A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
Locked
123
123
A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
 
|
A comparison of several rigs, KX3 included
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOf2OOGeGi8 73 Gus LU6AGV ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
Very interesting, Gus. One of the most salient impressions that comes out
is how little on-air testing seems to be done by most manufacturers. I guess that most rigs are made for phone ragchewers, and are probably fine for that purpose; but many of the faults that Rob Sherwood points out become obvious with a few hours of actual pileup or contest operation. How could a manufacturer imagine that a DXer would prefer to work a split pileup with a mouse-tuned radio, or send CW with a radio whose internal keyer spits out dits and dahs of random length? And the phase-noise dynamics that Rob describes -- they may not show up on a certain test, but they're clear enough when you use the radio, as are a variety of AGC problems. The Elecraft tradition started with rigs that would meet the requirements of a multi-op Field Day, and they have stuck with that viewpoint, to the benefit of their users. Meanwhile other radios I've owned or used have had irritating flaws that would have been glaringly apparent to the makers if they had actually tried them on the air before committing the design to production. Tony KT0NY On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Gustavo Villada <[hidden email]> wrote: > A comparison of several rigs, KX3 included > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOf2OOGeGi8 > > > > 73 > Gus LU6AGV > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > -- http://www.isb.edu/faculty/facultydir.aspx?ddlFaculty=352 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
In reply to this post by Gustavo Villada
Can anyone point out more about the K3 transmit audio fixes that
Sherwood talked about? On Thu, 6 Jun 2013, Gustavo Villada wrote: > A comparison of several rigs, KX3 included > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOf2OOGeGi8 > > > > 73 > Gus LU6AGV > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > -- Hisashi T Fujinaka - [hidden email] BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
I thought most of the comments were about receive audio distortion. There have been several changes, both hardware (DSP upgrade) and firmware (AGC Decay) and possibly others which affect this. 73, Bill W4ZV |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
In reply to this post by Tony Estep
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:06 AM, Tony Estep <[hidden email]> wrote:
> [......]. Meanwhile other radios I've owned > or used have had irritating flaws that would have been glaringly apparent > to the makers if they had actually tried them on the air before committing > the design to production. > > Tony KT0NY > > Tony, that is the difference between a company managed by executives, and other one by engineers. Gus LU6AGV ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
K3 - KPA500 Power control
|
|
In reply to this post by Gustavo Villada
Hi all,
My K3 and KPA500 combo seems to overshoot the powersetting at the beginning of a morse dot or dash. It happens with all morse code, not only the first dot or dots. Pwr at start of dot: abt 570 W, steady state pwr 520 W. It does show on my peak reading measurerents and the 550W led on the KPA lights with every dot/dash. Holding the key 440W led is off, so that confirms my other measurements. Checking the manuals does not help me at this time. Here's the setup: K3 #1255 with all HW mods and FW 4.60 / 2.80, running 33W on 12m TX ALC On (normal) EXT ALC Off KPA500 #1497, brandnew, FW 1.23 ALC THR 210 (default) KAT500: BYP K-line is connected via the elecraft aux cables. So.....What did I miss, or is this normal? 73 Arie PA3A ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: K3 - KPA500 Power control
|
|
read 550W led for 440W led
Op 7-6-2013 17:09, Arie Kleingeld PA3A schreef: > > Pwr at start of dot: abt 570 W, steady state pwr 520 W. It does show > on my peak reading measurerents and the 550W led on the KPA lights > with every dot/dash. Holding the key 440W led is off, so that confirms > my other measurements. ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Bill W4ZV
Rob helped us identify the K3's audio output distortion issue, which we subsequently cleaned up with a hardware change (five years ago) and new firmware (about three years ago).
If you have an older K3, see: http://www.elecraft.com/K3/mods/K3_AF_Stage_Upgrade_Instructions_Rev_B.pdf This mod, long since incorporated into production, adds a large RF choke in series with the AF amplifier stage's DC supply. As Rob's plots show, this dramatically knocked down the IMD products; most are now down 70-80 dB. I have pretty good ears, and once we made this change, I couldn't hear any difference between the internal amplifier and external powered speakers. Rob is correct that it would be possible to further reduce low-level distortion products. However, many of these fall outside the hearing range of the average user because they're related to an image of the 12-kHz CODEC sampling rate. What's left within hearing range could be reduced with a change in the AF amp IC, though there are diminishing returns and pragmatic considerations. The stereo audio amplifier IC we use is capable of driving two 4-ohm speakers at up to a few watts apiece, and it generates no RFI because it is a classic analog device running class AB. We could get higher drive power using a beefier analog device with much higher quiescent current, or by using a class-D or higher switching-style device. The former would increase the radio's current drain substantially, while the latter would require additional shielding and decoupling. As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make it available. 73, Wayne N6KR On Jun 7, 2013, at 3:55 AM, Bill W4ZV <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote >> Can anyone point out more about the K3 transmit audio fixes that >> Sherwood talked about? > > I thought most of the comments were about receive audio distortion. There > have been several changes, both hardware (DSP upgrade) and firmware (AGC > Decay) and possibly others which affect this. > > 73, Bill W4ZV > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
If I were using external amplified speakers (which I am not right now) on my K3, would I use the rear panel SPKR stereo plug, or the headphones connector stereo plug, or the stereo line out plug? Or does it matter? Noted that the line out impedance is much different than SPKRS or PHONES.
73, phil, K7PEH On Jun 7, 2013, at 8:18 AM, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> wrote: > Rob helped us identify the K3's audio output distortion issue, which we subsequently cleaned up with a hardware change (five years ago) and new firmware (about three years ago). > > If you have an older K3, see: > > http://www.elecraft.com/K3/mods/K3_AF_Stage_Upgrade_Instructions_Rev_B.pdf > > This mod, long since incorporated into production, adds a large RF choke in series with the AF amplifier stage's DC supply. As Rob's plots show, this dramatically knocked down the IMD products; most are now down 70-80 dB. I have pretty good ears, and once we made this change, I couldn't hear any difference between the internal amplifier and external powered speakers. > > Rob is correct that it would be possible to further reduce low-level distortion products. However, many of these fall outside the hearing range of the average user because they're related to an image of the 12-kHz CODEC sampling rate. What's left within hearing range could be reduced with a change in the AF amp IC, though there are diminishing returns and pragmatic considerations. The stereo audio amplifier IC we use is capable of driving two 4-ohm speakers at up to a few watts apiece, and it generates no RFI because it is a classic analog device running class AB. We could get higher drive power using a beefier analog device with much higher quiescent current, or by using a class-D or higher switching-style device. The former would increase the radio's current drain substantially, while the latter would require additional shielding and decoupling. > > As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make it available. > > 73, > Wayne > N6KR > > > On Jun 7, 2013, at 3:55 AM, Bill W4ZV <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote >>> Can anyone point out more about the K3 transmit audio fixes that >>> Sherwood talked about? >> >> I thought most of the comments were about receive audio distortion. There >> have been several changes, both hardware (DSP upgrade) and firmware (AGC >> Decay) and possibly others which affect this. >> >> 73, Bill W4ZV >> > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
In reply to this post by wayne burdick
This policy is so clearly stated that I have to comment that it's a nice
change to actually hear from the actual designer AND user that doesn't speak in 'engineer-ese'. To 'hear' clear, concise and accurate information without having to translate is wonderful. I actually understood it! Bravo! Rick wa6nhc -----Original Message----- From: Wayne Burdick Rob helped us identify the K3's audio output distortion issue, which we subsequently cleaned up with a hardware change (five years ago) and new firmware (about three years ago). If you have an older K3, see: http://www.elecraft.com/K3/mods/K3_AF_Stage_Upgrade_Instructions_Rev_B.pdf This mod, long since incorporated into production, adds a large RF choke in series with the AF amplifier stage's DC supply. As Rob's plots show, this dramatically knocked down the IMD products; most are now down 70-80 dB. I have pretty good ears, and once we made this change, I couldn't hear any difference between the internal amplifier and external powered speakers. Rob is correct that it would be possible to further reduce low-level distortion products. However, many of these fall outside the hearing range of the average user because they're related to an image of the 12-kHz CODEC sampling rate. What's left within hearing range could be reduced with a change in the AF amp IC, though there are diminishing returns and pragmatic considerations. The stereo audio amplifier IC we use is capable of driving two 4-ohm speakers at up to a few watts apiece, and it generates no RFI because it is a classic analog device running class AB. We could get higher drive power using a beefier analog device with much higher quiescent current, or by using a class-D or higher switching-style device. The former would increase the radio's current drain substantially, while the latter would require additional shielding and decoupling. As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make it available. 73, Wayne N6KR ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
In reply to this post by wayne burdick
This statement baffles me...
"As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make it available." Why would you not make improvements to the K3 just because they can not be applied to older units? I'm not sure what is to gain by holding back improvements. As a early K3 owner I would love to see a better K3 offered. I would have a choice to keep my early K3 or replace it with a improved unit. Radios evolve all the time. It is disappointing to know a better K3 could exist but doesn't because a new K3 may be better than the an older K3. That's just wrong. IMHO. Keith, K5ENS |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
Keith,
It might make it more difficult to upgrade all K3s if there were a number of different version K3s out there. I see your point but prefer to see Elecraft doing what it started and keeping the K3 an improving product for all. Once there is a K3A, B, C this may not longer be practical. As a CW operator the small amount of distortion is perhaps less noticeable than it would be if I were an ESSB operator with good hearing. Just one man's opinion ultimately it is up to the designers what happens. They have such an agreeable ethos that I am not sure it would be good to change it. 73 Doug EI2CN -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Keith-K5ENS Sent: 07 June 2013 17:09 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton This statement baffles me... "As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make it available." Why would you not make improvements to the K3 just because they can not be applied to older units? I'm not sure what is to gain by holding back improvements. As a early K3 owner I would love to see a better K3 offered. I would have a choice to keep my early K3 or replace it with a improved unit. Radios evolve all the time. It is disappointing to know a better K3 could exist but doesn't because a new K3 may be better than the an older K3. That's just wrong. IMHO. Keith, K5ENS -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/A-Rob-Sherwood-s-talk-in-Dayton-tp75748 14p7574839.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:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
In reply to this post by KV5J
I for one would prefer that Elecraft continue their plan to provide support to all
K3s in the field from the earliest serial number to the latest with the same upgrades and options. As far as doing something different for an even better K3, that would not be a K3, maybe it would be called a K4 or whatever. However, as long as the K3 can be that better product, even for those early adopters with much older K3s, this practice would hopefully continue. As far as audio goes -- I have no complaints and that may be due to the fact that I don't put up an oscilloscope or spectrum analyzer on my audio output as a means of using the K3. My ears work good enough. 73, phil, K7PEH On Jun 7, 2013, at 9:09 AM, Keith-K5ENS <[hidden email]> wrote: > This statement baffles me... > > > "As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that > is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a > further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make > it available." > > > Why would you not make improvements to the K3 just because they can not be > applied to older units? I'm not sure what is to gain by holding back > improvements. As a early K3 owner I would love to see a better K3 offered. > I would have a choice to keep my early K3 or replace it with a improved > unit. Radios evolve all the time. It is disappointing to know a better K3 > could exist but doesn't because a new K3 may be better than the an older K3. > > That's just wrong. IMHO. > > Keith, K5ENS > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/A-Rob-Sherwood-s-talk-in-Dayton-tp7574814p7574839.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:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by KV5J
Keith I don't think anything is being "held back". Everything (HW and SW) in the K3 can be modified as has been demonstrated numerous times (e.g. most notably replacing the entire DSP board). I believe Wayne is just saying that upgradability of existing units is a key consideration in their thinking (as opposed to Japan's Big 3). I only wish more manufacturers thought the same way. 73, Bill W4ZV |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
In reply to this post by Rick WA6NHC
The most understood presentation I have ever heard on a complex mater, that
was easy for even me to understand. 73, Fred/N0AZZ K3 Ser #'s 6730/5299--KX3 # 2573--K2/100--KAT100 P3/SVGA--KPA500--KAT500--W2 -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Rick Bates Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 11:01 AM To: 'Wayne Burdick'; [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton This policy is so clearly stated that I have to comment that it's a nice change to actually hear from the actual designer AND user that doesn't speak in 'engineer-ese'. To 'hear' clear, concise and accurate information without having to translate is wonderful. I actually understood it! Bravo! Rick wa6nhc -----Original Message----- From: Wayne Burdick Rob helped us identify the K3's audio output distortion issue, which we subsequently cleaned up with a hardware change (five years ago) and new firmware (about three years ago). If you have an older K3, see: http://www.elecraft.com/K3/mods/K3_AF_Stage_Upgrade_Instructions_Rev_B.pdf This mod, long since incorporated into production, adds a large RF choke in series with the AF amplifier stage's DC supply. As Rob's plots show, this dramatically knocked down the IMD products; most are now down 70-80 dB. I have pretty good ears, and once we made this change, I couldn't hear any difference between the internal amplifier and external powered speakers. Rob is correct that it would be possible to further reduce low-level distortion products. However, many of these fall outside the hearing range of the average user because they're related to an image of the 12-kHz CODEC sampling rate. What's left within hearing range could be reduced with a change in the AF amp IC, though there are diminishing returns and pragmatic considerations. The stereo audio amplifier IC we use is capable of driving two 4-ohm speakers at up to a few watts apiece, and it generates no RFI because it is a classic analog device running class AB. We could get higher drive power using a beefier analog device with much higher quiescent current, or by using a class-D or higher switching-style device. The former would increase the radio's current drain substantially, while the latter would require additional shielding and decoupling. As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make it available. 73, Wayne N6KR ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3199/6391 - Release Date: 06/07/13 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3199/6391 - Release Date: 06/07/13 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by KV5J
Keith,
I, too, think I see your point. That point is that one strategy a company could take is to continuously introduce newer, better products, ones which might cannibalize sales of previous products with each new product introduction. I worked at HP, and I think that was the strategy for the printer division. I think this is a good strategy for a consumer market place. This worked well when sales were reasonably high volume. Arguably, the best aspect about the Elecraft statement which you quote is that it exists and guides the company investments. That statement appeals to me. I like knowing that my radio will continue to be supported by my vendor and that its re-sale value, when I kick the bucket, will be higher than otherwise. So, to Elecraft, one benefit is that the strategy appeals to what-I-think is one of their target market segments - customers who want to be loyal customers. I see a cost reduction benefit to Elecraft as well. Elecraft is less likely to need to be supporting multiple products. They can keep inventory down, and won't have the costs of dealing with "end of support life" issues. And design costs might be lower, as the company is not introducing as many new designs and the new designs that are introduced are primarily for completely new-to-Elecraft functionality. Cost reduction is a big deal for any company. So Elecraft's strategy totally works for me. 73, Hoop K9QJS On Jun 7, 2013, at 9:09 AM, Keith-K5ENS <[hidden email]> wrote: This statement baffles me... "As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make it available." Why would you not make improvements to the K3 just because they can not be applied to older units? I'm not sure what is to gain by holding back improvements. As a early K3 owner I would love to see a better K3 offered. I would have a choice to keep my early K3 or replace it with a improved unit. Radios evolve all the time. It is disappointing to know a better K3 could exist but doesn't because a new K3 may be better than the an older K3. That's just wrong. IMHO. Keith, K5ENS ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Doug Turnbull
Keith (K5ENS) wrote:
> I'm not sure what is to gain by holding back > improvements. As a early K3 owner I would love to see a better K3 offered. > I would have a choice to keep my early K3 or replace it with a improved > unit. Radios evolve all the time. Hi Keith, It's highly desirable that changes be retrofittable since we have some 7,500 K3s in the field. But there are different levels of "mod". The mod we made to the RF choke (to reduce receive AF IMD) was simple, involving a component change. Let's call that "level 1". Nearly all of the K3's mods over the years have been of this type. We could completely redesign the AF stage if it were warranted, requiring replacement of the DSP board. Some customers might be willing to pay for such an upgrade, and we wouldn't . That would be "level 2". Now suppose we came up with something truly revolutionary, like a switch from an LCD to and OLED display. That would require replacement of the entire front panel module, and we might change the model number of the radio--a "level 3" change. (We are *not* going to do that, by the way :) Any of the above changes are retrofittable, and I can assure you that we're not holding anything back. The K3 was designed in a modular fashion so it can adapt to new requirements. 73, Wayne N6KR ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
Yup, Yup and Yup that's the reason I have Elecraft gear. Not buying new
radio gear every 2 years like I did with my Yaesu and Icom gear. I for one agree with the business model and great equipment. -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Wayne Burdick Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 11:58 AM To: Keith-K5ENS Cc: Elecraft Reflector Subject: Re: [Elecraft] A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton Keith (K5ENS) wrote: > I'm not sure what is to gain by holding back improvements. As a early > K3 owner I would love to see a better K3 offered. > I would have a choice to keep my early K3 or replace it with a > improved unit. Radios evolve all the time. Hi Keith, It's highly desirable that changes be retrofittable since we have some 7,500 K3s in the field. But there are different levels of "mod". The mod we made to the RF choke (to reduce receive AF IMD) was simple, involving a component change. Let's call that "level 1". Nearly all of the K3's mods over the years have been of this type. We could completely redesign the AF stage if it were warranted, requiring replacement of the DSP board. Some customers might be willing to pay for such an upgrade, and we wouldn't . That would be "level 2". Now suppose we came up with something truly revolutionary, like a switch from an LCD to and OLED display. That would require replacement of the entire front panel module, and we might change the model number of the radio--a "level 3" change. (We are *not* going to do that, by the way :) Any of the above changes are retrofittable, and I can assure you that we're not holding anything back. The K3 was designed in a modular fashion so it can adapt to new requirements. 73, Wayne N6KR ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3199/6391 - Release Date: 06/07/13 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3199/6391 - Release Date: 06/07/13 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
In reply to this post by Gustavo Villada
I'd look favorably on potential receive audio improvements.
I'm not sure I fully understand the 'we wouldn't' below. Is that, 'We wouldn't introduce such an improvement (level 2),' or 'We wouldn't bear the cost of such improvement,' (it would be the responsibility of the end user)? 73, Dick - KA5KKT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Hi Keith.We could completely redesign the AF stage if it were warranted, requiring replacement of the DSP board. Some customers might be willing to pay for such an upgrade, and we wouldn't . That would be "level 2". 73, Wayne N6KR ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton
|
|
In reply to this post by KV5J
I see your point but...
I can see a host of problems with implementing a policy of continuously improving a radio without the ability to modify the older versions. With each new improvement that is not possible on the older versions you increasing marginalize the early adopters. Now they own a K3 that is not as good as the later K3's and can never be as good as that later model. Early adopters are VERY important to a company because they provide the cash flow and feedback needed to successfully market and manufacture a product. In addition you will have various versions of the K3. Imagine the confusion for Elecraft and hams alike. The early K3's will be worth much less than the later ones as one knows it would be impossible to improve it any further. So who would buy an early product? Not me!! I'd wait, and wait, and wait... The constant improvement of a product without the ability to improve the earlier versions may work for some products, but it definitely would not work (IMHO only;-), it's not my company) for Elecraft radios. Want a better radio? Then wait for a K4, 5, 6... I own a K2 No. 2005. A great radio and I am happy with the fact that No. 0001 and 9999 will always have the capability to be equal or very nearly equal in specs, quality, and ergonomics. Rick K4LX From: Keith-K5ENS <[hidden email]> To: [hidden email] Sent: Friday, June 7, 2013 12:09 PM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] A Rob Sherwood's talk in Dayton This statement baffles me... "As always, our goal is to continuously improve the K3 in a way that is applicable to units in the field. If we find a practical way to achieve a further significant improvement in the audio channel, we'll certainly make it available." Why would you not make improvements to the K3 just because they can not be applied to older units? I'm not sure what is to gain by holding back improvements. As a early K3 owner I would love to see a better K3 offered. I would have a choice to keep my early K3 or replace it with a improved unit. Radios evolve all the time. It is disappointing to know a better K3 could exist but doesn't because a new K3 may be better than the an older K3. That's just wrong. IMHO. Keith, K5ENS -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/A-Rob-Sherwood-s-talk-in-Dayton-tp7574814p7574839.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:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |