CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
Locked
CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
 
|
Hi everybody,
my K2 is #4764. I am in doubt about the optimum CW-pitch. I think I remember from the old days, that the human ear has the best "built in" filter around 1000 Hz, so I thought, CW-crystal filters should have a pitch around 1000 Hz. Many commercial units seem to have 800 Hz, the standard K2 has a suggested pitch of 600 Hz. 1. why is that so? 2. I have set my K2 to 700 Hz but live with the very personal (not supported by spectrogram) impression that the overall selectivity-response is broader than it could be. Is it possible, that the NF-path is optimised for a 600 Hz-response? If so, I would go through the entire re-alignement procedure and reset everything to 600 Hz. Or is it all stupid personal impression? 73 Karsten _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
Karsten Eppert(DK4AS) wrote:
> I am in doubt about the optimum CW-pitch. I think I remember from the > old days, that the human ear has the best "built in" filter around 1000 > Hz, so I thought, CW-crystal filters should have a pitch around 1000 Hz. > Many commercial units seem to have 800 Hz, the standard K2 has a > suggested pitch of 600 Hz. > > 1. why is that so? Many people seem to feel that the ear's filter is better at lower pitches. A reason sometimes given is that the percentage difference between two signals a given distance apart is greater at lower pitches (e.g., a difference of 100 Hz. is 10% of 1000 Hz. and 20% of 500 Hz.), but this is based on a guess about how the ear/brain actually works! There is also the question of what pitch is least tiring to listen to, and in general, more comfortable. Older people tend to like lower pitches. It also depends on the characteristics of the audio system. I personally have my K2 set to 550 Hz. > 2. I have set my K2 to 700 Hz but live with the very personal (not > supported by spectrogram) impression that the overall > selectivity-response is broader than it could be. Is it possible, that > the NF-path is optimised for a 600 Hz-response? If so, I would go > through the entire re-alignement procedure and reset everything to 600 > Hz. Or is it all stupid personal impression? The IF selectivity is the same regardless of audio pitch. I suggest trying different pitches and seeing which you like. The spectrogram process gets faster every time you do it! -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Karsten Eppert (DK4AS)
Vic,
Although that isn't strictly the BFO setting, if you center the wider filters around the CW pitch and it is too low, won't their skirts extend below 0Hz and pass the opposite sideband? Leigh / WA5ZNU On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 8:11 am, Vic K2VCO wrote: > The IF selectivity is the same regardless of audio pitch. _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
Leigh L Klotz, Jr. wrote:
> Although that isn't strictly the BFO setting, if you center the wider > filters around the CW pitch and it is too low, won't their skirts extend > below 0Hz and pass the opposite sideband? Yes, I should have said that the selectivity is independent of BFO pitch, *within limits*. You could also adjust the BFO to a frequency such that the pitch when a signal is centered in the passband would be high enough that only dogs could hear it (and you might have trouble with the rx's audio response in that case). To be more serious, you don't need to center the signal in the filter. Since I use 550 Hz. as my selected pitch, I would definitely have the problem you describe if I centered my 1.2 KHz filter. The filters have relatively flat tops, though, so you can offset the signal toward the bottom of the wide filters without significant loss of gain. -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
RE: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
In reply to this post by Leigh L. Klotz Jr WA5ZNU
Leigh, WA5ZNU asked:
Although that isn't strictly the BFO setting, if you center the wider filters around the CW pitch and it is too low, won't their skirts extend below 0Hz and pass the opposite sideband? ---------------------------------- True, but that's not a selectivity issue. A 2 KHz filter that is positioned to pass both sidebands is still has a bandwidth of 2 KHz. It's selectivity is unchanged. If the filter is narrow enough and positioned in the right way with respect to the signal frequency, you'll only hear one sideband. That's why us "graybeards" call "single signal selectivity" or adequate selectivity to suppress the "other" signal or sideband. Nowadays I've noticed that a lot of younger operators think "single signal" means sharp enough selectivity to hear only one signal on the band at a time, but that's not the original definition at all. It simply meant that the selectivity was good enough so that when one tuned across a CW signal, that signal was only heard once (only one sideband in the bandpass). Ron AC7AC _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
In reply to this post by Karsten Eppert (DK4AS)
On November 12, 2005 07:50 am, Karsten Eppert(DK4AS) wrote:
> I am in doubt about the optimum CW-pitch. I think I remember from the > old days, that the human ear has the best "built in" filter around 1000 > Hz, I too prefer a higher pitched tone. I guess that is because I learned the code with a 1000 Hz tone or perhaps too many years of 1004 Hz test tones at the telco. Too bad the K2 will only go up to 800 Hz. Perhaps Eric and Wayne, you might consider adding this to the wish list of feature enhancements? -- Darrell Bellerive Amateur Radio Stations VA7TO and VE7CLA Grand Forks, British Columbia, Canada _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
On November 13, 2005 at 02:54 am, Darrell VA7TO - VE7CLA wrote:
> I too prefer a higher pitched tone. I guess that is because I learned the > code > with a 1000 Hz tone or perhaps too many years of 1004 Hz test tones at the > telco. Too bad the K2 will only go up to 800 Hz. Perhaps Eric and Wayne, > you > might consider adding this to the wish list of feature enhancements? > Perhaps the enhancement could be a BFO that is adjusted by a front panel control? An old fashioned method of control perhaps, but it provides the opportunity to change the pitch instantly to suit the occasion without fiddling with menus etc., or retuning the receiver. When attempting to copy a signal that is at antenna noise level (no QRN) I prefer a pitch of 300-400 Hz. If there is storm static QRN, whatever pitch results in best copy - could be up to 1500Hz or thereabouts. During "normal" operation, 550 - 600Hz which can be changed at any time to avoid fatigue. "Reverse CW" can be thrown in for free! 73, Geoff GM4ESD _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Karsten Eppert (DK4AS)
This subject has been discussed on the TenTec reflector, too. I tend to agree with K2VCO's ideas concerning the ear's ability to discern slight differences in pitch better at low frequencies. Bill Tippett, W4ZV, really got my attention when he divulged that he uses very low pitches (below 300 Hz) to copy weak signal DX. (Bill is one of the best in the world.) Ever since I learned that, I've set my Omni 6 as low as it would go (400 Hz). What's the range on the K2?
73, Chuck NI0C _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
I suggest you all try finding a copy of RadCom from a few months ago. There
was some very interesting research into the human ears response at various frequencies relating to intelegibility of CW signals. And the human ear has much more dynamic range in the 400 to 800 Hz area and thus that is why many operators use that range and it's becoming more and more a standard. Gregg R. Lengling, W9DHI, Un-Retired K2/100 SN 3075 http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Guenther" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]> Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 7:12 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what? This subject has been discussed on the TenTec reflector, too. I tend to agree with K2VCO's ideas concerning the ear's ability to discern slight differences in pitch better at low frequencies. Bill Tippett, W4ZV, really got my attention when he divulged that he uses very low pitches (below 300 Hz) to copy weak signal DX. (Bill is one of the best in the world.) Ever since I learned that, I've set my Omni 6 as low as it would go (400 Hz). What's the range on the K2? 73, Chuck NI0C _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
In reply to this post by Karsten Eppert (DK4AS)
On Nov 12, 2005, at 10:50 AM, Karsten Eppert(DK4AS) wrote: > I am in doubt about the optimum CW-pitch. I think I remember from > the old days, that the human ear has the best "built in" filter > around 1000 Hz, so I thought, CW-crystal filters should have a > pitch around 1000 Hz. Many commercial units seem to have 800 Hz, > the standard K2 has a suggested pitch of 600 Hz. While a lot of older rigs had an offset for 1000 Hz, most newer rigs are 700-800 Hz. But long-time CW ops typically go for even lower signals, sometimes in the range of 400 Hz. > 1. why is that so? 600 Hz is a good compromise between a lower frequency and single- signal reception. Much lower, and you're going to hear signals on the opposite side of the zero-beat. > 2. I have set my K2 to 700 Hz but live with the very personal (not > supported by spectrogram) impression that the overall selectivity- > response is broader than it could be. The adjustable filter has a narrow response, but it's skirts aren't that steep. > Is it possible, that the NF-path is optimised for a 600 Hz- > response? If so, I would go through the entire re-alignement > procedure and reset everything to 600 Hz. Or is it all stupid > personal impression? The response would be equally as broad at 600 Hz as at 700 Hz. I'd leave it. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Geoffrey Mackenzie-Kennedy-2
Geoffrey Mackenzie-Kennedsy wrote:
> Perhaps the enhancement could be a BFO that is adjusted by a front panel > control? Hi Geoff! This would be nice, and I presume that you mean that the knob would maintain the location of the BFO in relation to the passband along with the sidetone pitch. Currently it's possible to adjust the pitch from the menu (although this is not a one-knob operation!), but in order to keep the selected pitch inside a narrow passband, you need to do the CAL FIL procedure. So the knob that you refer to would have to cause the microprocessor to recalculate the VCO offset that is used to place the selected pitch at a given location in the filter passband. This is what happens when you run CAL FIL. I don't think the knob (which I too would like to have) is practical given the K2's architecture. -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
>> Perhaps the enhancement could be a BFO that is adjusted by a front >> panel control? > > This would be nice, and I presume that you mean that the knob would > maintain the location of the BFO in relation to the passband along > with the sidetone pitch. Currently it's possible to adjust the pitch > from the menu (although this is not a one-knob operation!), but in > order to keep the selected pitch inside a narrow passband, you need to > do the CAL FIL procedure. > > So the knob that you refer to would have to cause the microprocessor > to recalculate the VCO offset that is used to place the selected pitch > at a given location in the filter passband. This is what happens when > you run CAL FIL. 756-ProIII both have this, and I find it very helpful. It's not only nice to be able to customize the sidetone pitch, but I like to tweak it easily via a front-panel knob every so often during long operating periods, like contests - adjusting the sidetone (and zero-beat point) up or down a little from time to time seems to help minimize ear (or is it brain?) fatigue. /Paul W3PH -- Paul Heller [hidden email] _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
>>Perhaps the enhancement could be a BFO that is adjusted by a front panel >>control? > >This would be nice, and I presume that you mean that the knob would >maintain the location of the BFO in relation to the passband along with >the sidetone pitch. Currently it's possible to adjust the pitch from the >menu (although this is not a one-knob operation!), but in order to keep >the selected pitch inside a narrow passband, you need to do the CAL FIL >procedure. > >So the knob that you refer to would have to cause the microprocessor to >recalculate the VCO offset that is used to place the selected pitch at a >given location in the filter passband. This is what happens when you run >CAL FIL. 756-ProIII both have this, and I find it very helpful. It's not only nice to be able to customize the sidetone pitch, but I like to tweak it easily via a front-panel knob every so often during long operating periods, like contests - adjusting the sidetone (and zero-beat point) up or down a little from time to time seems to help minimize ear (or is it brain?) fatigue. If the filters are not set too narrow I find that the RIT does this for me. Larry Ingram AG4NN K2 SN 2529 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
In reply to this post by Paul Heller-2
Hi Vic, Paul,
Not quite Vic. The BFO knob would control the frequency of a BFO thus establishing the frequency difference between the BFO and a desired signal in the receiver passband, as done in receivers for decades.Its output is fed only to the product detector when in use. So the knob allows you to vary the beat note or pitch. Tweaking the BFO knob would and should not affect the sidetone at all, since sidetone is usually only a transmit aid. Because in the K2's system the sidetone is also used when measuring the frequency of an incoming signal and/or zero beating the K2's Tx with an incoming signal, my early thought is that the BFO knob would control the frequency of a second BFO #2 that is used only during receive, and also provides the means to switch back to the existing BFO #1 if SPOT is to be used. I suggest this second BFO because I don't think that it would be wise to have one BFO hopping frequency when going from Rx to Tx and back. This separate BFO #2 should be capable of being set say +- 1500 Hz from the passband centre frequency, which gives you "Reverse CW" as well. The added BFO #2 is completely divorced from the microprocessor. The existing BFO #1 carries on as usual but is disconnected from the product detector when BFO #2 is in use. BFO #2 would have to be properly shielded, ground fenced, and interface leads filtered. Big question is where to put it? Paul, I think that to be able to tweak the sidetone (monitoring) frequency a separate keyed AF oscillator directly feeding the audio is required because of the existing sidetone's connection with SPOT etc, but I am not at all sure about this. 73, Geoff GM4ESD Vic Rosenthal wrote: >> This would be nice, and I presume that you mean that the knob would >> maintain the location of the BFO in relation to the passband along with >> the sidetone pitch. Currently it's possible to adjust the pitch from the >> menu (although this is not a one-knob operation!), but in order to keep >> the selected pitch inside a narrow passband, you need to do the CAL FIL >> procedure. >> >> So the knob that you refer to would have to cause the microprocessor to >> recalculate the VCO offset that is used to place the selected pitch at a >> given location in the filter passband. This is what happens when you run >> CAL FIL. Paul Heller wrote: > This is the one feature that I really wish the K2 had. My TS-940 and > 756-ProIII both have this, and I find it very helpful. It's not only nice > to be able to customize the sidetone pitch, but I like to tweak it easily > via a front-panel knob every so often during long operating periods, like > contests - adjusting the sidetone (and zero-beat point) up or down a > little from time to time seems to help minimize ear (or is it brain?) > fatigue. > > /Paul > W3PH > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
RE: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
In reply to this post by Paul Heller-2
Paul and all,
Not that I am advocating it --- but the center of the CW filters is not directly coupled to the sidetone pitch by the K2 firmware, so the CW filters can be centered most anywhere. It is quite possible to peak the CW filters at 1000 Hz (as long as you do not run out of BFO range. HOWEVER, there are 2 problems with that - 1) the sidetone pitch is limited to 800 Hz, and 2) the transmit offset is controlled by the setting of the sidetone pitch, so that has a limit of 800 Hz as well. So if one should center the CW filters on 1000 Hz, you could listen at that frequency, but the sidetone would not be at that pitch (hard to zero beat), and the transmit signal would be at least 200 Hz away from the received signal. I would also like to point out that the process of changing the BFO frequency in CAL FIL is exactly the same as using a variable BFO control (but it only varies while one is setting it). The way I solve the 'wide CW filter lapping over onto the unwanted sideband' problem is to center the next widest filter (FL2, usually 700 or 600 Hz wide) first, and observe the placement of the low frequency slope in Spectrogram (I position the cross-hair cursor there and click it), then I go back and set FL1 to have the same low frequency slope as FL2. It works for me (If you don't understand, I will add more detail). 73, Don W3FPR > -----Original Message----- > > >> Perhaps the enhancement could be a BFO that is adjusted by a front > >> panel control? > > > > This would be nice, and I presume that you mean that the knob would > > maintain the location of the BFO in relation to the passband along > > with the sidetone pitch. Currently it's possible to adjust the pitch > > from the menu (although this is not a one-knob operation!), but in > > order to keep the selected pitch inside a narrow passband, you need to > > do the CAL FIL procedure. > > > > So the knob that you refer to would have to cause the microprocessor > > to recalculate the VCO offset that is used to place the selected pitch > > at a given location in the filter passband. This is what happens when > > you run CAL FIL. > This is the one feature that I really wish the K2 had. My TS-940 and > 756-ProIII both have this, and I find it very helpful. It's not only > nice to be able to customize the sidetone pitch, but I like to tweak it > easily via a front-panel knob every so often during long operating > periods, like contests - adjusting the sidetone (and zero-beat point) up > or down a little from time to time seems to help minimize ear (or is it > brain?) fatigue. > > /Paul > W3PH > > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
Good Evening Don,
The thoughts that I have had about a variable frequency BFO controlled from the front panel come from the requirement to be able to change the beat note of an incoming signal very quickly, such as one might want to do more than once during a pile up. Under such circumstances there is not the time to run CAL FIL unfortunately. 73, Geoff GM4ESD Don Wilhelm wrote on Sunday November 13, 2005 at 1147 PM > > I would also like to point out that the process of changing the BFO > frequency in CAL FIL is exactly the same as using a variable BFO control > (but it only varies while one is setting it). > > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Geoffrey Mackenzie-Kennedy-2
Geoffrey Mackenzie-Kennedsy wrote:
> Not quite Vic. The BFO knob would control the frequency of a BFO thus > establishing the frequency difference between the BFO and a desired > signal in the receiver passband, as done in receivers for decades.Its > output is fed only to the product detector when in use. So the knob > allows you to vary the beat note or pitch. Tweaking the BFO knob would > and should not affect the sidetone at all, since sidetone is usually > only a transmit aid. What I should have said is that the sidetone frequency setting -- a digital value in the eeprom -- (not the sidetone itself, which as you point out is not important) is used to compute the dial reading and the transmit offset. So I suggest that you need to change this setting AND the BFO frequency. If you change the sidetone pitch in the menu (i.e., change the 'sidetone frequency setting') in the K2, you adjust the transmit offset as well as the monitor pitch. The trouble with this is that the BFO frequency doesn't change, so the passband is still centered on a signal whose pitch is what you used when you did CAL FIL, and if you have a narrow filter, you lose gain at the new pitch. If you change the BFO frequency by itself, then you don't lose gain, since the relationship between the signal frequency (in the IF) and the crystal filter hasn't changed. But the dial reading and transmit offset are off. Your solution of adding a second BFO just for receiving would theoretically work, except that you would need to use the 'real' sidetone pitch for zero-beating. -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: CW-Pitch 600 Hz or 700 Hz or what?
|
|
Hi Vic,
You wrote: > Your solution of adding a second BFO just for receiving would > theoretically work, except that you would need to use the 'real' sidetone > pitch for zero-beating. Quite right, and I am sorry if I was not clear about the zero-beating issue. Had better tie the ribbons on this BFO knob idea!! 73, Geoff GM4ESD _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |