[Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
WØYK sed: [snip] The K3 simply "sounds better" on all modes, including RTTY. The band noise is less severe to listen to, and the difference is striking just having the ProIII in one ear and the K3 in the other with no signals in the passbands. Yet, the K3 dynamic range accepts a much larger range of signal levels and the K3 pre-amp can be left on even on the low bands where the attenuator does NOT need to be turned on except in severe situations. I ran with the pre-amp on, maximum sensitivity, and the attenuator off on all bands 10-80 for the entire NAQP. The K3 was less fatiguing to listen to for long periods of time with the audio sounding very natural, whereas the ProIII does sound digitized or artificial. (Maybe if you're not old enough to have spent many hours in front of a Drake or Collins receiver, you can't appreciate this point!) [end snip] This is GREAT news for me! While I don't "do" RTTY, I sure "do" CW. Over the years, I have listened multiple times on the 756 Pro series, and I must say that to my admittedly "sensitive" ear, I just can't stand that "digital" sound (very "flutey," if there is such a word). From home, I can even hear it on the xmited signal. I can pick out an Icom radio a mile away. Not "bad"...just not like it "should" be. Normally, I HATE subjective opinions...but this one that really "rings true." Thanks for the review! de Doug KR2Q ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
Agreed 100% - I have a Drake C line on the upper shelf of the operating position. An A/B test is a real eye opener. [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound" DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL dougzzz at gmail.com Mon Jul 23 07:21:11 EDT 2007 I can pick out an Icom radio a mile away. Not "bad"...just not like it "should" be. Normally, I HATE subjective opinions...but this one that really "rings true." Thanks for the review! de Doug KR2Q ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
I prefer the FT1000MP sound to the Pro3. It's more like my Drake TR7: a softer (shall I say) analogue sound. I get quickly fatigued with the Pro3 which I find harsh, rasping; though I do hear weaker stations, ie better for dx seeking than contesting. Looking forward to putting the K3 in an A/B test. David G3UNA > > From: "DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2007/07/23 Mon PM 12:21:11 BST > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net > Subject: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound" > > WØYK sed: > > [snip] > The K3 simply "sounds better" on all modes, including RTTY. The band noise > is less severe to listen to, and the difference is striking just having the > ProIII in one ear and the K3 in the other with no signals in the passbands. > Yet, the K3 dynamic range accepts a much larger range of signal levels and > the K3 pre-amp can be left on even on the low bands where the attenuator > does NOT need to be turned on except in severe situations. I ran with the > pre-amp on, maximum sensitivity, and the attenuator off on all bands 10-80 > for the entire NAQP. The K3 was less fatiguing to listen to for long > periods of time with the audio sounding very natural, whereas the ProIII > does sound digitized or artificial. (Maybe if you're not old enough to have > spent many hours in front of a Drake or Collins receiver, you can't > appreciate this point!) > [end snip] > > This is GREAT news for me! While I don't "do" RTTY, I sure "do" CW. > Over the years, I have listened multiple times on the 756 Pro series, > and I must say that to my admittedly "sensitive" ear, I just can't > stand that "digital" sound (very "flutey," if there is such a word). > >From home, I can even hear it on the xmited signal. I can pick out an > Icom radio a mile away. Not "bad"...just not like it "should" be. > > Normally, I HATE subjective opinions...but this one that really "rings true." > > Thanks for the review! > > de Doug KR2Q > ___ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
Great news to me also. I am used to using the old gear, and all the new stuff I have ever used sounds noisy and harsh, the newer it is, the worse it gets. Not sure if it's the multi conversions or the cheap audio amps, but all the newer stuff was very noisy. Even the R390a had way more noise then many other radios. The K2 is fairly quiet, but it's a CW/SSB rig and the audio is restricted I suspect.. Sounds like the K3 is going to be fantastic. Thanks for the detailed review. Well, I suppose its not long now! Brett N2DTS > This is GREAT news for me! While I don't "do" RTTY, I sure "do" CW. > Over the years, I have listened multiple times on the 756 Pro series, > and I must say that to my admittedly "sensitive" ear, I just can't > stand that "digital" sound (very "flutey," if there is such a word). > >From home, I can even hear it on the xmited signal. I can > pick out an > Icom radio a mile away. Not "bad"...just not like it "should" be. > > Normally, I HATE subjective opinions...but this one that > really "rings true." > > Thanks for the review! > > de Doug KR2Q > ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
I've done the same with many rigs. I currently use a K2 and Omni VI. The TT has a nice CW note at 450Hz. I'm thinking of adding a roofing filter to the TT to get the receiver up to the K2 standard. Pete, kn6bi -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Rasmussen Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 10:50 AM To: Elecraft Subject: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound" Agreed 100% - I have a Drake C line on the upper shelf of the operating position. An A/B test is a real eye opener. [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound" DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL dougzzz at gmail.com Mon Jul 23 07:21:11 EDT 2007 I can pick out an Icom radio a mile away. Not "bad"...just not like it "should" be. Normally, I HATE subjective opinions...but this one that really "rings true." Thanks for the review! de Doug KR2Q ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
My original Hallicrafters SX101MkIII had that sound, which I haven't heard for over 20 years. It was so easy to adjust the pitch and had a remarkable filter on it's 50Kc IF. That's 50 KHz for the younger hams ;) Al WA6VNN ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
If u hv never listened to CW on a 75A-4 with a matching spkr, u have not really heard CW. Maybe we should get Bob Heil to teach new rcvr engineers a thing or two? 73 Charles Harpole [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ http://liveearth.msn.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
Perhaps the one thing that we are all overlooking in the nice sound of the Collins and Drake radios is that their bandpass was much wider than the modern day radios and today there is far more QRM on the bands due to increased numbers of amateurs in the same spectrum. I loved my KWM-2 and used it for 14 years but doubt that it would be a very good radio to use in a contest in this day and time. Jim Younce K4ZM K2 SN:18 K2 Field Tester ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
I did some A/B testing with my K2, Drake 2B and R4A. The 2B was in fabulous condition and had the Q multiplier. The 4A had some issues which made it work just not quite right. I found the 2B to be a wonderful sounding rig for CW. It was warm and rich and the signals had a smoothness that was wonderful. The K2 didn't sound a nice but it wasn't that far behind. The AGC in the Drake was not my cup of tea. It attempted to keep everything at the same output level (no slope) so the background noise between elements was as strong as the signal. Also, it was slow on the attack. The leading edge of most elements had a spike for one audio cycle that could be seen in Spectrograph (or whatever it is called) but was quick enough to not be heard. That spike would cause the AGC to over react a bit so the first part of a long dash would be a bit quieter than the latter part. Still, the sound was very sweet. The K2's AGC was more up to the task. There was no slow reaction, no overshoot on the leading edge of an element and no over reacting. In the end, the sweet, smooth tone of the 2B was not enough to trump the better overall performance of the K2 who's received tone very good. We talk about Drake, Collins & the great rigs from years ago, but I'd like to suggest that thanks to Elecraft, THESE are the good old days! - Keith N1AS - - K2 5411.ssb.100 - ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
On the kwm2 and kwm2a, cw was an afterthought, and done in a poor way. I think they used audio tones into the mike circuit for CW, and maybe the ssb filter? I don't think those rigs were great CW radios. Not sure about the drake 2b, the r4c I had was very nice for its age, and with some mods can be as good as the modern stuff I hear. Mine sounded quite nice stock, under normal conditions anyway. I don't suppose any of the old stuff would be any good in any contest, but maybe some of it sounded much better on all modes. Not everyone contests or goes after rare DX, but everyone seems to be stuck with poor sounding radios these days, because they are built for contests, or for general coverage from 50KHz to 50MHz, or use noisy parts, or poor designs, or whatever Brett N2DTS ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
-Original Message- From: Brett gazdzinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On the kwm2 and kwm2a, cw was an afterthought, and done in a poor way. I think they used audio tones into the mike circuit for CW, and maybe the ssb filter? The KWM-2 and -2A did indeed use audio tones for CW. They used a very high tone (to most CW ops) so that the unwanted-sideband rejection would be good after the filtering. I don't think those rigs were great CW radios. They were barely usable on CW IMHO. No RIT, no sharp filter, no way to turn the AGC off nor to change its characteristics without a soldering iron. It didn't have to be that way. A carrier crystal setup could have been used instead of audio injection. Collins made narrow mechanical filters that could have been used, etc. They were primarily SSB rigs, pure and simple. And they did that job very well, particularly compared to what else was available to hams at the time. Perhaps Collins was concerned that if they made the KWM-2 a really good CW rig, it would hurt sales of the rest of the S-line. Unfortunately, most of the HF ham transceivers for the next decade or so imitated the KWM-2 in many ways. I don't suppose any of the old stuff would be any good in any contest, but maybe some of it sounded much better on all modes. Depends on which rig and how it is used. I have used older rigs and homebrew rigs using very old technology in contests with very good results. The rig you see on my homepage was responsible for over 620 QSOs on FD 1995 with only simple antennas. Not everyone contests or goes after rare DX, but everyone seems to be stuck with poor sounding radios these days, I'm not. Two reasons: Elecraft and homebrew. because they are built for contests, or for general coverage from 50KHz to 50MHz, or use noisy parts, or poor designs, or whatever A lot depends on what someone considers "good sounding" and "poor sounding". In my experience there are all sorts of factors: - Harmonic distortion (audio) - IM distortion (audio & rf/if) - Phase distortion (mostly IF) - AGC characteristics (or lack thereof) - Smooth vs. sharp rolloff of filter characteristics, filter ringing, etc. What some ops describe as "noise" is often actually distortion in some cases, AGC artifacts in others, and filter response in still other cases. Or a combination. 73 de Jim, N2EY ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
Built to a PRICE in ASIA :-) Every ham wants his IC-718 to sound like a $10, 000 radio but only pay $599 :-) Yeah, had one of those KWM-2 things and it sure was pretty inside and smelled so good when it was cooking :-) " THE SMELL OF HOT TUBES IN THE MORNING, THE SMELL OF VICTORY " :-)) But the thing was crap on CW, but it was a phone mans wet dream !! It did have great AUDIO but wasn't all that sensitive though. Things always seem better in MEMORY LANE :-) I loved my DRAKE C-LINE but it had hum and other assorted problems. Right NOW I love my ORION II but the K-3 may make me change my mind :-) soon I hope, maybe even before the snow flies ? Say it isn't so , Christmas and no K-3 , mine heart is wounded or whatever that D-DAY message was ... The K-3 is coming ... coming . soon ? K-3 DAY !! Walt K8CV Royal Oak, MI. - Original Message - From: "Brett gazdzinski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 9:44 AM Subject: RE: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound" On the kwm2 and kwm2a, cw was an afterthought, and done in a poor way. I think they used audio tones into the mike circuit for CW, and maybe the ssb filter? I don't think those rigs were great CW radios. Not sure about the drake 2b, the r4c I had was very nice for its age, and with some mods can be as good as the modern stuff I hear. Mine sounded quite nice stock, under normal conditions anyway. I don't suppose any of the old stuff would be any good in any contest, but maybe some of it sounded much better on all modes. Not everyone contests or goes after rare DX, but everyone seems to be stuck with poor sounding radios these days, because they are built for contests, or for general coverage from 50KHz to 50MHz, or use noisy parts, or poor designs, or whatever Brett N2DTS ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
Brett gazdzinski wrote: On the kwm2 and kwm2a, cw was an afterthought, and done in a poor way. I think they used audio tones into the mike circuit for CW, and maybe the ssb filter? I don't think those rigs were great CW radios. Not sure about the drake 2b, the r4c I had was very nice for its age, and with some mods can be as good as the modern stuff I hear. Mine sounded quite nice stock, under normal conditions anyway. I once had the following setup: R4B receiver, Hallicrafters HA-5 hetrodyne VFO, Heathkit DX-60B, and homemade 813 amplifier with a t/r switch hooked directly to the plate circuit. The keyer was homebrew and a NC contact on the keying relay activated the R4B muting circuit. After the addition of one bypass capacitor in the audio of the R4B, I had what I remember to be absolutely perfect QSK. When I turned off the sidetone from the keyer, keying the transmitter (about 250w input) resulted in smooth pulses of silence from the receiver. Maybe it's like your first girlfriend, the way time clouds memory, but this is the standard that I apply to modern rigs, most of which don't come close. I also got a certificate from ARRL in the frequency measuring test by calibrating the R4B to WWV and then just reading the frequency off the dial. -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
I am not certain what speakers you folks are using for these comparison tests, but if using the internal speakers, that alone can make a big difference. I use my K2 with an external speaker (a 6 inch woofer - amplified of course) - and I can say that if I feed it to the inputs of my shack stereo system it really sounds good - the internal speaker makes things sound a bit 'tinny' just because it is a small speaker. 73, Don W3FPR Darwin, Keith wrote: I did some A/B testing with my K2, Drake 2B and R4A. The 2B was in fabulous condition and had the Q multiplier. The 4A had some issues which made it work just not quite right. I found the 2B to be a wonderful sounding rig for CW. It was warm and rich and the signals had a smoothness that was wonderful. The K2 didn't sound a nice but it wasn't that far behind. ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
Yes, good point Don. When I did my tests, I fed the antenna to both rigs and tuned them to the same signal. I routed the rigs headphone output to a mixer and then to the Delta 44 sound card in my computer. The signals were recorded in Cakewalk Home Studio. This allowed me to listen to how each rig did on the same signal at the same time and to listen to it under studio headphones. The rig's speaker was not part of the equation. - Keith N1AS - - K2 5411.100.ssb - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:49 AM Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List Subject: Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound" I am not certain what speakers you folks are using for these comparison tests, but if using the internal speakers, that alone can make a big difference. I use my K2 with an external speaker (a 6 inch woofer - amplified of course) - and I can say that if I feed it to the inputs of my shack stereo system it really sounds good - the internal speaker makes things sound a bit 'tinny' just because it is a small speaker. 73, Don W3FPR Darwin, Keith wrote: > > I did some A/B testing with my K2, Drake 2B and R4A. The 2B was in > fabulous condition and had the Q multiplier. The 4A had some issues > which made it work just not quite right. > > I found the 2B to be a wonderful sounding rig for CW. It was warm and > rich and the signals had a smoothness that was wonderful. The K2 > didn't sound a nice but it wasn't that far behind. > ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
Jim, Tell me about your homebrew receiver. I have built 2 superhets, both work fantastic but on AM, I might add CW (a product detector). Unfortunately, kiwa does not make narrow filters anymore... Brett N2DTS > >I don't suppose any of the old stuff would be any good in any > >contest, but maybe some of it sounded much better on all modes. > > Depends on which rig and how it is used. I have used older rigs and > homebrew rigs > using very old technology in contests with very good results. The rig > you see on > my homepage was responsible for over 620 QSOs on FD 1995 with only > simple > antennas. > >> ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:17:30 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >It didn't have to be that way. A carrier crystal setup could have >been used instead of audio injection. Collins made narrow >mechanical filters that could have been used, etc. >Perhaps Collins was concerned that if they made the KWM-2 a >really good CW rig, it would hurt sales of the rest of the >S-line. As you probably know, Jim, audio tone injection was the commercial standard more than 50 years ago. Collins made great commercial multi-channel multi-tone HF rigs and they saw no reason to change a winning design. CW is a single-channel single-channel application, trivial by commercial standards. With their commercial gear as the cash cow, why change a winner? -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
In a message dated 7/24/07 4:54:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > audio tone injection was the > commercial standard more than 50 years ago. Collins made great > commercial multi-channel multi-tone HF rigs and they saw no > reason to change a winning design. CW is a single-channel > single-channel application, trivial by commercial standards. > With their commercial gear as the cash cow, why change a > winner? Because they were making a ham rig, not a commercial one. What the commercial services do isn't always the best thing for amateur radio applications. There's nothing theoretically wrong with audio injection for CW. But when a rig that cost as much as the KWM-2 did in its time expects the op to listen to 2 kHz tone on CW, doesn't provide a narrow filter even as an option, nor RIT or AGC OFF, I call shenanigans. The KWM-2 was meant for *amateur radio* SSB, and it had no peer in that role in its day. All IMHO 73 de Jim, N2EY ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
In a message dated 7/24/07 2:51:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Tell me about your homebrew receiver. > Rather than stray farther OT, I'll reply by direct email. If anybody else wants the info, which includes some attachments, just email me. 73 de Jim, N2EY ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] that Drake or Collins "sound"
I still use the TR-4 for SSB and also have the R4B. Using the same antenna the Drakes pull in the same weak signals as my K2 except the K2 eliminates the QRN/QRM quite a bit better. As far as sound quality, using the Drake MS-4 cabinet with the original Drake speaker and comparing it to the K2 standard in-cabinet speaker, the Drakes are a joy to listen to. I'm sure that with a better speaker system the K2 would improve. I may sell the K2 someday if I were to get the K3 but the Drake gear is priceless! 73, Jim/k2hn Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
