Re: [Elecraft] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Hi Phil - This thread has been closed. Please see my earlier posting. 73, Eric elecraft.com On 4/28/2014 1:41 PM, Phil Kane wrote: On 4/27/2014 9:26 PM, David Cole wrote: The legal issue will sort itself out. If ESSB does not have it's own emission definition, (one accepted by the FCC), and is classed with SSB, then it is not legal. Both "conventional" SSB and ESSB have the same emission designator - A3J - when used for voice (phone). The difference is the occupied bandwidth. That's where the argument is. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
On 4/27/2014 9:26 PM, David Cole wrote: > The legal issue will sort itself out. If ESSB does not have it's own > emission definition, (one accepted by the FCC), and is classed with SSB, > then it is not legal. Both "conventional" SSB and ESSB have the same emission designator - A3J - when used for voice (phone). The difference is the occupied bandwidth. That's where the argument is. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
If you understood that if you have 3.0 kHz of IF and clip off some of the lows and some of the highs from the audio. It's not the same as only having 2.3 kHz of IF. Keith -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588076.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Gentlemen, This thread is now closed. I apologize for not stepping in earlier, I was off-line most of the weekend. In general, please do not argue on the Elecraft list pro/con about various emission modes like ESSB, CW vs no-code, QRP vs QRO, Contesting etc and their appropriateness to amateur radio. This list is not a forum for amateur radio policy. Also, impolite discussion is in direct violation of the list guidelines. Also, if you are tempted to use ALL CAPS or Exclamation points (!) in a posting, please do not post. If you feel angry or like you must attack someone, don't. In general waiting overnight and re-reading your proposed posting goes a long way towards self filtering. :-) The delete key works wonders.. Regards, Eric List Moderator elecraft.com On 4/28/2014 12:09 AM, Dennis Mills wrote: STOP IT !! On Apr 27, 2014, at 11:11 PM, mikerodgerske5gbc--- via Elecraft wrote: While I do not endorse ESSB, it seems to me the dogs were let loose almost immediately. Doesn't this go against list guidelines? I don't understand why Eric let this go on. 73 Mike R __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Of course it is. If you would understand that SSB is simply audio mixed up to R-F, you would not have this mistaken idea. We normally do it in two steps, audio to I-F, I-F to R-F, but that's all it is, a frequency conversion. Certainly, if you take a 2 KHz band of audio frequencies and run the result of the first frequency conversion through a 1 KHz filter, you will band limit the result. However, if you run the same product through a 10 KHz IF filter, you will still get a 2 KHz wide result. The wide filter isn't going to magically widen the transmitted signal. Wes N7WS On 4/27/2014 7:07 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: Joe, You of all people should know it's not the same as actually narrowing the IF. You should try both and compare. Keith __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
STOP IT !! On Apr 27, 2014, at 11:11 PM, mikerodgerske5gbc--- via Elecraft wrote: > While I do not endorse ESSB, it seems to me the dogs were let loose almost > immediately. > > Doesn't this go against list guidelines? > > I don't understand why Eric let this go on. > > 73 > Mike R > > Check out the QRZ app > __ > 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 dmil...@att.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
While I do not endorse ESSB, it seems to me the dogs were let loose almost immediately. Doesn't this go against list guidelines? I don't understand why Eric let this go on. 73 Mike R Check out the QRZ app __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
If one wants to devolve into international law (treaty), ITU defines "commercial quality" telephony as 300 - 3000 Hz and defines "Sound Broadcasting" as "between 4,000 and 10,000 (Hz) depending on the quality desired". See: http://life.itu.ch/radioclub/rr/ap01.htm. The USA includes that definition/table in 47CFR §2.201 and §2.202. Thus references to the "necessary bandwidth" for voice (phone) in part 97 (47CFR Part 97) should be read as 2K70J3A for SSB (including "ESSB") and 6K0A3A for AM - including the limitations in §97.307(a) and §97.307(b). 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/28/2014 12:26 AM, David Cole wrote: Milverton, Respectfully, your reply does not answer the question-- is there really a need for ESSB? Your answer merely introduces a totally different argument into this discussion, (the legal argument), while using my question as a launching point for a subject change. I am not asking about if it is legal, I am asking why do it at all? Is this really to use an ESSB supporters own words, "...other hams having fun..."? The legal issue will sort itself out. If ESSB does not have it's own emission definition, (one accepted by the FCC), and is classed with SSB, then it is not legal. This conclusion on my part is based on Part 97.307(a), again, this assumes that ESSB and SSB have the same emission designation as per the FCC. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Hi Mike, I beg to differ on that, the slow transmissions have a valid reason to be so slow, they are working statistics to make a contact with the lowest power possible... Does ESSB take less power? Does it allow for very weak signals reception... No... It is there because someone thinks it is cool... Nothing more. It is not innovative, nor does it have any engineering reason for existing on HF. All it takes is an equalizer. Using slow CW is clever approach to a problem, it lets one make a contact where one would not be possible, ESSB does just the opposite... Given the same band conditions, the restricted BW signal will outperform the ESSB signal every time. It was after all a supporter of ESSB that said it was just fun... Is that really it? It's just cool? -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 22:32 -0600, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote: > For the same reason that people are trying to make qso's on 160 using > some type of incredibly slow transmission mode that appears to most as > local qrm. Because you can, doesn't mean you should. > > Mike W0MU > > On 4/27/2014 10:26 PM, David Cole wrote: > > Milverton, > > Respectfully, your reply does not answer the question-- is there really > > a need for ESSB? > > > > Your answer merely introduces a totally different argument into this > > discussion, (the legal argument), while using my question as a launching > > point for a subject change. I am not asking about if it is legal, I am > > asking why do it at all? Is this really to use an ESSB supporters own > > words, "...other hams having fun..."? > > > > The legal issue will sort itself out. If ESSB does not have it's own > > emission definition, (one accepted by the FCC), and is classed with SSB, > > then it is not legal. This conclusion on my part is based on Part > > 97.307(a), again, this assumes that ESSB and SSB have the same emission > > designation as per the FCC. > > > > __ > 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Joe, You have answered a question that myself and another ham in my area have been wondering about... Why are we starting to see the other sideband in some signals... THANK YOU! -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 22:09 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > > NOW! > > You have just Describe 98% of those who proclaim their love of > > Contesting! > > Hardly - most contesters are focused on keeping their audio "tight" > for maximum efficiency. Yes, some overdrive an amplifier and > splatter but heavily compressed (low peak to average) audio is not > "wide" and does not cause interference. Unlike intentionally wide > audio with excessive low end that rings and creates a false carrier > to the point the SSB can be demodulated as AM. > > It takes one look at a P3 or other panadapter to tell the difference > between properly adjusted DX or contest audio and ESSB slop. The DX > or contest audio will show more high end than low end and be 2.4 - 2.8 > KHz wide. The ESSB slop will have 20 dB or more low end than high end, > will be 3.5 - 4.0 KHz wide and will sound muddy or 'rumble' with very > little articulation in spite of the extra bandwidth. The excess low > frequency audio will push the transmitter IF and PA stages into > compression much too soon and result audio that is "dense" and full > to tightly packed IMD products of the low frequency (fundamental). > If the transmitter has been modified with a wide IF filter, the ESSB > signal will also include a regenerated opposite sideband down only > 10 to 15 dB relative to the normal sideband due to the IMD generated > in the overdriven IF and PA stages. > > 73, __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Milverton, Again, respectfully I submit that you are trying to shift the subject off of ESSB, to anywhere else now. Joe is not talking about Contesting, he is talking about ESSB. -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 18:39 -0700, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: > willful > use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a > violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly > interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. > > NOW! > You have just Describe 98% of those who proclaim their love of Contesting! > > [particularly! > interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc.] > > BTW. > Aggressive use of Compression (PUNCH) > Overly active ALC. > And! Last but not the least, chronic twisting of the mic gain knob > to the right is tantamount of the above mention. > > Maybe, we should just include the Contester in this tantivy as well. > > > > 73 Milverton. / W9MMS > > > On Sunday, April 27, 2014 8:09 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" > wrote: > > > >On the other hand, Title 47 which includes more than Part 97 regularly > >defines SSB as 2K80J3E (2.8 KHz bandwidth) and specifies a maximum > >modulating frequency of 2.8 KHz for various FM voice "communications" > >services. > > > >Given that standard, and the fact that RM-10740 was dismissed without > >modifying the rule that requires the use of minimum bandwidth, without > >modifying the rules against intentional interference, and without > >modifying the rule that requires "good engineering practice," willful > >use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a > >violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly > >interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. > > > >73, > > > >... Joe, W4TV > > > > > > > >On 4/27/2014 8:42 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: > >> This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they > >> want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering > >> reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. > >> Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any > >> other reason to do ESSB? > >> > >> David, et al. > >> > >> The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been bantered > >> around > >> on numerous different occasions. > >> There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make frivolous > >> statements on > >> what should or should not be the accepted TBW. > >> Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on TBW > >> for SSB. > >> > >> For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the > >> FCC view on the > >> subject a define bandwidth on Phone. > >> > >> http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf > >> > >> There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for > >> Amateurs. > >> > >> 73 Milverton. > >> > >> > >__ > >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 tnny...@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 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
For the same reason that people are trying to make qso's on 160 using some type of incredibly slow transmission mode that appears to most as local qrm. Because you can, doesn't mean you should. Mike W0MU On 4/27/2014 10:26 PM, David Cole wrote: Milverton, Respectfully, your reply does not answer the question-- is there really a need for ESSB? Your answer merely introduces a totally different argument into this discussion, (the legal argument), while using my question as a launching point for a subject change. I am not asking about if it is legal, I am asking why do it at all? Is this really to use an ESSB supporters own words, "...other hams having fun..."? The legal issue will sort itself out. If ESSB does not have it's own emission definition, (one accepted by the FCC), and is classed with SSB, then it is not legal. This conclusion on my part is based on Part 97.307(a), again, this assumes that ESSB and SSB have the same emission designation as per the FCC. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Milverton, Respectfully, your reply does not answer the question-- is there really a need for ESSB? Your answer merely introduces a totally different argument into this discussion, (the legal argument), while using my question as a launching point for a subject change. I am not asking about if it is legal, I am asking why do it at all? Is this really to use an ESSB supporters own words, "...other hams having fun..."? The legal issue will sort itself out. If ESSB does not have it's own emission definition, (one accepted by the FCC), and is classed with SSB, then it is not legal. This conclusion on my part is based on Part 97.307(a), again, this assumes that ESSB and SSB have the same emission designation as per the FCC. -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 17:42 -0700, tnny...@yahoo.com wrote: > This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what > they > want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering > reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. > Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any > other reason to do ESSB? > > David, et al. > > The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been > bantered around > on numerous different occasions. > There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make > frivolous statements on > what should or should not be the accepted TBW. > Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on > TBW for SSB. > > For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are > the FCC view on the > subject a define bandwidth on Phone. > > http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf > > There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for > Amateurs. > > 73 Milverton. > > > On Sunday, April 27, 2014 7:04 PM, David Cole wrote: > > Larry, > Respectfully, I have to disagree with you here... I built a > state of > the art fully digital audio studio for movie studio use three > years ago, > so I would fall into the "Audio Guys" group... > > I really do think ESSB sounds cool, and the audio person in me > likes to > hear it, but the engineer in me thinks the ham bands are just > the wrong > place for it. At least below 100 MHz. > > This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing > what they > want to do with their K3s", there really are some good > engineering > reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated > a few. > Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there > really any > other reason to do ESSB? > > -- > Thanks and 73's, > For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: > www.nk7z.net > for MixW support see; > http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info > for Dopplergram information see: > http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info > for MM-SSTV see: > http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info > > > On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 21:41 +, Larry Wassmann wrote: > > I am sorry now that I asked what I thought was a reasonable > question. Looking for some help. But I guess most just wanted > to vent their particular bias and dislike for other hams > having fun doing what they want to do with their K3s. Why does > Elecraft offer what they call a ESSB filter? Why do almost all > new rigs come with EQs now? Do you think any of us audio guys > had any influence? True thanks for those who sent me mail > giving me real help and not just bash me and other who enjoy > sounding like men not some little girl with her panties too > tight. > > > > > > 73 OZ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: > > Larry Martus Wassmann > > Non omnis moriar > > (Not all of me will die) - - - The good I do will live > forever. > > > > www.w3oz.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.q
Re: [Elecraft] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
I've seen far more boring ones, Wes. At least this guy has a dog and knows Cobal ... and has an admirable profit motive :-) 73, Phil On 4/27/14, 7:43 PM, Wes (N7WS) wrote: So what digital mode do you think is "best"? PSK-31 maybe, where the proponents mistakenly believe that you don't need decent antennas or more than 10W to send brag files that put a normal human being to sleep? "Hello my good friend Wes. It is a pleasure to QSO you this first time. My name is Jose and I was created in December 1960. My dog's name is Poochsito and my locator is El10jh. The equipment here is an Elecraft K3-10 with the built-in tuner and the 8-pole 2.8 KHz filter, running 8.65 W to a wet noodle antenna up 6.5 meters and fed with 30.33 meters of RG8X. Computer is a 10GHz 8-core POS with 32Gb ram running a patched version of Cobal... Interface is an ABC Technology Turbo 29 with the Gigabyte accelerator chip.Audio is fed to the Turbo 29 via Monster Cable SuperFlex HCOF with gold-plated connectors. Ham Radio Deluxe is used because it is way too complicated for the average ham and makes we holier-than-thou operators feel superior. Well OM... was my pleasure to QSO you. I QSL100 percent via eQSL after receipt of $10 US via Paypal. I wish you good health and happiness in 2014 and want to take this opportunity to wish you and your family a wonderful Christmas and a Happy 2015. 73s AR N7WS de XE3BS SK SK SK... QSO No 456 logged 04/27/2014 0222Z." That digital mode? On 4/27/2014 4:02 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: Only because of the need for speed not because it's the best digital mode. Keith __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Cutting the bandwidth of the audio going into the modulator is indistinguishable from narrowing the bandwidth after the modulator. If you don't believe that run a 1/3 octave EQ (so you have finer control) between the mic and the input of the K3. Of course, you can always install an INRAD 2.1 KHz filter in the K3 and tell the rig it is a 2.7 KHz filter ... that should give you a tight 400-2600 Hz response. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 10:07 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: Joe, You of all people should know it's not the same as actually narrowing the IF. You should try both and compare. Keith If you use K9YC's suggested EQ you will be very close to 2.3/2.4 KHz audio - particularly if 400 and 3200 are set to -16 dB. Try it ... 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 7:41 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: I've been asking for the ability to narrow the transmit bandwidth on the K3 for years. That would make a better contest radio. But alas all I hear is it's on the list. Keith -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588036.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 li...@subich.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
I'm sorry but just because a band is not full of signals does not make it right to have a poor signal. In fact, I don't see anywhere in the FCC regulations that states you can do whatever you want as long as you don't bother someone else. To the other gentleman, I would like to ask for a link to the study that shows 98% of contesters have poor audio. CQ magazines contests are now disqualifying stations with poor audio or signals on CW. That has been a bug in the bonnet of most contesters for some time. So, again, I would like read the study that proves that 98% of contesters are operating poorly and purposely as you intimate. 73, Tim Herrick, KQ8M k...@kq8m.com AR-Cluster V6 kq8m.no-ip.org User Ports: 23, 7373 with local skimmer, 7374 without local skimmer Server Ports: V6 3607, V4 Active 3605, V4 Passive 3606 -Original Message- From: Elecraft [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of GRANT YOUNGMAN Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2014 10:56 PM To: List Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny You can find some ESSB around 7230 daytimes, and 14.178 give or take. I haven't heard the 20M guys for a while, but I haven't been there listening either. Some of the guys on 40 do exhibit the false carrier artifact that Joe referred to. But the band isn't crowded during the day (or hasn't been) so it seems the question is SO? They're not bothering anyone except the bandwidth police who complain about a 6 or 8 kHz wide AM signal, too, as being "horrible" on 75 meters when the band is otherwise DEAD. (ESSB sounds darn good on a receiver with wide bandwidth and good audio response, and the AM community in general are good neighbors on the bands). We have enough trouble with HOA's beating us up - why do we insist on beating up on our fellow hams who might enjoy some aspect of ham radio that we don't? I don't understand it, other than reflecting some drive to be IN CONTROL of what others are allowed to do, not because it affects us personally, or is even good for the hobby, but just . because . control. I rarely bother to even turn on the radio when the ever increasing number of contests ruins the bands for me - but I also don't spend all of my time trying to outlaw contests . We each have points of view. But there's a tendency to treat this whole bandwidth nonsense as a religious war (I know, I'm guilty, too) - which isn't a good thing. Grant NQ5T On Apr 27, 2014, at 9:20 PM, Fred Jensen wrote: > Since I don't casually frequent the SSB sub-bands, where and when would I be > likely to find ESSB? I'd like to see what it sounds like. I have an FT-847 which is pretty broad in SSB, might be fun to compare it to the K3. > > And, sadly for Milverton, I will admit to being a somewhat casual contester, > mainly CW and some RTTY, not a lot on SSB since I can't hear it all that well. > > 73, > > Fred K6DGW > - Northern California Contest Club > - CU in the 2014 Cal QSO Party 4-5 Oct 2014 > - www.cqp.org > > On 4/27/2014 7:09 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > >> Hardly - most contesters are focused on keeping their audio "tight" >> for maximum efficiency. Yes, some overdrive an amplifier and >> splatter but heavily compressed (low peak to average) audio is not >> "wide" and does not cause interference. Unlike intentionally wide >> audio with excessive low end that rings and creates a false carrier >> to the point the SSB can be demodulated as AM. > __ 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...@kq8m.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
You can find some ESSB around 7230 daytimes, and 14.178 give or take. I haven’t heard the 20M guys for a while, but I haven't been there listening either. Some of the guys on 40 do exhibit the false carrier artifact that Joe referred to. But the band isn’t crowded during the day (or hasn’t been) so it seems the question is SO? They’re not bothering anyone except the bandwidth police who complain about a 6 or 8 kHz wide AM signal, too, as being “horrible” on 75 meters when the band is otherwise DEAD. (ESSB sounds darn good on a receiver with wide bandwidth and good audio response, and the AM community in general are good neighbors on the bands). We have enough trouble with HOA’s beating us up — why do we insist on beating up on our fellow hams who might enjoy some aspect of ham radio that we don’t? I don’t understand it, other than reflecting some drive to be IN CONTROL of what others are allowed to do, not because it affects us personally, or is even good for the hobby, but just … because … control. I rarely bother to even turn on the radio when the ever increasing number of contests ruins the bands for me — but I also don’t spend all of my time trying to outlaw contests … We each have points of view. But there’s a tendency to treat this whole bandwidth nonsense as a religious war (I know, I’m guilty, too) — which isn’t a good thing. Grant NQ5T On Apr 27, 2014, at 9:20 PM, Fred Jensen wrote: > Since I don't casually frequent the SSB sub-bands, where and when would I be > likely to find ESSB? I'd like to see what it sounds like. I have an FT-847 > which is pretty broad in SSB, might be fun to compare it to the K3. > > And, sadly for Milverton, I will admit to being a somewhat casual contester, > mainly CW and some RTTY, not a lot on SSB since I can't hear it all that well. > > 73, > > Fred K6DGW > - Northern California Contest Club > - CU in the 2014 Cal QSO Party 4-5 Oct 2014 > - www.cqp.org > > On 4/27/2014 7:09 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > >> Hardly - most contesters are focused on keeping their audio "tight" >> for maximum efficiency. Yes, some overdrive an amplifier and >> splatter but heavily compressed (low peak to average) audio is not >> "wide" and does not cause interference. Unlike intentionally wide >> audio with excessive low end that rings and creates a false carrier >> to the point the SSB can be demodulated as AM. > __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
You know how to bait a guy. But there is more info in the made up QSO than there is in the Elecraft SSB net for the whole 2014. Just saying. Keith PSK-31 maybe, where the proponents mistakenly believe that you don't need decent antennas or more than 10W to send brag files that put a normal human being to sleep? "Hello my good friend Wes. It is a pleasure to QSO you this first time. My name is Jose and I was created in December 1960. My dog's name is Poochsito and my locator is El10jh. The equipment here is an Elecraft K3-10 with the built-in tuner and the 8-pole 2.8 KHz filter, running 8.65 W to a wet noodle antenna up 6.5 meters and fed with 30.33 meters of RG8X. Computer is a 10GHz 8-core POS with 32Gb ram running a patched version of Cobal... Interface is an ABC Technology Turbo 29 with the Gigabyte accelerator chip. Audio is fed to the Turbo 29 via Monster Cable SuperFlex HCOF with gold-plated connectors. Ham Radio Deluxe is used because it is way too complicated for the average ham and makes we holier-than-thou operators feel superior. Well OM... was my pleasure to QSO you. I QSL100 percent via eQSL after receipt of $10 US via Paypal. I wish you good health and happiness in 2014 and want to take this opportunity to wish you and your family a wonderful Christmas and a Happy 2015. 73s AR N7WS de XE3BS SK SK SK... QSO No 456 logged 04/27/2014 0222Z." -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588044.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
So what digital mode do you think is "best"? PSK-31 maybe, where the proponents mistakenly believe that you don't need decent antennas or more than 10W to send brag files that put a normal human being to sleep? "Hello my good friend Wes. It is a pleasure to QSO you this first time. My name is Jose and I was created in December 1960. My dog's name is Poochsito and my locator is El10jh. The equipment here is an Elecraft K3-10 with the built-in tuner and the 8-pole 2.8 KHz filter, running 8.65 W to a wet noodle antenna up 6.5 meters and fed with 30.33 meters of RG8X. Computer is a 10GHz 8-core POS with 32Gb ram running a patched version of Cobal... Interface is an ABC Technology Turbo 29 with the Gigabyte accelerator chip. Audio is fed to the Turbo 29 via Monster Cable SuperFlex HCOF with gold-plated connectors. Ham Radio Deluxe is used because it is way too complicated for the average ham and makes we holier-than-thou operators feel superior. Well OM... was my pleasure to QSO you. I QSL100 percent via eQSL after receipt of $10 US via Paypal. I wish you good health and happiness in 2014 and want to take this opportunity to wish you and your family a wonderful Christmas and a Happy 2015. 73s AR N7WS de XE3BS SK SK SK... QSO No 456 logged 04/27/2014 0222Z." That digital mode? On 4/27/2014 4:02 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: Only because of the need for speed not because it's the best digital mode. Keith __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Hardly - most contesters are focused on keeping their audio "tight" for maximum efficiency. I wonder which planet you're orbiting on a contest week end? !! Joe, you just got a thing for ESSBer, and here comes Larry asking his question this morning, which presented the avenue you were seeking to get on your Podium. Well! If that's what put cream in your twinkie, go ahead and knock yourself out. Not everyone shares or endorse your opinion. ps. This is not an attack against you, just an observation. 73 Milverton. On Sunday, April 27, 2014 9:18 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote: 98 percent of contesters? Exaggerate much? > >I am sure we can find examples of your infractions easily enough during >non contest periods. > >So many trolls... > >Mike W0MU > >On 4/27/2014 7:39 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: >> willful >> use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a >> violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly >> interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. >> >> NOW! >> You have just Describe 98% of those who proclaim their love of Contesting! >> >> [particularly! >> interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc.] >> >> BTW. >> Aggressive use of Compression (PUNCH) >> Overly active ALC. >> And! Last but not the least, chronic twisting of the mic gain knob >> to the right is tantamount of the above mention. >> >> Maybe, we should just include the Contester in this tantivy as well. >> >> >> >> 73 Milverton. / W9MMS >> >> >> On Sunday, April 27, 2014 8:09 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" >> wrote: >> >> >>> On the other hand, Title 47 which includes more than Part 97 regularly >>> defines SSB as 2K80J3E (2.8 KHz bandwidth) and specifies a maximum >>> modulating frequency of 2.8 KHz for various FM voice "communications" >>> services. >>> >>> Given that standard, and the fact that RM-10740 was dismissed without >>> modifying the rule that requires the use of minimum bandwidth, without >>> modifying the rules against intentional interference, and without >>> modifying the rule that requires "good engineering practice," willful >>> use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a >>> violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly >>> interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. >>> >>> 73, >>> >>> ... Joe, W4TV >>> >>> >>> >>> On 4/27/2014 8:42 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any other reason to do ESSB? David, et al. The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been bantered around on numerous different occasions. There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make frivolous statements on what should or should not be the accepted TBW. Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on TBW for SSB. For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the FCC view on the subject a define bandwidth on Phone. http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for Amateurs. 73 Milverton. >>> __ >>> 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 tnny...@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 w...@w0mu.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 tnny...@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.ne
Re: [Elecraft] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Since I don't casually frequent the SSB sub-bands, where and when would I be likely to find ESSB? I'd like to see what it sounds like. I have an FT-847 which is pretty broad in SSB, might be fun to compare it to the K3. And, sadly for Milverton, I will admit to being a somewhat casual contester, mainly CW and some RTTY, not a lot on SSB since I can't hear it all that well. 73, Fred K6DGW - Northern California Contest Club - CU in the 2014 Cal QSO Party 4-5 Oct 2014 - www.cqp.org On 4/27/2014 7:09 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: Hardly - most contesters are focused on keeping their audio "tight" for maximum efficiency. Yes, some overdrive an amplifier and splatter but heavily compressed (low peak to average) audio is not "wide" and does not cause interference. Unlike intentionally wide audio with excessive low end that rings and creates a false carrier to the point the SSB can be demodulated as AM. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
None of this will matter soon as we will have a new mode button. Digital Voice will be the new SSB. Then everyone can complain about all the SSBers taking up 2.8 KHz. Keith -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587999p7588040.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
98 percent of contesters? Exaggerate much? I am sure we can find examples of your infractions easily enough during non contest periods. So many trolls... Mike W0MU On 4/27/2014 7:39 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: willful use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. NOW! You have just Describe 98% of those who proclaim their love of Contesting! [particularly! interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc.] BTW. Aggressive use of Compression (PUNCH) Overly active ALC. And! Last but not the least, chronic twisting of the mic gain knob to the right is tantamount of the above mention. Maybe, we should just include the Contester in this tantivy as well. 73 Milverton. / W9MMS On Sunday, April 27, 2014 8:09 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" wrote: On the other hand, Title 47 which includes more than Part 97 regularly defines SSB as 2K80J3E (2.8 KHz bandwidth) and specifies a maximum modulating frequency of 2.8 KHz for various FM voice "communications" services. Given that standard, and the fact that RM-10740 was dismissed without modifying the rule that requires the use of minimum bandwidth, without modifying the rules against intentional interference, and without modifying the rule that requires "good engineering practice," willful use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 8:42 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any other reason to do ESSB? David, et al. The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been bantered around on numerous different occasions. There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make frivolous statements on what should or should not be the accepted TBW. Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on TBW for SSB. For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the FCC view on the subject a define bandwidth on Phone. http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for Amateurs. 73 Milverton. __ 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 tnny...@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 w...@w0mu.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
> NOW! You have just Describe 98% of those who proclaim their love of Contesting! Hardly - most contesters are focused on keeping their audio "tight" for maximum efficiency. Yes, some overdrive an amplifier and splatter but heavily compressed (low peak to average) audio is not "wide" and does not cause interference. Unlike intentionally wide audio with excessive low end that rings and creates a false carrier to the point the SSB can be demodulated as AM. It takes one look at a P3 or other panadapter to tell the difference between properly adjusted DX or contest audio and ESSB slop. The DX or contest audio will show more high end than low end and be 2.4 - 2.8 KHz wide. The ESSB slop will have 20 dB or more low end than high end, will be 3.5 - 4.0 KHz wide and will sound muddy or 'rumble' with very little articulation in spite of the extra bandwidth. The excess low frequency audio will push the transmitter IF and PA stages into compression much too soon and result audio that is "dense" and full to tightly packed IMD products of the low frequency (fundamental). If the transmitter has been modified with a wide IF filter, the ESSB signal will also include a regenerated opposite sideband down only 10 to 15 dB relative to the normal sideband due to the IMD generated in the overdriven IF and PA stages. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 9:39 PM, tnny...@yahoo.com wrote: willful use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. NOW! You have just Describe 98% of those who proclaim their love of Contesting! [particularly! interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc.] BTW. Aggressive use of Compression (PUNCH) Overly active ALC. And! Last but not the least, chronic twisting of the mic gain knob to the right is tantamount of the above mention. Maybe, we should just include the Contester in this tantivy as well. 73 Milverton. / W9MMS On Sunday, April 27, 2014 8:09 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" wrote: On the other hand, Title 47 which includes more than Part 97 regularly defines SSB as 2K80J3E (2.8 KHz bandwidth) and specifies a maximum modulating frequency of 2.8 KHz for various FM voice "communications" services. Given that standard, and the fact that RM-10740 was dismissed without modifying the rule that requires the use of minimum bandwidth, without modifying the rules against intentional interference, and without modifying the rule that requires "good engineering practice," willful use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 8:42 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any other reason to do ESSB? David, et al. The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been bantered around on numerous different occasions. There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make frivolous statements on what should or should not be the accepted TBW. Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on TBW for SSB. For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the FCC view on the subject a define bandwidth on Phone. http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for Amateurs. 73 Milverton. __ 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 tnny...@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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Joe, You of all people should know it's not the same as actually narrowing the IF. You should try both and compare. Keith If you use K9YC's suggested EQ you will be very close to 2.3/2.4 KHz audio - particularly if 400 and 3200 are set to -16 dB. Try it ... 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 7:41 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: > > I've been asking for the ability to narrow the transmit bandwidth on the > K3 > for years. That would make a better contest radio. > But alas all I hear is it's on the list. > > Keith -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588036.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
willful use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. NOW! You have just Describe 98% of those who proclaim their love of Contesting! [particularly! interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc.] BTW. Aggressive use of Compression (PUNCH) Overly active ALC. And! Last but not the least, chronic twisting of the mic gain knob to the right is tantamount of the above mention. Maybe, we should just include the Contester in this tantivy as well. 73 Milverton. / W9MMS On Sunday, April 27, 2014 8:09 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" wrote: >On the other hand, Title 47 which includes more than Part 97 regularly >defines SSB as 2K80J3E (2.8 KHz bandwidth) and specifies a maximum >modulating frequency of 2.8 KHz for various FM voice "communications" >services. > >Given that standard, and the fact that RM-10740 was dismissed without >modifying the rule that requires the use of minimum bandwidth, without >modifying the rules against intentional interference, and without >modifying the rule that requires "good engineering practice," willful >use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a >violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly >interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. > >73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > > >On 4/27/2014 8:42 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: >> This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they >> want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering >> reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. >> Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any >> other reason to do ESSB? >> >> David, et al. >> >> The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been bantered >> around >> on numerous different occasions. >> There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make frivolous >> statements on >> what should or should not be the accepted TBW. >> Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on TBW >> for SSB. >> >> For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the FCC >> view on the >> subject a define bandwidth on Phone. >> >> http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf >> >> There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for >> Amateurs. >> >> 73 Milverton. >> >> >__ >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 tnny...@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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
On the other hand, Title 47 which includes more than Part 97 regularly defines SSB as 2K80J3E (2.8 KHz bandwidth) and specifies a maximum modulating frequency of 2.8 KHz for various FM voice "communications" services. Given that standard, and the fact that RM-10740 was dismissed without modifying the rule that requires the use of minimum bandwidth, without modifying the rules against intentional interference, and without modifying the rule that requires "good engineering practice," willful use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 8:42 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any other reason to do ESSB? David, et al. The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been bantered around on numerous different occasions. There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make frivolous statements on what should or should not be the accepted TBW. Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on TBW for SSB. For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the FCC view on the subject a define bandwidth on Phone. http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for Amateurs. 73 Milverton. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
On 4/27/2014 5:42 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote: > For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the FCC > view on the > subject a define bandwidth on Phone. > > http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf That was 10 years ago. A fresh look would be in order. -- -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 >From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
The original post mentioned play back of recorded audio. Now thats about as difficult to get right as i can think of. I am not going to preach but, the effort is not worth it as the audio cannot be duplicated perfectly. Pretty much a waste of time when you consider setting up the receive and transnitter to be flat then hope the station you are intending to listen has figured out how to setup his rcvr. Easier to snip of a P3.grin In VK we sadly have a huge number of pretty ordinary sounding stations. My fix for that problem is to move frequency. Gary Gary Vk1ZZ K3, KX3, KPA500-FT, KAT500-FT,P3. On 28/04/2014 10:26 AM, "Phil Kane" wrote: > On 4/27/2014 3:44 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: > > > RTTY is an old outdated digital mode and severs only one thing these > days. > > Contesting. > > Folks say the same thing about CW. But if it's not broke, don't fix it. > That's what ham radio is all about. > -- > > 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane (same call since 1952) > Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 > > From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest > Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon > __ > 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any other reason to do ESSB? David, et al. The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been bantered around on numerous different occasions. There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make frivolous statements on what should or should not be the accepted TBW. Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on TBW for SSB. For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the FCC view on the subject a define bandwidth on Phone. http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for Amateurs. 73 Milverton. On Sunday, April 27, 2014 7:04 PM, David Cole wrote: Larry, >Respectfully, I have to disagree with you here... I built a state of >the art fully digital audio studio for movie studio use three years ago, >so I would fall into the "Audio Guys" group... > >I really do think ESSB sounds cool, and the audio person in me likes to >hear it, but the engineer in me thinks the ham bands are just the wrong >place for it. At least below 100 MHz. > >This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they >want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering >reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. >Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any >other reason to do ESSB? > >-- >Thanks and 73's, >For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: >www.nk7z.net >for MixW support see; >http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info >for Dopplergram information see: >http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info >for MM-SSTV see: >http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info > > >On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 21:41 +, Larry Wassmann wrote: >> I am sorry now that I asked what I thought was a reasonable question. >> Looking for some help. But I guess most just wanted to vent their particular >> bias and dislike for other hams having fun doing what they want to do with >> their K3s. Why does Elecraft offer what they call a ESSB filter? Why do >> almost all new rigs come with EQs now? Do you think any of us audio guys had >> any influence? True thanks for those who sent me mail giving me real help >> and not just bash me and other who enjoy sounding like men not some little >> girl with her panties too tight. >> >> >> 73 OZ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: >> Larry Martus Wassmann >> Non omnis moriar >> (Not all of me will die) - - - The good I do will live forever. >> >> www.w3oz.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 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 tnny...@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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
On 4/27/2014 3:44 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: > RTTY is an old outdated digital mode and severs only one thing these days. > Contesting. Folks say the same thing about CW. But if it's not broke, don't fix it. That's what ham radio is all about. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane (same call since 1952) Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 >From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Larry, Respectfully, I have to disagree with you here... I built a state of the art fully digital audio studio for movie studio use three years ago, so I would fall into the "Audio Guys" group... I really do think ESSB sounds cool, and the audio person in me likes to hear it, but the engineer in me thinks the ham bands are just the wrong place for it. At least below 100 MHz. This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz. Joe has articulated a few. Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any other reason to do ESSB? -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 21:41 +, Larry Wassmann wrote: > I am sorry now that I asked what I thought was a reasonable question. Looking > for some help. But I guess most just wanted to vent their particular bias and > dislike for other hams having fun doing what they want to do with their K3s. > Why does Elecraft offer what they call a ESSB filter? Why do almost all new > rigs come with EQs now? Do you think any of us audio guys had any influence? > True thanks for those who sent me mail giving me real help and not just bash > me and other who enjoy sounding like men not some little girl with her > panties too tight. > > > 73 OZ > > > > > > > From: > Larry Martus Wassmann > Non omnis moriar > (Not all of me will die) - - - The good I do will live forever. > > www.w3oz.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 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
If you use K9YC's suggested EQ you will be very close to 2.3/2.4 KHz audio - particularly if 400 and 3200 are set to -16 dB. Try it ... 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 7:41 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: I've been asking for the ability to narrow the transmit bandwidth on the K3 for years. That would make a better contest radio. But alas all I hear is it's on the list. Keith A friend of mine has a flex and can vary his transmitter BW we ran some tests and as I told Dick,, if ur gonna chase DX as you narrow your signal to 2 K or so with the same mike gain etc really gives you punch with better average power but no increase in distortion,, well not much observing it on the P3 taking it much less than that does cause distortion bad sounding audio but if you know any folk with a flex get them to do the same test interesting to observe on the P3 Dick still likes to use ESSB but not when 75 is very active long thread fer sure HAR Bob K3DJC -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588018.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 li...@subich.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Keith, Respectfully, I think you missed an important part of Joe's post. The rules state-- that for the mode used, not the least broad mode, nor the narrowest mode possible, but for the mode being used... 97.307(a): No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth than necessary for the information rate and EMISSION TYPE BEING TRANSMITTED, in accordance with good amateur practice. I added the caps for emphasis. So this entire discussion hangs on the question-- is ESSB the same mode as SSB. If it is, then it is not legal, very simple. If ESSB is a different mode than SSB, than this discussion path proves nothing. I am very interested in the answer to this questions as well as a few others are I expect. I just don't know where to find a list of FCC accepted mode definitions. If ESSB is not address in the list, then I believe it would fall under SSB, and as such not be legal. -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 14:57 -0700, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: > Joe, > > Because there are other narrower digital modes that can do the same thing. > RTTY uses much bandwidth. Just like you claim ESSB uses to much. > > Keith, K5ENS > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588002.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 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
I've been asking for the ability to narrow the transmit bandwidth on the K3 for years. That would make a better contest radio. But alas all I hear is it's on the list. Keith A friend of mine has a flex and can vary his transmitter BW we ran some tests and as I told Dick,, if ur gonna chase DX as you narrow your signal to 2 K or so with the same mike gain etc really gives you punch with better average power but no increase in distortion,, well not much observing it on the P3 taking it much less than that does cause distortion bad sounding audio but if you know any folk with a flex get them to do the same test interesting to observe on the P3 Dick still likes to use ESSB but not when 75 is very active long thread fer sure HAR Bob K3DJC -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588018.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
CW is an old outdated digital mode, one that is usually spoken of with great reverence by those who practice it. AM is an outdated voice mode but I get why people still use AM. Don't know why I have a key or a microphone for my KX3, I greatly prefer keyboard modes. I have the deepest respect for those who continue to keep the traditions alive, and I recognize their skill. ... and I repeat my call for a little more courtesy between operators, on and off the air. 73 -- Lynn On 4/27/2014 3:44 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: RTTY is an old outdated digital mode __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Joe, you seems to be the Resident Authority on the subject matter! 73 Milverton. On Sunday, April 27, 2014 5:56 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" wrote: >On 4/27/2014 6:18 PM, Jim Brown wrote: >> Why do rigs include equalizers? First, because hams want them, >> whether for a good reason or a bad one. HOW we use them is what >> matters. > >Equalizers have a positive use with overly wide microphones like >most electrets. Cut everything below 100 Hz, roll off 200 Hz a >bit, add a modest 3 to 5 dB per octave rise above 1000 Hz and pull >it back down above 3 KHz and one generally has outstanding audio >that sounds very life-like. > >Unfortunately like any tool, EQ can be misused unintentionally by those >who don't know how to use it properly or misused intentionally by those >who don't care about the impact to others. > >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 tnny...@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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
A friend of mine has a flex and can vary his transmitter BW we ran some tests and as I told Dick,, if ur gonna chase DX as you narrow your signal to 2 K or so with the same mike gain etc really gives you punch with better average power but no increase in distortion,, well not much observing it on the P3 taking it much less than that does cause distortion bad sounding audio but if you know any folk with a flex get them to do the same test interesting to observe on the P3 Dick still likes to use ESSB but not when 75 is very active long thread fer sure HAR Bob K3DJC > > The FCC rules say that an amateur station is to limit the bandwidth > to > that necessary for communications, and that is generally accepted as > a > 2.8 kHz bandwidth for voice communications. > > For what purpose? To sound like a broadcast station? I do not see > the > merit in that since amateur radio should be more concerned with > communications effectiveness which means reducing the low frequency > > content and transmitting within a 2.8 kHz bandwidth. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
I set up my K3 TX EQ as recommended by Jim. Admittedly, I do not operate a lot of SSB, primarily in a small number of contests, but when I do I have gotten unsolicited reports of "really great audio." Since this happens in nearly every SSB contest I get into, I've concluded that Jim knows a whole lot more about audio than I do. :-) I run the ALC indicator with the 5th bar about half-on, and the compression no higher than 10 dB. I'm using the Heil headset from Elecraft with the electret element. FWIW: My hearing was damaged a long time ago and I'm fairly deaf [reason for not a lot of SSB]. Jim also suggested a technique with the RX EQ which may work for others that effectively doubles the range of the EQ. My hearing aids are at afterburner roar, and the +16 dB of available boost in the highs doesn't do much. His suggestion was to cut the lows and turn up the AF gain some. This gives me about 30 dB of range in the EQ, still not enough but a lot better than 16. 73, Fred K6DGW - Northern California Contest Club - CU in the 2014 Cal QSO Party 4-5 Oct 2014 - www.cqp.org On 4/27/2014 3:18 PM, Jim Brown wrote: Using the TXEQ built into the K3, I recommend full cut of the three lowest octave bands (50, 100, and 200 Hz centers), and 6dB cut of the 400 Hz band. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Only because of the need for speed not because it's the best digital mode. Keith -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588011.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
It's also the most popular digital mode for DXing and still provides better S/N under weak signal conditions than all but some modulation methods with heavy redundancy/error correction. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 6:44 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: RTTY is an old outdated digital mode and severs only one thing these days. Contesting. Keith -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588006.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 li...@subich.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: (may be snipped) On 4/27/2014 3:44 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: RTTY is an old outdated digital mode and severs only one thing these days. Contesting. REPLY: Did you forget DXing? Nearly all DXPeditions, if they operate digital at all, choose RTTY as their only digital mode. 73, Bill W6WRT __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
On 4/27/2014 6:18 PM, Jim Brown wrote: Why do rigs include equalizers? First, because hams want them, whether for a good reason or a bad one. HOW we use them is what matters. Equalizers have a positive use with overly wide microphones like most electrets. Cut everything below 100 Hz, roll off 200 Hz a bit, add a modest 3 to 5 dB per octave rise above 1000 Hz and pull it back down above 3 KHz and one generally has outstanding audio that sounds very life-like. Unfortunately like any tool, EQ can be misused unintentionally by those who don't know how to use it properly or misused intentionally by those who don't care about the impact to others. 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
OTOH. Last I checked my K3 can be set to transmit ESSB 4.0Khz wide. But it can't be set to transmit SSB at 2.3khz wide. Keith -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588007.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
RTTY is an old outdated digital mode and severs only one thing these days. Contesting. Keith -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588006.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
If you are referring to PSK31, it is significantly less sensitive than traditional RTTY. If your reference is to JT65/JT9, they support structured messages only. In any case , 45 baud/170 H shift RTTY is well within the rules but SSB more than 2.8 KHz wide is not permitted under rules that define communication quality voice as 2.8 KHz. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 5:57 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: Joe, Because there are other narrower digital modes that can do the same thing. RTTY uses much bandwidth. Just like you claim ESSB uses to much. Keith, K5ENS -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588002.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 li...@subich.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
On 4/27/2014 2:41 PM, Larry Wassmann wrote: Do you think any of us audio guys had any influence? W4TV is "an audio guy" -- specifically a retired broadcast engineer who worked in TV. So am I "an audio guy" -- specifically a retired audio professional who worked in sound reinforcement, recording for broadcast and CD releases, and before that in broadcast radio and TV. I'm also a Fellow of the Audio Engineering Society. W4TV is entirely correct in his recommendations, and the only extent to which we differ is that I strongly recommend an octave less low frequency bandwidth than he does. Using the TXEQ built into the K3, I recommend full cut of the three lowest octave bands (50, 100, and 200 Hz centers), and 6dB cut of the 400 Hz band. Why? Because as a consultant specializing in the design of very high quality sound systems for acoustically challenging performance and worship spaces, I learned that 90% of all speech intelligibility is conveyed between 400 Hz and 5 kHz, but that voices and room noise have lots of energy below 400 Hz that wastes TX power. The octaves below 500 Hz contain about half of the ENERGY in speech, but contribute only about 5% to speech intelligibility. So getting rid of that wasted power and cranking up the mic gain by 3dB is the equivalent of doubling our output power! The octave above 3 kHz adds only 10% to speech intelligibility, but burns twice as much RF bandwidth. That's OK on a dead band, but it IS selfish and inconsiderate when others want to use that spectrum. As Riley Hollingsworth (the enforcement guy at the FCC who cleaned up the ham bands before retiring several years ago) has said both in print and at a speech at Dayton, "if you want to transmit wideband audio, get yourself a broadcast station." Riley is active on the ham bands. I've worked him several times during contests. Why do rigs include equalizers? First, because hams want them, whether for a good reason or a bad one. HOW we use them is what matters. 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Joe, Because there are other narrower digital modes that can do the same thing. RTTY uses much bandwidth. Just like you claim ESSB uses to much. Keith, K5ENS -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7588002.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
OK, I will "jump into the fray" with some of my observations and opinions. I have heard some of the ESSB crowd maintain that they are striving for the best SSB signal that can be achieved within the limits of the 2.8 kHz bandwidth. However, the requests for audio at very low audio frequencies (less than 200 Hz) and highs at 4000 Hz and above cannot fit within a 2.8 kHz bandwidth at all. We are to transmit using "communications" grade rather than "broadcast quality". I do hope all who are participating in ESSB are aware of the 2.8 kHz bandwidth limitation imposed by the regulations that you have quoted, but I fear that those rules are being violated. The FCC rules say that an amateur station is to limit the bandwidth to that necessary for communications, and that is generally accepted as a 2.8 kHz bandwidth for voice communications. For what purpose? To sound like a broadcast station? I do not see the merit in that since amateur radio should be more concerned with communications effectiveness which means reducing the low frequency content and transmitting within a 2.8 kHz bandwidth. I will not comment on the continued use of AM which occupies twice the bandwidth (or more) of an SSB signal. Certainly, the K3 does AM mode, but IMHO, it should not be used on HF. How about if we banish ESSB and AM to the VHF/UHF region where there is ample space for wideband transmissions. The use of those modes in the HF region is a waste of precious spectrum and since most of those who adhere to those modes seem to be running substantial power, it squeezes the other hams who would like to operate in that part of the spectrum of available space - in other words, creates unnecessary interference. 73, Don W3FPR On 4/27/2014 5:22 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > I would also hope there is a time and place for more courtesy. Including maintaining a *clean*, narrow signal that does not use half again as much spectrum as a reasonable communications grade signal as defined by ITU (and NTIA). 97.3(a)(43) Spurious emission. An emission, or frequencies outside the necessary bandwidth of a transmission, the level of which may be reduced without affecting the information being transmitted. (SSB) Phone = 2K80J3E => Necessary bandwidth 2.8 KHz. Emissions outside 2.80 KHz = "Spurious emission" 97.307(a) No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth than necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice. 97.307 (c) All spurious emissions from a station transmitter must be reduced to the greatest extent practicable. If any spurious emission, including chassis or power line radiation, causes harmful interference to the reception of another radio station, the licensee of the interfering amateur station is required to take steps to eliminate the interference, in accordance with good engineering practice. SSB greater than 2.8 KHz is neither "good engineering practice" nor "necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted". 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 4:20 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote: On 4/27/2014 12:30 PM, GRANT YOUNGMAN wrote: The infantile fascination with SSB restricted to 300-3000 (or less) Hz is nothing more than another childish, restricted bandwidth temper tantrum from those who don’t know better or don’t care. I would also hope there is a time and place for more courtesy. Can we dial down the rhetoric? Calling something outdated is fine. Infantile and Childish is a tiny bit much. 73 -- Lynn __ 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 li...@subich.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 w3...@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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
In what regard? 45.45 baud/170 Hz shift Baudot RTTY is not excessively wide and certainly within the bandwidth requirements (300 baud/1000 Hz shift). 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 5:43 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote: Joe, You shouldn't have any problem agreeing RTTY should not be used as a digital mode. Keith, K5ENS I would also hope there is a time and place for more courtesy. Including maintaining a *clean*, narrow signal that does not use half again as much spectrum as a reasonable communications grade signal as defined by ITU (and NTIA). 97.3(a)(43) Spurious emission. An emission, or frequencies outside the necessary bandwidth of a transmission, the level of which may be reduced without affecting the information being transmitted. (SSB) Phone = 2K80J3E => Necessary bandwidth 2.8 KHz. Emissions outside 2.80 KHz = "Spurious emission" 97.307(a) No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth than necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice. 97.307 (c) All spurious emissions from a station transmitter must be reduced to the greatest extent practicable. If any spurious emission, including chassis or power line radiation, causes harmful interference to the reception of another radio station, the licensee of the interfering amateur station is required to take steps to eliminate the interference, in accordance with good engineering practice. SSB greater than 2.8 KHz is neither "good engineering practice" nor "necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted". 73, ... Joe, W4TV -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7587998.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 li...@subich.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Joe, You shouldn't have any problem agreeing RTTY should not be used as a digital mode. Keith, K5ENS > I would also hope there is a time and place for more courtesy. Including maintaining a *clean*, narrow signal that does not use half again as much spectrum as a reasonable communications grade signal as defined by ITU (and NTIA). > 97.3(a)(43) Spurious emission. An emission, or frequencies outside > the necessary bandwidth of a transmission, the level of which may be > reduced without affecting the information being transmitted. (SSB) Phone = 2K80J3E => Necessary bandwidth 2.8 KHz. Emissions outside 2.80 KHz = "Spurious emission" > 97.307(a) No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth > than necessary for the information rate and emission type being > transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice. > 97.307 (c) All spurious emissions from a station transmitter must be > reduced to the greatest extent practicable. If any spurious emission, > including chassis or power line radiation, causes harmful > interference to the reception of another radio station, the licensee > of the interfering amateur station is required to take steps to > eliminate the interference, in accordance with good engineering > practice. SSB greater than 2.8 KHz is neither "good engineering practice" nor "necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted". 73, ... Joe, W4TV -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Is-there-a-reason-the-receive-is-so-Skinny-tp7587977p7587998.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
> I would also hope there is a time and place for more courtesy. Including maintaining a *clean*, narrow signal that does not use half again as much spectrum as a reasonable communications grade signal as defined by ITU (and NTIA). 97.3(a)(43) Spurious emission. An emission, or frequencies outside the necessary bandwidth of a transmission, the level of which may be reduced without affecting the information being transmitted. (SSB) Phone = 2K80J3E => Necessary bandwidth 2.8 KHz. Emissions outside 2.80 KHz = "Spurious emission" 97.307(a) No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth than necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice. 97.307 (c) All spurious emissions from a station transmitter must be reduced to the greatest extent practicable. If any spurious emission, including chassis or power line radiation, causes harmful interference to the reception of another radio station, the licensee of the interfering amateur station is required to take steps to eliminate the interference, in accordance with good engineering practice. SSB greater than 2.8 KHz is neither "good engineering practice" nor "necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted". 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 4:20 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote: On 4/27/2014 12:30 PM, GRANT YOUNGMAN wrote: The infantile fascination with SSB restricted to 300-3000 (or less) Hz is nothing more than another childish, restricted bandwidth temper tantrum from those who don’t know better or don’t care. I would also hope there is a time and place for more courtesy. Can we dial down the rhetoric? Calling something outdated is fine. Infantile and Childish is a tiny bit much. 73 -- Lynn __ 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 li...@subich.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Phil, I understand totally, I spent 30 years of my life as a Broadcast engineer... :) -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 12:04 -0700, Phil Kane wrote: > On 4/27/2014 7:13 AM, David Cole wrote: > > > Sorry to jump in on the thread, without an answer, but a question-- why > > the need for a low end below 200 HZ? We are not broadcast stations > > after all... Maybe I am missing something but I see zero reason for all > > of this Extended SSB, all it seems to do is cause splatter... > > As we used to say in the broadcasting field - it gives Fidelity Free > audio! :) > -- -- > 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane > Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 > > From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest > Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon > __ > 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
On 4/27/2014 12:30 PM, GRANT YOUNGMAN wrote: The infantile fascination with SSB restricted to 300-3000 (or less) Hz is nothing more than another childish, restricted bandwidth temper tantrum from those who don’t know better or don’t care. I would also hope there is a time and place for more courtesy. Can we dial down the rhetoric? Calling something outdated is fine. Infantile and Childish is a tiny bit much. 73 -- Lynn __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
? The infantile fascination with SSB restricted to 300-3000 (or less) Hz is nothing more than another childish, restricted bandwidth temper tantrum from those who don’t know better or don’t care. This never ending bandwidth argument is pointless. There’s a time and place for both. I’d worry more, frankly, about the horrendous, over-driven, over powered, bad sounding, splatter-laden, rudely behaved signals during a contest than a few guys who happen to like a bit of bandwidth any other time when the bands tend to be relatively uncrowded wastelands. Grant NQ5T On Apr 27, 2014, at 2:08 PM, wrote: > Thanks for saying it > > > Bob K3DJC > > >> >> The infantile fascination with SSB flat from 50 Hz to 4000 Hz is >> nothing more than another childish, bandwidth wasting, QRM >> generating >> temper-tantrum from those who don't know better or don't care. >> >> 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
My take on the original post is that it related to questioning whether a rig was working as it should, not a philosophical discussion of whether ESSB is good or not, though I agree that its use is pointless and bandwidth-wasting. Phil w7ox On 4/27/14, 12:08 PM, riese-k3...@juno.com wrote: Thanks for saying it Bob K3DJC The infantile fascination with SSB flat from 50 Hz to 4000 Hz is nothing more than another childish, bandwidth wasting, QRM generating temper-tantrum from those who don't know better or don't care. 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Thanks for saying it Bob K3DJC > > The infantile fascination with SSB flat from 50 Hz to 4000 Hz is > nothing more than another childish, bandwidth wasting, QRM > generating > temper-tantrum from those who don't know better or don't care. > > 73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > > On 4/27/2014 10:13 AM, David Cole wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Sorry to jump in on the thread, without an answer, but a > question-- why > > the need for a low end below 200 HZ? We are not broadcast > stations > > after all... Maybe I am missing something but I see zero reason > for all > of this Extended SSB, all it seems to do is cause splatter... > > __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
On 4/27/2014 7:13 AM, David Cole wrote: > Sorry to jump in on the thread, without an answer, but a question-- why > the need for a low end below 200 HZ? We are not broadcast stations > after all... Maybe I am missing something but I see zero reason for all > of this Extended SSB, all it seems to do is cause splatter... As we used to say in the broadcasting field - it gives Fidelity Free audio! :) -- -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 >From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
OK... It's not just me then... It is refreshing to hear someone actually mention pre/de emphasis in a discussion about reducing channel noise... THANK YOU JOE! I thought I was loosing my mind for a while, hearing these ESSB stations. I do mostly CW, so I almost never get into the SSB portion of the band. Of late I have been running into these people, and the 4KC Plus splat they create. That was a surprise! -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 12:43 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > Absolutely! In addition, overly "pumped" low end simply adds hum, > rumble and IMD to the audio. Professional audio engineers have > learned to cut the low end on audio production/recording/broadcast > for a very long time except where absolutely necessary and even > then most pros use a low-cut set around 100 Hz unless they are > trying to record a bass, tuba, piano, organ, etc. with significant > program content below low C (~130 Hz) or deep C (~65 Hz). > > Very few male voices are pitched below 100 Hz - it seems to me the > lowest recorded was around 80 Hz - the fundamental range of a bass > vocalist is typically E2 (~82 Hz) to E4 (~330 Hz). Communications > quality (ITU: 2.8 KHz bandwidth) adequately covers 200 to 3000 Hz or > 100 to 2900 Hz. Even "toll grade" (2.1 to 2.4 KHz bandwidth) audio > in the old days was more than adequate for reasonable communications. > > It is particularly worth noting that the ratio of fundamental to > harmonic content in speech is quite high and systems which do not > substantially reduce the fundamental power typically sound muddy and > distorted. Broadcast systems typically use preemphasis (decreased > lows/increased highs) in transmission with corresponding deemphasis > (high frequency roll off) in reception to reduce channel noise and > improve reception. > > The infantile fascination with SSB flat from 50 Hz to 4000 Hz is > nothing more than another childish, bandwidth wasting, QRM generating > temper-tantrum from those who don't know better or don't care. > > 73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > > On 4/27/2014 10:13 AM, David Cole wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Sorry to jump in on the thread, without an answer, but a question-- why > > the need for a low end below 200 HZ? We are not broadcast stations > > after all... Maybe I am missing something but I see zero reason for all > > of this Extended SSB, all it seems to do is cause splatter... > > > __ > 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Absolutely! In addition, overly "pumped" low end simply adds hum, rumble and IMD to the audio. Professional audio engineers have learned to cut the low end on audio production/recording/broadcast for a very long time except where absolutely necessary and even then most pros use a low-cut set around 100 Hz unless they are trying to record a bass, tuba, piano, organ, etc. with significant program content below low C (~130 Hz) or deep C (~65 Hz). Very few male voices are pitched below 100 Hz - it seems to me the lowest recorded was around 80 Hz - the fundamental range of a bass vocalist is typically E2 (~82 Hz) to E4 (~330 Hz). Communications quality (ITU: 2.8 KHz bandwidth) adequately covers 200 to 3000 Hz or 100 to 2900 Hz. Even "toll grade" (2.1 to 2.4 KHz bandwidth) audio in the old days was more than adequate for reasonable communications. It is particularly worth noting that the ratio of fundamental to harmonic content in speech is quite high and systems which do not substantially reduce the fundamental power typically sound muddy and distorted. Broadcast systems typically use preemphasis (decreased lows/increased highs) in transmission with corresponding deemphasis (high frequency roll off) in reception to reduce channel noise and improve reception. The infantile fascination with SSB flat from 50 Hz to 4000 Hz is nothing more than another childish, bandwidth wasting, QRM generating temper-tantrum from those who don't know better or don't care. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 10:13 AM, David Cole wrote: Hi, Sorry to jump in on the thread, without an answer, but a question-- why the need for a low end below 200 HZ? We are not broadcast stations after all... Maybe I am missing something but I see zero reason for all of this Extended SSB, all it seems to do is cause splatter... __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Hi, Sorry to jump in on the thread, without an answer, but a question-- why the need for a low end below 200 HZ? We are not broadcast stations after all... Maybe I am missing something but I see zero reason for all of this Extended SSB, all it seems to do is cause splatter... -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for Dopplergram information see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info for MM-SSTV see: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 11:48 +, Larry Wassmann wrote: > Joe W4TV > > > Joe maybe you can tell me where I am going wrong then. I use the 6K ESSB > filter and have the K3 set up for 4K transmission. When I, and other look at > my signal I am in fact transmitting out to 4K when measured on a spectrum > analyzers. But when I look at signals myself on my receiver band pass display > on the SA, all I can see is signals out to about 3.5 or a little better. I > have the center frequency set at *155. I was told that is what it is supposed > to be set at. If I move the center frequency up to 200Hz yes I can receive up > to 4K but the bottom end amplitude is way down and when I try to play that > audio back via the DVR everyone says they have lost their bottom end. What am > I doing wrong? Are there other filters I should be using. I or none of the > other guys I know how to set up the K3 to faithfully capture receive audio > and play it back with frequencies below 200Hz, so if you know how to maintain > the same amplitude of signal on the receive low end that matches the trans mi > tted low end, we would really appreciate it. Thanks. > > > > > > > From: > Larry Martus Wassmann > Non omnis moriar > (Not all of me will die) - - - The good I do will live forever. > > www.w3oz.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 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Don, > You can set the Low end down to 0.00 if you want, and the High end to > 4.2 kHz. Each end of the DSP filter width is independent when using > Hi-Cut and Lo-Cut. That is not entirely true. The maximum difference between LO and HI is limited to 4.0 KHz. If one can stand the "roar" with LO = 0.00, HI will not go above 4.00. If one sets HI = 4.2 for maximum hiss, LO will not go below 0.20. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 9:44 AM, Don Wilhelm wrote: Larry, Use Hi-Cut and Lo-Cut rather than Width and Shift and you will have much better luck. You can set the Low end down to 0.00 if you want, and the High end to 4.2 kHz. Each end of the DSP filter width is independent when using Hi-Cut and Lo-Cut. The low end response of the audio stages will be a limiting factor as well as the low pass filter in the audio path to keep high frequency white noise at bay. I do not operate ESSB, so I have not measured the response with the DSP filter set that wide, but try it and see if that helps. 73, Don W3FPR On 4/27/2014 7:48 AM, Larry Wassmann wrote: Joe maybe you can tell me where I am going wrong then. I use the 6K ESSB filter and have the K3 set up for 4K transmission. When I, and other look at my signal I am in fact transmitting out to 4K when measured on a spectrum analyzers. But when I look at signals myself on my receiver band pass display on the SA, all I can see is signals out to about 3.5 or a little better. I have the center frequency set at *155. I was told that is what it is supposed to be set at. If I move the center frequency up to 200Hz yes I can receive up to 4K but the bottom end amplitude is way down and when I try to play that audio back via the DVR everyone says they have lost their bottom end. What am I doing wrong? Are there other filters I should be using. I or none of the other guys I know how to set up the K3 to faithfully capture receive audio and play it back with frequencies below 200Hz, so if you know how to maintain the same amplitude of signal on the receive low end that matches the trans mi tted low end, we would really appreciate it. Thanks. __ 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 li...@subich.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Larry, Use Hi-Cut and Lo-Cut rather than Width and Shift and you will have much better luck. You can set the Low end down to 0.00 if you want, and the High end to 4.2 kHz. Each end of the DSP filter width is independent when using Hi-Cut and Lo-Cut. The low end response of the audio stages will be a limiting factor as well as the low pass filter in the audio path to keep high frequency white noise at bay. I do not operate ESSB, so I have not measured the response with the DSP filter set that wide, but try it and see if that helps. 73, Don W3FPR On 4/27/2014 7:48 AM, Larry Wassmann wrote: Joe maybe you can tell me where I am going wrong then. I use the 6K ESSB filter and have the K3 set up for 4K transmission. When I, and other look at my signal I am in fact transmitting out to 4K when measured on a spectrum analyzers. But when I look at signals myself on my receiver band pass display on the SA, all I can see is signals out to about 3.5 or a little better. I have the center frequency set at *155. I was told that is what it is supposed to be set at. If I move the center frequency up to 200Hz yes I can receive up to 4K but the bottom end amplitude is way down and when I try to play that audio back via the DVR everyone says they have lost their bottom end. What am I doing wrong? Are there other filters I should be using. I or none of the other guys I know how to set up the K3 to faithfully capture receive audio and play it back with frequencies below 200Hz, so if you know how to maintain the same amplitude of signal on the receive low end that matches the trans mi tted low end, we would really appreciate it. Thanks. __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Larry, I do not believe in, nor use excessive low frequency audio. My use for the full 4 KHz receive is for simultaneous decoding of JT65 and JT9 signals. In that regard I am setting DATA A (or USB) to LO = 0.20, HI = 4.20 or FC = 2.20, BW = 4.00. Multiple measurements shows the receive bandwidth to be flat from 300 - 4000 Hz and down slightly at 200/4200 Hz with no RX EQ. I have absolutely no use for the distortion inducing, power wasting and QRM generating SSB audio below 200 Hz. As such both my TX and RX EQ are set for maximum cut at 50 at 100 Hz. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/27/2014 7:48 AM, Larry Wassmann wrote: Joe W4TV Joe maybe you can tell me where I am going wrong then. I use the 6K ESSB filter and have the K3 set up for 4K transmission. When I, and other look at my signal I am in fact transmitting out to 4K when measured on a spectrum analyzers. But when I look at signals myself on my receiver band pass display on the SA, all I can see is signals out to about 3.5 or a little better. I have the center frequency set at *155. I was told that is what it is supposed to be set at. If I move the center frequency up to 200Hz yes I can receive up to 4K but the bottom end amplitude is way down and when I try to play that audio back via the DVR everyone says they have lost their bottom end. What am I doing wrong? Are there other filters I should be using. I or none of the other guys I know how to set up the K3 to faithfully capture receive audio and play it back with frequencies below 200Hz, so if you know how to maintain the same amplitude of signal on the receive low end that matches the transmi tted low end, we would really appreciate it. Thanks. From: Larry Martus Wassmann Non omnis moriar (Not all of me will die) - - - The good I do will live forever. www.w3oz.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 li...@subich.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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
Which radio? Should have been in the subject line but no mention in body either. I suspect KX3? 73 Mike R Check out the QRZ app __ 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] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny
The K3 receives perfectly well all the way to 4 KHz (200 - 4200, 100 - 4100, 50 - 4050 [if you can stand the growl]) as long as one has a suitably wide roofing filter. I regularly see 100 to 4100 Hz in data modes using the FM roofer (I did not bother with a 6 KHz filter). The response is easily dead flat for 3800 Hz with 4000 Hz at +1/-3 dB on "Line Out" and slightly more on the headphone output with judicious use of the RX EQ. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 4/25/2014 6:01 PM, Larry Wassmann wrote: How come we can transmit out to 4K but can only receive to about 3.5K. Seems strange to me. I would like to hear as wide as I can transmit. Yes I know I can shift the center frequency, but by doing that the low end is diminished and I don’t like that either. Couldn’t this be done in a future DSP update. Just wishing. 73 OZ From: Larry Martus Wassmann Non omnis moriar (Not all of me will die) - - - The good I do will live forever. www.w3oz.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 li...@subich.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
