Elecraft

Choice of signal source for KX3 extended temperature calibration?

Classic

List

Threaded

45 messages Options

123

Frank O'Donnell

Choice of signal source for KX3 extended temperature calibration?

Which of the following two signal sources would enable the best results
from the KX3's extended temperature calibration?

--Elecraft's XG50 board, which puts out 49.380 MHz ± 5 ppm.

-- Siglent SDG 2042X waveform generator, with input from a Trimble
Thunderbolt GPSDO. Maximum frequency on the Siglent is 40 MHz.

The calibration instructions call for using a signal source close to 50
MHz. Is 40 MHz close enough? The XG50 is much closer to 50 MHz, whereas
the Siglent/Trimble potentially has the capability of being considerably
more accurate. I'm interested in squeezing as much frequency stability
out of the KX3 as possible.

Thanks and 73,

Frank O'Donnell K6FOD

______________________________________________________________
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

Bob McGraw - K4TAX

Re: Choice of signal source for KX3 extended temperature calibration?

I'd hang a 1N914 diode across the output of the Siglent generator and
tune it to 25 MHz. The 2nd harmonic should be strong enough.

73

Bob, K4TAX

On 5/2/2019 5:26 PM, Frank O'Donnell wrote:

> Which of the following two signal sources would enable the best
> results from the KX3's extended temperature calibration?
>
> --Elecraft's XG50 board, which puts out 49.380 MHz ± 5 ppm.
>
> -- Siglent SDG 2042X waveform generator, with input from a Trimble
> Thunderbolt GPSDO. Maximum frequency on the Siglent is 40 MHz.
>
> The calibration instructions call for using a signal source close to
> 50 MHz. Is 40 MHz close enough? The XG50 is much closer to 50 MHz,
> whereas the Siglent/Trimble potentially has the capability of being
> considerably more accurate. I'm interested in squeezing as much
> frequency stability out of the KX3 as possible.
>
> Thanks and 73,
>
> Frank O'Donnell K6FOD
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

Phil Genera

Re: Choice of signal source for KX3 extended temperature calibration?

I'ts been a while, but I did this just fine with the 50mhz harmonic from
the thunderbolt.

--
Phil
W1JV

On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 8:00 PM Bob McGraw K4TAX <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd hang a 1N914 diode across the output of the Siglent generator and
> tune it to 25 MHz. The 2nd harmonic should be strong enough.
>
> 73
>
> Bob, K4TAX
>
>
> On 5/2/2019 5:26 PM, Frank O'Donnell wrote:
> > Which of the following two signal sources would enable the best
> > results from the KX3's extended temperature calibration?
> >
> > --Elecraft's XG50 board, which puts out 49.380 MHz ± 5 ppm.
> >
> > -- Siglent SDG 2042X waveform generator, with input from a Trimble
> > Thunderbolt GPSDO. Maximum frequency on the Siglent is 40 MHz.
> >
> > The calibration instructions call for using a signal source close to
> > 50 MHz. Is 40 MHz close enough? The XG50 is much closer to 50 MHz,
> > whereas the Siglent/Trimble potentially has the capability of being
> > considerably more accurate. I'm interested in squeezing as much
> > frequency stability out of the KX3 as possible.
> >
> > Thanks and 73,
> >
> > Frank O'Donnell K6FOD
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > 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

WA2SI

Prospective K4

I'm in the comparison stage of planning my next, and likely final, HF rig purchase. While researching my options, I came across this comment on the Flex reflector. (See link below.) It occurs to me that the next logical progression from the K3S might likely be something along the lines of a FlexRadio 6600M, but optimized for the discerning CW enthusiast. I'd personally love to see a K4 along those lines. Any thoughts or opinions?

https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/flexradios-cw-failings

Vy 73 de Bert
WA2SI
______________________________________________________________
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

Rose

Re: Prospective K4

Bert,

Then why not just purchase the Flex?

73 !

K0PP

On Sun, May 5, 2019, 09:11 Bert Craig <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm in the comparison stage of planning my next, and likely final, HF rig
> purchase. While researching my options, I came across this comment on the
> Flex reflector. (See link below.) It occurs to me that the next logical
> progression from the K3S might likely be something along the lines of a
> FlexRadio 6600M, but optimized for the discerning CW enthusiast. I'd
> personally love to see a K4 along those lines. Any thoughts or opinions?
>
> https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/flexradios-cw-failings
>
> Vy 73 de Bert
> WA2SI
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>

Joseph Trombino, Jr

Re: Prospective K4

Howdy Gang.

I’ve built and owned Elecraft gear since 1999.

Still have my KX3 and KX2.

I bought a Flex 6600M rig and it was the best radio I’ve owned in years.

But Flex messed with the firmware to where if you were in full QSK mode and used the internal ATU a loud relay would start clicking when sending CW characters, messing with the normally quiet QSK changeover from RX to TX.

The reason given for this firmware change was that when the ATU was engaged in full QSK mode the receive signals would be 10db down as opposed to zero db loss without the tuner in line.

To be honest I never noticed this problem but Flex, in all of their wisdom, made the disruptive change.

IMHO this firmware change completely ruined a very FB CW rig.

Perhaps the folks at Flex are not as CW-centric as the Elecraft folks.

In terms of a K4 I would certainly love to see a beautiful 8” or large front panel display.

This is the direction all modern radios are going….just look at the YaeCommWood offerings plus the Sun MB1 rig.

While the P3 and PX3 displays are OK, a full 8” or larger hi-res display is breathtaking and extremely useful.

So, why not a K4 with a big hi-res screen?

I’m ready for it…make it happen!!

73, Joe W2KJ
I QRP, therefore I aim

> On May 5, 2019, at 11:16 AM, Rose <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Bert,
>
> Then why not just purchase the Flex?
>
> 73 !
>
> K0PP
>
> On Sun, May 5, 2019, 09:11 Bert Craig <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I'm in the comparison stage of planning my next, and likely final, HF rig
>> purchase. While researching my options, I came across this comment on the
>> Flex reflector. (See link below.) It occurs to me that the next logical
>> progression from the K3S might likely be something along the lines of a
>> FlexRadio 6600M, but optimized for the discerning CW enthusiast. I'd
>> personally love to see a K4 along those lines. Any thoughts or opinions?
>>
>> https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/flexradios-cw-failings
>>
>> Vy 73 de Bert
>> WA2SI
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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

wayne burdick

Re: Prospective K4

Administrator

In reply to this post by Rose

All future Elecraft radios will have the same “designed-by-CW-ops” performance, and the same attention to detail in CW controls, regardless of any new technology we incorporate. They will have to pass our own rigorous testing. And they will certainly not exhibit any of the deficiencies mention in the referenced thread.

73,
Wayne
N6KR

----
elecraft.com

> On May 5, 2019, at 8:16 AM, Rose <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Bert,
>
> Then why not just purchase the Flex?
>
> 73 !
>
> K0PP
>
>> On Sun, May 5, 2019, 09:11 Bert Craig <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I'm in the comparison stage of planning my next, and likely final, HF rig
>> purchase. While researching my options, I came across this comment on the
>> Flex reflector. (See link below.) It occurs to me that the next logical
>> progression from the K3S might likely be something along the lines of a
>> FlexRadio 6600M, but optimized for the discerning CW enthusiast. I'd
>> personally love to see a K4 along those lines. Any thoughts or opinions?
>>
>> https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/flexradios-cw-failings
>>
>> Vy 73 de Bert
>> WA2SI
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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

Dave Sublette-2

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by Joseph Trombino, Jr

My personal opinion is Flex is too much computer. I hate computers. My
operating time has done n nothing but decrease since I bought a computer.
This is ham RADIO, not ham computer.

And while I'm at it, You kids get off my lawn!!

73,

Dave, K4TO

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 11:37 AM Joseph Trombino, Jr <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Howdy Gang.
>
> I’ve built and owned Elecraft gear since 1999.
>
> Still have my KX3 and KX2.
>
> I bought a Flex 6600M rig and it was the best radio I’ve owned in years.
>
> But Flex messed with the firmware to where if you were in full QSK mode
> and used the internal ATU a loud relay would start clicking when sending CW
> characters, messing with the normally quiet QSK changeover from RX to TX.
>
> The reason given for this firmware change was that when the ATU was
> engaged in full QSK mode the receive signals would be 10db down as opposed
> to zero db loss without the tuner in line.
>
> To be honest I never noticed this problem but Flex, in all of their
> wisdom, made the disruptive change.
>
> IMHO this firmware change completely ruined a very FB CW rig.
>
> Perhaps the folks at Flex are not as CW-centric as the Elecraft folks.
>
> In terms of a K4 I would certainly love to see a beautiful 8” or large
> front panel display.
>
> This is the direction all modern radios are going….just look at the
> YaeCommWood offerings plus the Sun MB1 rig.
>
> While the P3 and PX3 displays are OK, a full 8” or larger hi-res display
> is breathtaking and extremely useful.
>
> So, why not a K4 with a big hi-res screen?
>
> I’m ready for it…make it happen!!
>
> 73, Joe W2KJ
> I QRP, therefore I aim
>
>
>
> > On May 5, 2019, at 11:16 AM, Rose <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Bert,
> >
> > Then why not just purchase the Flex?
> >
> > 73 !
> >
> > K0PP
> >
> > On Sun, May 5, 2019, 09:11 Bert Craig <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm in the comparison stage of planning my next, and likely final, HF
> rig
> >> purchase. While researching my options, I came across this comment on
> the
> >> Flex reflector. (See link below.) It occurs to me that the next logical
> >> progression from the K3S might likely be something along the lines of a
> >> FlexRadio 6600M, but optimized for the discerning CW enthusiast. I'd
> >> personally love to see a K4 along those lines. Any thoughts or opinions?
> >>
> >> https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/flexradios-cw-failings
> >>
> >> Vy 73 de Bert
> >> WA2SI
> >> ______________________________________________________________
> >> 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
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

Macy monkeys

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by Joseph Trombino, Jr

8" display with 3D spectrum scope. I'm enjoying it on the FTDX101D while I wait for the K4...

John K7FD

> On May 5, 2019, at 8:36 AM, Joseph Trombino, Jr <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Howdy Gang.
>
> I’ve built and owned Elecraft gear since 1999.
>
> Still have my KX3 and KX2.
>
> I bought a Flex 6600M rig and it was the best radio I’ve owned in years.
>
> But Flex messed with the firmware to where if you were in full QSK mode and used the internal ATU a loud relay would start clicking when sending CW characters, messing with the normally quiet QSK changeover from RX to TX.
>
> The reason given for this firmware change was that when the ATU was engaged in full QSK mode the receive signals would be 10db down as opposed to zero db loss without the tuner in line.
>
> To be honest I never noticed this problem but Flex, in all of their wisdom, made the disruptive change.
>
> IMHO this firmware change completely ruined a very FB CW rig.
>
> Perhaps the folks at Flex are not as CW-centric as the Elecraft folks.
>
> In terms of a K4 I would certainly love to see a beautiful 8” or large front panel display.
>
> This is the direction all modern radios are going….just look at the YaeCommWood offerings plus the Sun MB1 rig.
>
> While the P3 and PX3 displays are OK, a full 8” or larger hi-res display is breathtaking and extremely useful.
>
> So, why not a K4 with a big hi-res screen?
>
> I’m ready for it…make it happen!!
>
> 73, Joe W2KJ
> I QRP, therefore I aim
>
>
>
>> On May 5, 2019, at 11:16 AM, Rose <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Bert,
>>
>> Then why not just purchase the Flex?
>>
>> 73 !
>>
>> K0PP
>>
>>> On Sun, May 5, 2019, 09:11 Bert Craig <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm in the comparison stage of planning my next, and likely final, HF rig
>>> purchase. While researching my options, I came across this comment on the
>>> Flex reflector. (See link below.) It occurs to me that the next logical
>>> progression from the K3S might likely be something along the lines of a
>>> FlexRadio 6600M, but optimized for the discerning CW enthusiast. I'd
>>> personally love to see a K4 along those lines. Any thoughts or opinions?
>>>
>>> https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/flexradios-cw-failings
>>>
>>> Vy 73 de Bert
>>> WA2SI
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

Grant Youngman-2

Re: Prospective K4

>>
>> But Flex messed with the firmware to where if you were in full QSK mode and used the internal ATU a loud relay would start clicking when sending CW characters, messing with the normally quiet QSK changeover from RX to TX.
>>

Lousy QSK makes it a non-starter. Flex has always had issues with CW — QSK with too much latency to work to, now, clunky QSK? And the Sun looks nice, but I would never buy a radio hanging its hat on Microsoft, especially on Windows 10.

On buying that last retirement radio — I bought an Orion as my retirement radio. Then I bought an Orion II as my absolute last upgrade. Then I bought a well-appointed K3. It never really ends :-)

A “breathtaking" display doesn’t necessarily make a radio any better. I guess if I'd come up in the iPhone generation I’d think differently about that. But we’ll see — a K4 would have to be a markedly better RADIO first.

Grant NQ5T
K3 #2091 KX3 #8342

______________________________________________________________
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

Drew AF2Z

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by Dave Sublette-2

I've never doubted that Elecraft would produce a great CW rig, if not
the best!

The only thing I'd be concerned about is the operator interface. Not
really looking forward to touchscreen controls here, though I suppose
they are inevitable in modern rigs. And I don't care to have my rig
dependent on a computer either.

I think modern rigs could benefit by having an optional keyboard
interface-- no need of an intermediary computer, just a dedicated
plug-in (or wireless) keyboard that could be used to access all the rig
controls and menu items. A slash command system like the old Lotus 123
spreadsheet of the 80's would be highly efficient allowing access to any
corner of the rig's control space with just a few keystrokes. Also the
possibility for the operator to macro-tize everything to his heart's
content...

I wonder if Elecraft will stick with the high portability/low power
consumption design. Those things aren't really important to me. I
wouldn't mind a larger rig.

73,
Drew
AF2Z

On 05/05/19 11:42, Dave Sublette wrote:

> My personal opinion is Flex is too much computer. I hate computers. My
> operating time has done n nothing but decrease since I bought a computer.
> This is ham RADIO, not ham computer.
>
> And while I'm at it, You kids get off my lawn!!
>
> 73,
>
> Dave, K4TO
>
> On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 11:37 AM Joseph Trombino, Jr <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Howdy Gang.
>>
>> I’ve built and owned Elecraft gear since 1999.
>>
>> Still have my KX3 and KX2.
>>
>> I bought a Flex 6600M rig and it was the best radio I’ve owned in years.
>>
>> But Flex messed with the firmware to where if you were in full QSK mode
>> and used the internal ATU a loud relay would start clicking when sending CW
>> characters, messing with the normally quiet QSK changeover from RX to TX.
>>
>> The reason given for this firmware change was that when the ATU was
>> engaged in full QSK mode the receive signals would be 10db down as opposed
>> to zero db loss without the tuner in line.
>>
>> To be honest I never noticed this problem but Flex, in all of their
>> wisdom, made the disruptive change.
>>
>> IMHO this firmware change completely ruined a very FB CW rig.
>>
>> Perhaps the folks at Flex are not as CW-centric as the Elecraft folks.
>>
>> In terms of a K4 I would certainly love to see a beautiful 8” or large
>> front panel display.
>>
>> This is the direction all modern radios are going….just look at the
>> YaeCommWood offerings plus the Sun MB1 rig.
>>
>> While the P3 and PX3 displays are OK, a full 8” or larger hi-res display
>> is breathtaking and extremely useful.
>>
>> So, why not a K4 with a big hi-res screen?
>>
>> I’m ready for it…make it happen!!
>>
>> 73, Joe W2KJ
>> I QRP, therefore I aim
>>
>>
>>
>>> On May 5, 2019, at 11:16 AM, Rose <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Bert,
>>>
>>> Then why not just purchase the Flex?
>>>
>>> 73 !
>>>
>>> K0PP
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 5, 2019, 09:11 Bert Craig <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm in the comparison stage of planning my next, and likely final, HF
>> rig
>>>> purchase. While researching my options, I came across this comment on
>> the
>>>> Flex reflector. (See link below.) It occurs to me that the next logical
>>>> progression from the K3S might likely be something along the lines of a
>>>> FlexRadio 6600M, but optimized for the discerning CW enthusiast. I'd
>>>> personally love to see a K4 along those lines. Any thoughts or opinions?
>>>>
>>>> https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/flexradios-cw-failings
>>>>
>>>> Vy 73 de Bert
>>>> WA2SI
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>

WA2SI

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by wayne burdick

Tnx Wayne! This is pretty much it in a nutshell. I appreciate this "designed-by-CW-ops" ideology.

Vy 73 de Bert
WA2SI

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]>
To: Rose <[hidden email]>
Cc: Bert Craig <[hidden email]>, Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sun, 05 May 2019 11:40
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Prospective K4

All future Elecraft radios will have the same “designed-by-CW-ops” performance, and the same attention to detail in CW controls, regardless of any new technology we incorporate. They will have to pass our own rigorous testing. And they will certainly not exhibit any of the deficiencies mention in the referenced thread.

73,
Wayne
N6KR

----
elecraft.com

wayne burdick

Re: Prospective K4

Administrator

In reply to this post by Grant Youngman-2

Grant Youngman <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>>>
>>> But Flex messed with the firmware to where if you were in full QSK mode and used the internal ATU a loud relay would start clicking when sending CW characters, messing with the normally quiet QSK changeover from RX to TX.
>>>
>
> Lousy QSK makes it a non-starter.

It certainly would for me :)

> Flex has always had issues with CW — QSK with too much latency to work to, now, clunky QSK?

That latency is due to processing even the demodulation channels in the frequency domain.

> And the Sun looks nice, but I would never buy a radio hanging its hat on Microsoft, especially on Windows 10.

Agreed. If a radio has an internal computer, it had better be transparent to the operator, including not taking forever to boot up and not being subject to problematic software upgrades.

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

Elecraft mailing list

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by Drew AF2Z

History is replete with examples of companies that refused, at their own peril, to embrace emerging technologies. This stubbornness, I suspect, was born out of a sense of technological arrogance.

In the early 1970s, the Swiss watch industry, enamored with their mechanical movements, refused to embrace quartz technology. That decision would result in decades of rapidly declining Swiss watch sales. The ultimate irony is that today many Swiss watches make use of Citizen internal movements.

Conversely, there are companies like Apple. Apple, was able to leverage existing technologies and make them “better” for their end-customer. In other words, confront the paradigm shift head-on, know what your end-customers will most value (even if they don’t know it today) and positively exploit the emerging technologies.

Elecraft is more of an Apple than it is a Swiss watch company. I have no doubt they will positively exploit emerging technologies and deliver products with features that we haven’t even thought about today.

Have faith, all. And, by the way, as we wait, we’ll just "have to live with" our worldclass transceivers; not a bad position to be in if you ask me.

73,
Joe
W1GO

> On May 5, 2019, at 12:41 PM, Drew AF2Z <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I've never doubted that Elecraft would produce a great CW rig, if not the best!
>
> The only thing I'd be concerned about is the operator interface. Not really looking forward to touchscreen controls here, though I suppose they are inevitable in modern rigs. And I don't care to have my rig dependent on a computer either.
>
> I think modern rigs could benefit by having an optional keyboard interface-- no need of an intermediary computer, just a dedicated plug-in (or wireless) keyboard that could be used to access all the rig controls and menu items. A slash command system like the old Lotus 123 spreadsheet of the 80's would be highly efficient allowing access to any corner of the rig's control space with just a few keystrokes. Also the possibility for the operator to macro-tize everything to his heart's content...
>
> I wonder if Elecraft will stick with the high portability/low power consumption design. Those things aren't really important to me. I wouldn't mind a larger rig.
>
> 73,
> Drew
> AF2Z
>
>
>

Gary K9GS

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by WA2SI

While we're providing input.200W all mode continuous duty outputExternal 48V power supply73,Gary K9GS
-------- Original message --------From: Bert Craig <[hidden email]> Date: 5/5/19 11:52 AM (GMT-06:00) To: Rose <[hidden email]>, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> Cc: Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Prospective K4 Tnx Wayne! This is pretty much it in a nutshell. I appreciate this "designed-by-CW-ops" ideology.Vy 73 de BertWA2SI-----Original Message-----From: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]>To: Rose <[hidden email]>Cc: Bert Craig <[hidden email]>, Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>Sent: Sun, 05 May 2019 11:40Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Prospective K4All future Elecraft radios will have the same “designed-by-CW-ops” performance, and the same attention to detail in CW controls, regardless of any new technology we incorporate. They will have to pass our own rigorous testing. And they will certainly not exhibit any of the deficiencies mention in the referenced thread. 73,WayneN6KR----elecraft.com> On May 5, 2019, at 8:16 AM, Rose <[hidden email]> wrote:> > Bert,> > Then why not just purchase the Flex?> > 73 !> > K0PP> >> On Sun, May 5, 2019, 09:11 Bert Craig <[hidden email]> wrote:>> >> I'm in the comparison stage of planning my next, and likely final, HF rig>> purchase. While researching my options, I came across this comment on the>> Flex reflector. (See link below.) It occurs to me that the next logical>> progression from the K3S might likely be something along the lines of a>> FlexRadio 6600M, but optimized for the discerning CW enthusiast. I'd>> personally love to see a K4 along those lines. Any thoughts or opinions?>> >> https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/flexradios-cw-failings>> >> Vy 73 de Bert>> WA2SI>> ______________________________________________________________>> 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______________________________________________________________Elecraft mailing listHome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:[hidden email] list hosted by: http://www.qsl.netPlease 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

wayne burdick

Re: Prospective K4

Administrator

In reply to this post by Drew AF2Z

> Drew AF2Z <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I've never doubted that Elecraft would produce a great CW rig, if not the best!
>
> The only thing I'd be concerned about is the operator interface. Not really looking forward to touchscreen controls here, though I suppose they are inevitable in modern rigs.

Touch/mouse would provide a lot of flexibility. The trick would be to use "real" controls for things you do most often, and make sparing use of touch for basic operation. Of course touch has some cool aspects like tap/drag, pinch/spread, etc., that can be applied to new features such as an advanced panadapter.

>
> I think modern rigs could benefit by having an optional keyboard interface-- no need of an intermediary computer, just a dedicated plug-in (or wireless) keyboard that could be used to access all the rig controls and menu items.

Definitely.

> I wonder if Elecraft will stick with the high portability/low power consumption design. Those things aren't really important to me. I wouldn't mind a larger rig.

We're dedicated to providing gear that won't break your back, runs efficiently, and can be used for portable applications when needed (Field Day, DXpeditions, emcomm, RV, etc.). A new radio would have be somewhat bigger to accommodate a large display, but it would not have to be twice as large, weigh 2 to 3 times as much, or consume 3 to 4 times as much power as a K3S. All of the K3S's newer competitors have one or more of these non-portable characteristics, and some have all three.

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

Wes Stewart-2

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by Macy monkeys

How are you liking the radio performance wise? I assume you have a K3 with
which to compare.

Wes N7WS

On 5/5/2019 8:54 AM, Macy monkeys wrote:
> 8" display with 3D spectrum scope. I'm enjoying it on the FTDX101D while I wait for the K4...
>
> John K7FD
>

______________________________________________________________
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

Mike Markowski-2

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by wayne burdick

Hi Wayne,

On 5/5/19 1:03 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
> Grant Youngman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Flex has always had issues with CW — QSK with too much latency to work to, now, clunky QSK?
>
> That latency is due to processing even the demodulation channels in the frequency domain.

Can you explain this a little more? It's probably clear to many, but
not me. :-) I think of 'channel' as the RF channel, but this is used
differently. A demod channel as opposed to what other sorts of channels?

Also, since an fft/ifft change over between frequency and time is the
norm in SDRs, why does it matter at what point processing is performed?

Not doubting, wanting to understand. Tnx es 73.
Mike ab3ap
______________________________________________________________
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

Bill Steffey NY9H

Re: Prospective K4

In reply to this post by WA2SI

using 50V devices... and predistortion......( probaby an internal
upverter for the 50V....) = very low distortion....

On 5/5/2019 1:04 PM, Gary K9GS wrote:
> While we're providing input.200W all mode continuous duty outputExternal 48V power supply73,Gary K9GS
______________________________________________________________
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

wayne burdick

Re: Prospective K4

Administrator

In reply to this post by Mike Markowski-2

Most “pure” SDRs (using wideband direct sampling and no crystal filters) process all incoming receive samples in large packets.This provides some economies of scale for signal processing algorithms, but it does impact latency. In some cases the impact can be dramatic – like 100 to 200 ms QSK delays.

An alternative is to process only the pan adapter data in large packets. If such data is only being used for a spectral display, the latency is not an issue.

In CW mode or in other situations where latency must be low, time-domain DSP routines can optionally be used for processing data from the slices (signal channels) used for demodulation. Latency as low as just a few milliseconds is then possible, contingent on the level of filtering required. Filtering trade offs can be automated, e.g. in proportion to the QSK delay setting.

Wayne

----
elecraft.com

> On May 5, 2019, at 10:50 AM, Mike Markowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Wayne,
>
>> On 5/5/19 1:03 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>> Grant Youngman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Flex has always had issues with CW — QSK with too much latency to work to, now, clunky QSK?
>> That latency is due to processing even the demodulation channels in the frequency domain.
>
> Can you explain this a little more? It's probably clear to many, but not me. :-) I think of 'channel' as the RF channel, but this is used differently. A demod channel as opposed to what other sorts of channels?
>
> Also, since an fft/ifft change over between frequency and time is the norm in SDRs, why does it matter at what point processing is performed?
>
> Not doubting, wanting to understand. Tnx es 73.
> Mike ab3ap
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

123