One way to get better-sounding audio, both on transmit and receive, is
to use a wider-bandwidth crystal filter and let the DSP do most of the
filtering. Because the digital filter is linear-phase it will sound
much more natural than an analog non-linear-phase filter.
That's why I leave ESSB enabl
Alan Bloom wrote:
>
> One way to get better-sounding audio, both on transmit and receive, is
> to use a wider-bandwidth crystal filter and let the DSP do most of the
> filtering. Because the digital filter is linear-phase it will sound
> much more natural than an analog non-linear-phase filter
On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 13:44, Julian, G4ILO wrote:
> If crystal filters distort the phase enough to make an audible difference on
> speech how the heck do we ever manage to receive PSK through them?
Most of the phase distortion tends to occur at the band edges. As long
as the PSK signal is signif
If crystal filters distort the phase enough to make an audible difference on
speech how the heck do we ever manage to receive PSK through them?
The phase distortion is most pronounced near the corner frequency of the
crystal filter.
PSK, at least PSK31, is a very narrow mode and the chang ei
On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:44:26 -0800 (PST), Julian, G4ILO wrote:
>If crystal filters distort the phase enough to make an audible difference on
>speech how the heck do we ever manage to receive PSK through them?
Phase shift is greatest where amplitude response is changing rapidly -- that
is, at the
Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave G4AON
> Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2008 6:38 AM
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 vs. HPSDR Mercury receiver
>
>
> The explanation from the article is
Dave G4AON wrote:
>
> The explanation from the article is as follows:
>
> "When noise pulses/spikes pass through a crystal
> filter, the phase response of the filter
> changes, depending on the noise frequency.
> However, when noise pulses/spikes pass
> through an ADC with a linear response, t
Dave G4AON wrote:
SDR where the authors compare a K3 with a HPSDR Mercury receiver and
explain why the SDR sounds better than the K3 (noise through a crystal
filter causing phase changes).
The K3 is also an SDR!
--
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may
The explanation from the article is as follows:
"When noise pulses/spikes pass through a crystal
filter, the phase response of the filter
changes, depending on the noise frequency.
However, when noise pulses/spikes pass
through an ADC with a linear response, the
phase response stays the same, bec
For casual SSB operating I listen to my LP-PAN / PowerSDR panadapter which is
fed from ahead of the xtal filters, and for dabbling in contests or
operating CW (where latency can be an issue) I listen to the K3. I am not in
Europe where things can be dicey, but I have yet to see enough total peak
e
James R. Duffey wrote:
>I realize that this is not the specific environment you are talking
about.
Correct. VHF Contests and HF Contests are two entirely different animals.
I honestly don't know of *any* serious (i.e. Top Ten class) HF contesters
that use SDRs. However I expect quite a few
Dave G4AON wrote:
Members of the RSGB may wish to sneak a preview of the December
RadCom article on SDR where the authors compare a K3 with a HPSDR
Mercury receiver and explain why the SDR sounds better than the K3
(noise through a crystal filter causing phase changes).
I've read the article an
David,
If you have not read it, the December 2008 issue of QST contains another
review of the Perseus.
Although I own a Perseus, which I bought for use as a piece of test
equipment, I do not own a K3 thus cannot compare their 'sound'. I can say
though that I have never been comfortable with
13 matches
Mail list logo
