Just to reiterate my earlier posting, the next beta release of the K3
mcu/dsp code will have -BOTH- NR methods available. (Those from 3.25 and
3.27. ) You really -can- have it your way. :-)
You will be able to scan though the same 16 3.27 settings as now,
followed by the set of 16 3.25 style
Eric,
No No no, I have been grossly misinterpreted. I never asked for a combination
of 3.25 and 3.27. BOTH of these NR's are far from aggressive enough for my
type of Noise floor and Narrow band CW work. Furthermore they take WAY too long
to build the filters.
What I was asking for was
I may have misspoken. Re-reading my emails with Wayne and Lyle
indicates the 'old' NR included in the next release (in addition to the
current NR method) will be that of DSP 2.22, which I think is what you
are referring to. :-)
73, Eric
The Smiths wrote:
Eric,
No No no, I have been
Man that will be a lot of settings but after reading all the posts I'd
had exactly the same idea but just didn't post it. Having a little
down time here after kayaking back from the neighbors on the other
side of the bay for lunch. Figured I'd look in and catch up. I'm
anxiously awaiting the
Joe Planisky wrote:
Some times you can't satisfy all the people all the time with one
road.
Truer words were never spoken!
I'm a full time CW operator (well, 99.9% CW, 0.1% digital modes.) I
played with the pre-3.25 NR quite a bit and I was never able to find a
setting that made a
I agree with N6MQL, after working with 3.27 awhile now, 3.25 made CW better.
I only have the 250Hz filter, and it doesn't do as well with NR as wide
settings... and the wide filter setting makes the NR shine. It may even work
better than 3.25 NR narrow overall, I don't know.
My constant
Hi Steve
I also seem to get the impression that the selected NR setting is not exacty
the same as the selected level within in the menu versus turning the DSP NR
on and off without entering the menu, if that makes sense.
What I am finding is that 2-4 when applied from within the menu,
I also seem to get the impression that the selected NR setting is not exacty
the same as the selected level within in the menu versus turning the DSP NR
on and off without entering the menu, if that makes sense.
The NR is an adaptive filter. When you turn it off, it is completely
: Thursday, August 27, 2009 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 NR triggering
I also seem to get the impression that the selected NR setting is not
exacty the same as the selected level within in the menu versus turning
the DSP NR on and off without entering the menu, if that makes sense
Thinks likeIf F1-1 doesn't work, do we go to F1-2 or F2-1 or should
we skip a few F's.
Depends on the noise, the signal, the levels and the nature of the
artifacts of NR you best tolerate. F1-x builds sharper filters, while
F4-x typically has more attenuation...
Should we turn NR off
It's become obvious to me that the most of the full time CW ops on the
reflector were very happy with the fast responding, instant changing, very
aggressive filters on the Pre 3.25 NR. So long as you didn't choose a filter
that was too aggressive for your needs, I never found that I cut
FWIW, I strongly agree with N6MQL's suggestion.
Bill W5WVO
The Smiths (N6MQL) wrote:
Instead of trying to find a single NR DSP that would satisfy both
groups, which seems near impossible to do. Wouldn't it be best to
implement some way to have the OLD NR on CW mode, and then perhaps
Some times you can't satisfy all the people all the time with one
road.
Truer words were never spoken!
I'm a full time CW operator (well, 99.9% CW, 0.1% digital modes.) I
played with the pre-3.25 NR quite a bit and I was never able to find a
setting that made a CW signal easier to copy,
I would like to still see some kind of APF filter to peak up weak cw,
I'm still always
looking for more volume or gain against the noise floor. For me its hard
to compare
something from a couple of months ago to what I have now in firmware but
for the
impressions or notes taken back with other
Joe and all,
As I understand the changes, in the pre-3.27 NR situation, there were
audio peaks in the response envelope - so it worked very well (similar
to an APF) for some who used a CW pitch near the peaks, but there were
others who used other sidetone pitches and they were not happy with
I just had a CW QSO on a noisy 80m. Here's what I noticed with NR set for
F1-3. BW set for 2.5 kHz.
QRN very loud! I pushed NR. Band goes almost totally silent. Calling CQ with
the bug was like being in TX mode but I was using QSK as always. Wow...Nice
and quiet. Then someone answered my CQ. On
16 matches
Mail list logo
