RE: [Elecraft] Chasing the numbers
On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 11:06, Darwin, Keith wrote: > I did my comparisons a few years ago so what follows is my recollection > of my tests. ... > Drake 2B vs. K2 > > The Drake is a fabulous sounding rig. Very clean, smooth, sweet. > Unfortunately, it has a very aggressive AGC so you'll never hear a quiet > band as the AGC ramps up the gain when there is no signal to provide a > constant full-blast noise floor. ... > I also recorded CW signals and examined their waveform. The Drake's AGC > was rather slow to kick in so the leading edge of each dot/dash had a > 1/2 to 1 cycle spike that was 2x the height of the rest of the signal. > After a cycle, the AGC had caught up and the rest of the waveform was > much more controlled. Interestingly, this leading edge spike of sorts > did not add any nasty artifacts to the audio. I had a 2B many years ago. The thing that absolutely amazed me about that radio is that you could run full QSK with the AGC enabled. I never saw another receiver that could do that. Al N1AL ___ 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] Chasing the numbers
Hi Gary, I agree with your comments. I seem to like radios that have better audio resolution and sound good rather than have good specs. That's why I like using my K2 - it sounds great with headphones. It has a great tone. All other radios have been moved on and the K2 is my main rig. I don't care about the specs so much but it is a bonus. Here in VK we don't suffer from strong close-in signals like OPs in EU so these things matter less. One of the reasons I've ordered a K3 is because guys were raving about how good they sound, not because of the dynamic range etc. I don't know if elecraft have gone to great lengths to engineering the K2 audio or whether it was a technological accident. But if it sounded like fuzzy tin box I would have sold it years ago regardless of it's specs. Dave VK2NA Message: 33 Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:47:08 -0700 From: "Gary D Krause" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Elecraft] Chasing the numbers To: "Elecraft" , Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1;format="flowed" Since the K3 is at the top of the list now and the K2 isn't far behind, I've been wondering how the numbers really affect what we hear. If a ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, blind folded and not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one with the best receiver by just using his or her ears? Lets assume that this ham has good hearing and that every rig is set the same. I realize that people have different reasons for picking a rig and that it isn't always based on lab tests otherwise we would all own the same rig assuming money is not a factor :-) But is there really a difference in the lab numbers as close as they are or are we just chasing numbers? Gary, N7HTS ___ 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] Chasing the numbers
Gary, Based on your scenario, it would take me a few hours operating a contest to make a decision, but I feel confident that I could pick the better receivers out of the group, "for my purposes." Now, this may not be the same selection that someone else makes. However, if you have a large enough group of operators and ask them to pick the best 2 or 3 rigs, over a period of time, you should arrive at the best rig. Relative to the specification numbers. They are part of the equation. One of my criteria for a good receiver is its fatigue factor (sorry, there are no none numbers for this parameter, its all subjective). But, the numbers associated with the AGC parameters, the blocking characteristics, the IMD numbe rs, etc., all add up to affect that fatigue factor. Other things that you do not normally see in the published data are the specific characteristics/parameters of the components, processors and circuits that pass the audio portion of the signal. For me, these can have significant impact on my fatigue factor. Someone else has mentioned the TS830. I had one for several years, and did numerous mods, including INRAD filters in both IF's. Until I started using a K 2, it was my standard reference rig. Subsequent rigs (TS850 and FT1000MP, both with INRAD filters) never approached the 830's low fatigue factor. But both of those newer rigs had better numbers. So, what does all of this mean? The low fatigue factor allows your brain to do more of the signal processing. The "strange noises" that some rigs generate impact your brain's ability to process the audio. As a result, the be tter number rigs have a better chance of having a low fatigue factor, but it is not a guarenteed situation. As they say...YMMV. 73, Henry - K4TMC ** Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy /2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598) ___ 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] Chasing the numbers
Very broad topic here. One thing that you might very well notice about the different receivers, is how much different they sound, one from another, even in a situation where you're listening to a single signal on an otherwise clear band. Audiophiles would know the correct buzz-words, but tube receivers tend to sound "warm" because of the characteristics of tubes (somewhere, I'd read that tubes emit even-numbered harmonics, and transistors, odd-numbered harmonics...I have NO IDEA if that's true). I have an ICOM R-71A, which is pretty nice, but the audio sounds "mushy". Apparently, there's a mod available for that, but I'm not going to bother with it; I'll be selling the R-71A and some other stuff to get a 2nd K3. I used to have an ICOM IC-756ProII. I loved the LCD display, and, of course, the band scope, but I never could actually LIKE the audio. The CW always sounded somewhat "hollow"; it was hard to describe. Prior to my ordering the K3, I had several discussions with long-time friend KR2Q. Doug had the perfect description for the ProII's audio: he called it "flutey". I have a Drake C-Line, with the Sherwood mods in the R4C. I *seem* to recall briefly setting up the R4C alongside the ProII, and being astonished at the difference in how they sounded. (The R4C was the clear winner). I don't know why I didn't compare them for a longer period; perhaps I didn't want to disappointed in my ProII. I'm still trying to figure out what to do with the C-Line. I might sell that, too. Previous to the ProII, I had Yaesu FT-1000MP. I always liked the sound of the Collins mechanical filters in it. Back in my days at contest station K2GL, I spend a lot of time behind a Collins 75A-4, and loved how that sounded (tubes, and Collins mechanical filters). We also had Drake TR-7A's, and as much as I loved the 75A-4, I disliked the Drake twice as much, especially under weak-signal conditions. Anyway, these comparison would not necessarily tell you what's "best", except for what's most pleasing to listen to under those non-demanding conditions. It *DOES* make a difference, especially when you become used to the differences between what radios CAN sound like, and should be part of any purchase decision. I'm sure that you would be able to hear the difference between those radios. Listening to JA's coming in over the pole on 20 M right now. They sound good on the K3. Hope this helps a little. 73, Steve NN4X On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 4:34 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Gary D Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > I've been wondering how the numbers really affect what we hear. If a > ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, >blind folded and > not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one > with the best receiver by just >using his or her ears? Lets assume that > this ham has good hearing and that every rig is set the same. I realize > that people >have different reasons for picking a rig and that it isn't > always based on lab tests otherwise we would all own the same rig > >assuming money is not a factor :-) But is there really a difference in > the lab numbers as close as they are or are we just >chasing numbers? > > IMHO: > > It depends on what you are doing. > > Under good conditions (decent signal strength, not a lot of QRM or QRN, > etc.), you won't hear much difference between a K3 and any other > half-decent rig. > > It's when things are less-than-good that the differences really begin > to show. Like when you're trying to dig out an S1 signal next to an > S9+40 signal. Or when the band is full of signals of all kinds and > strengths, but you only want to hear one of them. Etc. What tough > conditions do is to show up the weaknesses in a rig. > > There's also the inability to set every rig the same. Filter responses > and DSP settings vary all over the place, as do gain controls, notches, > etc. > > The numbers show what can be measured objectively. But that's not the > only measure of a rig. What really shows the quality of a design is a > combination of the numbers and other factors, like how tiring is it to > operate the rig, how well it makes contacts of the kind you like to > make, etc. > > IOW, for me, the real test is this: How much fun do you have with the > rig? > > 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 > ___ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Chasing the numbers
-Original Message- From: Gary D Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I've been wondering how the numbers really affect what we hear. If a ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, >blind folded and not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one with the best receiver by just >using his or her ears? Lets assume that this ham has good hearing and that every rig is set the same. I realize that people >have different reasons for picking a rig and that it isn't always based on lab tests otherwise we would all own the same rig >assuming money is not a factor :-) But is there really a difference in the lab numbers as close as they are or are we just >chasing numbers? IMHO: It depends on what you are doing. Under good conditions (decent signal strength, not a lot of QRM or QRN, etc.), you won't hear much difference between a K3 and any other half-decent rig. It's when things are less-than-good that the differences really begin to show. Like when you're trying to dig out an S1 signal next to an S9+40 signal. Or when the band is full of signals of all kinds and strengths, but you only want to hear one of them. Etc. What tough conditions do is to show up the weaknesses in a rig. There's also the inability to set every rig the same. Filter responses and DSP settings vary all over the place, as do gain controls, notches, etc. The numbers show what can be measured objectively. But that's not the only measure of a rig. What really shows the quality of a design is a combination of the numbers and other factors, like how tiring is it to operate the rig, how well it makes contacts of the kind you like to make, etc. IOW, for me, the real test is this: How much fun do you have with the rig? 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
RE: [Elecraft] Chasing the numbers
-Original Message- From: Darrell Bellerive [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Keith, I would be interested in reading about your observations on the differences between receivers. Please consider posting them to the reflector. - I did my comparisons a few years ago so what follows is my recollection of my tests. Omni V vs. 830s. The TenTec rig had a harsher, more distorted sound on CW and SSB. It had a noticeably tighter passband resulting in less splatter and of frequency noise as well as a more bandwidth limited sound. My Omni V with twin Inrad 2.8 KHz filters sounded almost as good as the 830s with it's stock SSB filters. The Omni with stock filters was noticeably narrower than the 830s. It was clear that part of the 830s' great sound was the wide receiver passband. From an AGC point of view, both rigs were similar with aggressive AGCs with no real slope. 830s vs. K2 This test was done during a CW contest. The 830s with twin 500 Hz filters had less selectivity than the K2. The aggressive flat-top AGC of the 830s amplified the background noise so it "sounded" S-9. Consequently, the rig was always screaming at me. If it wasn't loud signals, it was loud band noise between the signals. The K2, with it's sloping AGC, allowed the background noise to stay in the background. Overall, the rig was just quieter and cleaner to listen to. Also, the K2 receiver did a better job of keeping things clean between stations. The holes between 2 big stations sounded like holes in the K2. In the 830s, those holes were filled with garble, grunge, junk. Drake 2B vs. K2 The Drake is a fabulous sounding rig. Very clean, smooth, sweet. Unfortunately, it has a very aggressive AGC so you'll never hear a quiet band as the AGC ramps up the gain when there is no signal to provide a constant full-blast noise floor. Filtering, of course is not nearly as good as the modern K2, but fidelity and sonic quality is better. The wide filtering made strong SSB signals a joy to listen to and CW stuff came through very clean and pure. Still, for AGC reasons, I found the K2 to be more relaxing to listen to in general even though it didn't sound as good. I also recorded CW signals and examined their waveform. The Drake's AGC was rather slow to kick in so the leading edge of each dot/dash had a 1/2 to 1 cycle spike that was 2x the height of the rest of the signal. After a cycle, the AGC had caught up and the rest of the waveform was much more controlled. Interestingly, this leading edge spike of sorts did not add any nasty artifacts to the audio. After seeing it on the screen, I could hear it in the audio but the little edge at the beginning was not bothering at all. The K2, on the other hand had no such edge and in the headphones did sound a bit smoother than the 2B's CW tone. Omni V vs. K1 I had a K1 for a while and compared it to the Omni V. K1 sounded much (much) better. Smooth, pure, nice. Of course the AGC caused loud signals to pop and the filtering was not nearly as good, but the K1 sure sounded nice. My recollection is that the K1 sounds better than the K2 (less IF noise, for instance) but I never had both rigs at the same time so I can't say for sure. - Keith N1AS - - K2 5411.ssb.100 - - K3 Wave 3 - ___ 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] Chasing the numbers
Gary D Krause wrote: Since the K3 is at the top of the list now and the K2 isn't far behind, I've been wondering how the numbers really affect what we hear. If a ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, blind folded and not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one with the best receiver by just using his or her ears? The biggest issue is close-in dynamic range. When you notice this the most is in a contest, when you are trying to work a station surrounded by others. A receiver that's poor in this area will present you with pops and other noises in the passband when there are loud signals nearby which you may not be hearing. These noises cover up weak signals and add to operator fatigue. Another situation is when there are a lot of CW signals at various pitches. A poor radio presents you with mass of distorted signals and it's hard to pick out the one you want. One of the things I really like about the K3 is that signals seem to stand out and you can use your 'brain filter' to differentiate. If you mostly ragchew with reasonably strong signals in uncrowded bands, it probably won't matter too much. But it's nice to know that the capability is there if you ever need it. -- 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] Chasing the numbers
Thanks Keith, that's good to know. I only have two other rigs to compare my K2 with and they are older rigs that I bought in the eighties. I believe they are both single conversion designs and I swear that I can sometimes hear weak signals better on them than on my K2 but, the K2 has much better filtering. Maybe my brain does a better job of filtering. On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:01:22 -0700 "Darwin, Keith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've done this, or as close to it as I can get. Yes, there is a big difference. I hook up 2 rigs to the same antenna and then feed their audio outputs (speaker outs) into a mixing board. I adjust the audio to give the best S/N ratio on the rig and then trim each channel on the mixer to get both rigs at the same level in the headphones. I can then listen to one rig or the other (or one in each ear) by just sliding volume faders up and down or hitting a mute button. In this way, I'm using the same antenna, tuning the same signal at the same time and listening on the same headphones. The only difference is the rig itself. I've done this test with various combinations of R4A, 2B, IC-735, TS-830s, TenTec Omni V, K1 and K2. What I've found is that the differences between rigs are shown more clearly with this sort of rapid A/B testing. You can really hear the differences in AGC action, IF passband width, frequency response, distortion levels and general grunge or harsh sound. There really is a difference. No, we are not just chasing numbers. - Keith N1AS - - K2 5411.ssb.100 - - K3 Wave 3 - -Original Message- If a ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, blind folded and not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one with the best receiver by just using his or her ears? ... is there really a difference in the lab numbers as close as they are or are we just chasing numbers? Gary, N7HTS ___ 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] Chasing the numbers
Keith, I would be interested in reading about your observations on the differences between receivers. Please consider posting them to the reflector. Darrell On Thursday 28 February 2008 09:01, you wrote: > I've done this, or as close to it as I can get. Yes, there is a big > difference. > > I hook up 2 rigs to the same antenna and then feed their audio outputs > (speaker outs) into a mixing board. I adjust the audio to give the best > S/N ratio on the rig and then trim each channel on the mixer to get both > rigs at the same level in the headphones. I can then listen to one rig > or the other (or one in each ear) by just sliding volume faders up and > down or hitting a mute button. In this way, I'm using the same antenna, > tuning the same signal at the same time and listening on the same > headphones. The only difference is the rig itself. > > I've done this test with various combinations of R4A, 2B, IC-735, > TS-830s, TenTec Omni V, K1 and K2. > > What I've found is that the differences between rigs are shown more > clearly with this sort of rapid A/B testing. You can really hear the > differences in AGC action, IF passband width, frequency response, > distortion levels and general grunge or harsh sound. There really is a > difference. No, we are not just chasing numbers. > > - Keith N1AS - > - K2 5411.ssb.100 - > - K3 Wave 3 - > > -Original Message- > If a ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, blind folded and > not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one > with the best receiver by just using his or her ears? > ... is there really a difference in the lab numbers as close as they are > or are we just chasing numbers? > > Gary, > N7HTS > ___ -- Darrell Bellerive Amateur Radio Stations VA7TO and VE7CLA Grand Forks, British Columbia, Canada ___ 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] Chasing the numbers
I've done this, or as close to it as I can get. Yes, there is a big difference. I hook up 2 rigs to the same antenna and then feed their audio outputs (speaker outs) into a mixing board. I adjust the audio to give the best S/N ratio on the rig and then trim each channel on the mixer to get both rigs at the same level in the headphones. I can then listen to one rig or the other (or one in each ear) by just sliding volume faders up and down or hitting a mute button. In this way, I'm using the same antenna, tuning the same signal at the same time and listening on the same headphones. The only difference is the rig itself. I've done this test with various combinations of R4A, 2B, IC-735, TS-830s, TenTec Omni V, K1 and K2. What I've found is that the differences between rigs are shown more clearly with this sort of rapid A/B testing. You can really hear the differences in AGC action, IF passband width, frequency response, distortion levels and general grunge or harsh sound. There really is a difference. No, we are not just chasing numbers. - Keith N1AS - - K2 5411.ssb.100 - - K3 Wave 3 - -Original Message- If a ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, blind folded and not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one with the best receiver by just using his or her ears? ... is there really a difference in the lab numbers as close as they are or are we just chasing numbers? Gary, N7HTS ___ 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] Chasing the numbers
Gary, Those better numbers will allow you to copy weaker signals than a receiver with a poorer numbers. So there is something to it other than just chasing numbers. Will the average ragchewing ham notice a difference - maybe, but that is not the type who typically dig for weak signals. The DXer, the contester, and many QRP hams will dig for those weak ones, 73, Don W3FPR Gary D Krause wrote: Since the K3 is at the top of the list now and the K2 isn't far behind, I've been wondering how the numbers really affect what we hear. If a ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, blind folded and not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one with the best receiver by just using his or her ears? Lets assume that this ham has good hearing and that every rig is set the same. I realize that people have different reasons for picking a rig and that it isn't always based on lab tests otherwise we would all own the same rig assuming money is not a factor :-) But is there really a difference in the lab numbers as close as they are or are we just chasing numbers? ___ 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
