theory.



Ken K6MR












From: Jim Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 06:21
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated



"It all depends" is/was the premise for my reply, Don.

 If new and old hams don't understand the potential problems with long runs
of coax to/from an antenna they want to operate on multiple bands and an ATU
in the shack they will be surprised at how inefficient their system is.

P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share

Note 1: I had a 43' vertical with top loading wires in a NORD-style config
with my external ATU at the base of the vertical and 120' of coax back to
the shack  never saw a VSWR delta of more than .2 between what was
"seen" at the input to the tuner and what was "seen" at the xmtr while
operating on 160 through 20 meters.



--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616802.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
Message delivered to k...@outlook.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

2016-04-27 Thread Ken K6MR

No problem. Yes, open wire line has its own problems. I was reacting to your 
note regarding using short runs of coax operated at high SWR. There is nothing 
inherently inefficient about doing so. Like any design it’s easy to run the 
numbers to determine what the actual losses are. Many times they are just too 
small to worry about. Especially in the case of verticals, the ground losses 
will be far higher unless you invest in an excellent radial/ground shield 
underneath it. The tuner can’t help that.

Ken K6MR



From: James Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 11:01
To: Ken K6MR<mailto:k...@outlook.com>; 
elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Did not mean to sound argumentative, Ken.apologize if it came out that 
wayI am "involved" in this discussion becuz' of Don's initial post about 
new hams not understanding the advantageous aspects of open wire feed line



From: James Rodenkirch
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:38 AM
To: Ken K6MR; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated


It is not "the principle behind the use of open  wire feed line," Ken IF, I 
place an antenna auto tuner at the base of, for instance, a vertical and feed 
the tuner with low loss coax


I understand the use of open wire feed line and an ATU prior to attaching to 
the xmtrBUT...see above - works as well, if not better 'cuz I don't have to 
worry about the open wire feed line running too close to metal objects...




From: Ken K6MR 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:36 AM
To: Jim Rodenkirch; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated


"P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share"



Jim:



Google "transmission line bounce diagram". This is a simple concept easily 
proven by mathematics.



On a practical level, this is the concept behind the use of open wire feed 
lines. It's been done for decades. The type of feed line does not change the 
theory.



Ken K6MR












From: Jim Rodenkirch<mailto:rodenkirch_...@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 06:21
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net<mailto:elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated



"It all depends" is/was the premise for my reply, Don.

 If new and old hams don't understand the potential problems with long runs
of coax to/from an antenna they want to operate on multiple bands and an ATU
in the shack they will be surprised at how inefficient their system is.

P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that quality coax runs of < 150 feet
make it "ok" to have the ATU in the shack while operating an antenna on
multiple bandswhat technical evidence of that posit do you have to
share

Note 1: I had a 43' vertical with top loading wires in a NORD-style config
with my external ATU at the base of the vertical and 120' of coax back to
the shack  never saw a VSWR delta of more than .2 between what was
"seen" at the input to the tuner and what was "seen" at the xmtr while
operating on 160 through 20 meters.



--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616802.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
Message delivered to k...@outlook.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] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated