This evening as I was listening to a moderately weak station on 30 meters CW.
I noticed that the P3 display showed a wide (+-.75 KHz from center) pulse
pattern centered on the frequency I was on. I also noted that there was a
strong (XE2, not that it matters) almost 3 KHz down. The P3
Used correctly, THAT symbol is specifically Earth ground. As opposed
to the 'sideways E' (chassis ground) or triangle (signal) ground
symbols.
REPLY:
Just wait till you go to work in the aircraft industry and try to
ground something at 30,000 feet! :-)
73, Bill W6WRT
Taking this one step
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
Anyone have one for sale at a reasonable price before I order a kit version? If
so please send details including price shipped to zip 45324.
Thanks
Tim
NZ8J
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home:
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
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
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 =
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
As my father used to say; If you can't talk it, you don't know it.
Stew ke4yh
Anyone who says Hey, look - I'm getting this right, even when I'm using
the wrong words! is probably about to demonstrate that he wasn't smart
enough.
73 from Ian GM3SEK
_
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
I agree with Rick's comments above. I use N1MM for FSK RTTY. I have an extra RX
window set up to receive signals from VFO B in split mode so I can tell who the
last worked station was while I copy the DX with VFO A. With a narrow 400 hz
bandwidth and 10 khz span on my P3 I can easily tune from
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
Here is the SSB net report for April 20, 2014. We had 30 participants.
Station NameQTH Rig S/N
N6JWJohnCA KX3 515
KM4IK Ian GA K3 281
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
In AFSK A/FSK D the transmit/VFO B cursor is 400 Hz.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 4/27/2014 12:54 PM, Ken Kontor via Elecraft wrote:
I agree with Rick's comments above. I use N1MM for FSK RTTY. I have an extra RX
window set up to receive signals from VFO B in split mode so I can tell who the
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,
Not with the new beta P3 code...
Rick, WA6NHC
iPad = small keypad = typos = sorry ;-)
On Apr 27, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV li...@subich.com wrote:
In AFSK A/FSK D the transmit/VFO B cursor is 400 Hz.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 4/27/2014 12:54 PM, Ken Kontor via Elecraft
*YES* with the new beta code - I'm running it and the VFO B/SPLIT
cursor is 400 Hz wide when the data sub-mode is FSK D or AFSK A.
The transmit (red) cursor only goes to 2.8 KHz when DATA A is selected.
Use AFSK A (which you should be doing for the AFSK transmit filter in
any case) if you want
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:
?
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
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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
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:
I observe the full 2.8 kHz red transmit cursor underneath the green
receive cursor when DATA A used.
However, when I press and hold ALT on the K3 to select DATA A REV
I see only the green receive filter cursor, without the red transmit
cursor.
Was DATA A REV overlooked in the makeover?
Bob NW8L
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
Well I have something odd going on. I was trying some new antenna tunings
today and noticed that the power out on the KPA500 would start at about 100
watts.ramp up to 500+ watts over about 10 seconds, and then drop back to 100
watts again. It kept repeating this cycle as I was talking to someone
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
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
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 li...@subich.com 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
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
This is for pure information purposes.
I don't even have a K3 yet.
I am under the impression that all of the
crystal filters that Elecraft sells except
for the 5 pole filters are made by Inrad.
I am also under the impression that all of the
5 pole filters are made by Elecraft in house.
Do I
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
FYI...Elecraft takes PayPal.
Keith
--
View this message in context:
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Are-filters-bought-from-Inrad-the-same-as-filters-bought-from-Elecraft-tp7588017p7588019.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
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
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
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
Now I'm in real trouble !!!
FYI...Elecraft takes PayPal.
Keith
--
View this message in context:
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Are-filters-bought-from-Inrad-the-same-as-filters-bought-from-Elecraft-tp7588017p7588023.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I looked again, and I didn't see Paypal as an option.
but then I used google and found this on the Elecraft web site:
We also accept payments directly from your PayPal account. (Funds transfers
only - Use our regular credit card option at checkout for cards.) Use our
regular shopping cart system
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
Hello Jim,
I agree with you about the recommended EQ settings on TX. Your suggested
settings are even more useful when operating QRP with KX3. I would like to
squeeze every bit of power from KX3 into speech contents so that the other end
can copy me.
With good use of EQ, we are able to turn
Larry, I recently sold a 6 kHz AM filter after I realized that I have
two of them.
It was clearly printed on the body of the filter that it was made by Inrad.
Not sure if this is true for all of the filters for the K3 that Elecraft
sells, but I would doubt that Elecraft makes their own
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
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
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
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
Actually, most of those of my acquaintance, who are concerned about
bandwidth are *extremely* competent, technically, and *do* care. The
real problem is those who can, and will, abuse the bandwidth.
In Canada there is a very wide 6kHz bandwidth limit on all HF bands,
save for 30-meters. The
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!
Check the transceiver. The KPA has constant gain, and nothing that allows it to
change power as you describe.
If you use a K3, then reconsider your choice to use ALC. It is not recommended,
nor is it needed with the KPA500. You also might consider recalibrating the
transceiver to eliminate
Larry has it right. The 8-pole filters are from our good friends at Inrad,
while the last time I checked the 5-pole filters are in-house. from my own
experience, both are excellent. But then I could be accused of being a wee bit
biased... :-)
JackB, W6FB
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 27, 2014,
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
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
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
A couple hours ago Larry Lopez (N2CVS) wrote ...
Does Elecraft test the incoming INRAD crystals?
Elecraft designed and produced a small gadget and provided it to INRAD at no
charge. This gadget accepts one filter at a time, and has a cable to
connect it to a network analyzer. With this setup,
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:
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
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
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
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
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
Thanks for the clarification Gary.
__
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
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
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
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
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
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
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;
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;
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
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
81 matches
Mail list logo
