Elecraft › [QRO]

Elecraft] {K3 KX3} Software CW in K3 and KX3 and contesting

Classic

List

Threaded

7 messages Options

Mercury

Elecraft] {K3 KX3} Software CW in K3 and KX3 and contesting

Maybe I'm missing something, Bud, but I send the letter Q the same way with Iambic B keying. Hold the dah paddle for the duration of the letter and tap the dit at the appropriate place. No need to let up on the dah paddle. Is there some other characteristic that distinguishes Ulimatic from Iambic B? I've never used Ultimatic keying but hear a lot of folks rave about it. I do just fine with Iambic B but mess up big time with Iambic A. To each his own.

73 - Will, AI4VE

Sent from my iPad
______________________________________________________________
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

Don Wilhelm-4

Re: Elecraft] {K3 KX3} Software CW in K3 and KX3 and contesting

Will,

The distinguishing characteristic is that it does not alternate between
dits and dahs.
You are correct, that a dingle dot insertion can work the same way in
either case, and by the same reasoning, a single dash insertion. but if
you send a character like "Z", you close the DAH paddle and get the
first DAH off, then after the 2nd DAH starts, close the DIT paddle (you
do not have to take your finger off the DAH paddle) and it will begin
sending a string of DITS - get both fingers off the paddle after the 2nd
dit has started.

Or take the letter "B" - DAH first, then close the DIT paddle - it does
not mater much whether you take your finger off the DAH paddle or not,
it will send 3 dits as long as you do not lift the finger from the dit
paddle. The last paddle closed takes priority.

There are many other examples where Ultimatic is easier - but the timing
is not as critical as it is for the Iambic alternating dots and dashes
system.

I think Iambic was a mistake created by the Curtis chip manufactures and
salesmen (OK, I am ignoring the Accukeyer, I admit that) - but the
original Ultimatic mode was easier to my mind, and it is more like bug
keying that any other keyer mode - except the bug will not do a string
of DAHs, only dits.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 8/10/2012 6:13 PM, Mercury wrote:

> Maybe I'm missing something, Bud, but I send the letter Q the same way with Iambic B keying. Hold the dah paddle for the duration of the letter and tap the dit at the appropriate place. No need to let up on the dah paddle. Is there some other characteristic that distinguishes Ulimatic from Iambic B? I've never used Ultimatic keying but hear a lot of folks rave about it. I do just fine with Iambic B but mess up big time with Iambic A. To each his own.
>
> 73 - Will, AI4VE
>
> Sent from my iPad
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

W2RU - Bud Hippisley

Re: Software CW in K3 and KX3 and contesting

In reply to this post by Mercury

Hi, Will --

"Q" was probably not the best choice I could have used to distinguish between the two modes.

My biggest problem with Iambic and a dual-lever paddle is the number "2", which I do have to send occasionally....:-) It typically comes out as dit-dit-dah-dit-dah.

For me, at least, I think the crux of the difference between the two algorithms is that I can be "sloppier" about when I get my thumb or fingers off the first lever squeezed on a large number of characters, such as the A, W, J, 1 and N, D, B, 6 families. This timing becomes increasingly critical as sending speed increases. For instance, I can send a "2" quite consistently using dual-lever Iambic at slow speeds.

I freely admit that my difficulties with Iambic may be influenced by the characteristics of keyers I first used, prior to introduction of the Iambic algorithm. In other words, if your first electronic keyer was Iambic, you may not have as much trouble as I with it. An aside: One of those early keyers I loved, the POO-keyer from K2POO, was a (vacuum tube!) "dash priority" or "dash override" design -- not so much by deliberate design, perhaps, as by the reaction of the analog circuit to having dot and dash contacts simultaneously closed.

Ultimately (get that?), I think the answer is this: If you're perfectly happy with the Iambic algorithm in conjunction with a dual-lever paddle, and it's making good characters for you, or if you use only a single-lever paddle, stick with the Iambic. If it's giving you "fits", however, an Ultimatic keyer might be just the ticket for you.

Bud, W2RU

On Aug 10, 2012, at 6:13 PM, Mercury <[hidden email]> wrote:

alsopb

Re: Elecraft] {K3 KX3} Software CW in K3 and KX3 and contesting

In reply to this post by Don Wilhelm-4

Guys,

I'd like to point out that the transition being made when electronic
keyers started coming on line was:

BUG --->KEYER

What was being solved is not having to make all those dashes manually.
That in itself was a huge help. Transmitting speeds could be increased
20% or more. Many guys at that time could copy way faster than they
could send.

For most of us, the first electronic keyer paddles were bugs with the
dit arm constrained (rubber band). Yeah you could HB something. You
supplied all the timing between dots and dashes.

Modes like Iambic et al came about when somebody thought a bit out of
the box: Would two levers make things easier? (for others maybe, not
for me....) I'm not sure whether iambic or dual levers keys came first.
Obviously one couldn't work without the other.

Don't forget the Cootie key!

73 Brian/K3KO

On 8/10/2012 22:52, Don Wilhelm wrote:

> Will,
>
> The distinguishing characteristic is that it does not alternate between
> dits and dahs.
> You are correct, that a dingle dot insertion can work the same way in
> either case, and by the same reasoning, a single dash insertion. but if
> you send a character like "Z", you close the DAH paddle and get the
> first DAH off, then after the 2nd DAH starts, close the DIT paddle (you
> do not have to take your finger off the DAH paddle) and it will begin
> sending a string of DITS - get both fingers off the paddle after the 2nd
> dit has started.
>
> Or take the letter "B" - DAH first, then close the DIT paddle - it does
> not mater much whether you take your finger off the DAH paddle or not,
> it will send 3 dits as long as you do not lift the finger from the dit
> paddle. The last paddle closed takes priority.
>
> There are many other examples where Ultimatic is easier - but the timing
> is not as critical as it is for the Iambic alternating dots and dashes
> system.
>
> I think Iambic was a mistake created by the Curtis chip manufactures and
> salesmen (OK, I am ignoring the Accukeyer, I admit that) - but the
> original Ultimatic mode was easier to my mind, and it is more like bug
> keying that any other keyer mode - except the bug will not do a string
> of DAHs, only dits.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 8/10/2012 6:13 PM, Mercury wrote:
>> Maybe I'm missing something, Bud, but I send the letter Q the same way with Iambic B keying. Hold the dah paddle for the duration of the letter and tap the dit at the appropriate place. No need to let up on the dah paddle. Is there some other characteristic that distinguishes Ulimatic from Iambic B? I've never used Ultimatic keying but hear a lot of folks rave about it. I do just fine with Iambic B but mess up big time with Iambic A. To each his own.
>>
>> 73 - Will, AI4VE
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2437/5191 - Release Date: 08/10/12
>
>

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2437/5191 - Release Date: 08/10/12

______________________________________________________________
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

Phillip Lontz

KX1 Displayed voltage question

In reply to this post by W2RU - Bud Hippisley

I have applied 13.66 volts from my HP lab power supply... also I measured it with the Fluke 179 and a Fluke 2840. Both Flukes are more or less in agreement.
The KX1 battery display says it is 13.3vdc when it is powered up.

A....... is there a way to adjust the display voltage on the KX1 so that it more closely matches the Flukes etc? OR

B.......is the .3 vdc difference about the correct voltage drop for the KX1 and then the KX1 is more or less correct and no adjustment not needed?

Thank You

Phil
Santa Fe
KF5ROJ (New ticket Today)( yeeeaah!!!)
______________________________________________________________
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 Morrow-3

Re: KX1 Displayed voltage question

Phil wrote:

> I have applied 13.66 volts from my HP lab power supply...
> also I measured it with the Fluke 179 and a Fluke 2840. Both
> Flukes are more or less in agreement.
> The KX1 battery display says it is 13.3vdc when it is powered up.

The difference between the external supply DC voltage and that
indicated by the MPU-controlled LED is due to the voltage drop
across the reverse polarity and external/internal DC power
auctioneering diode D2.

What the LED shows is, in fact, the voltage at which the KX1
internal electronics are operating. It's all perfectly correct.

Congratulations on your new license.

73,
Mike / KK5F

______________________________________________________________
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

Mercury

Re: Elecraft] {K3 KX3} Software CW in K3 and KX3 and contesting

In reply to this post by Mercury

Thanks for the explanations, Don and Bud. I think I understand how an Ultimatic keyer works now and can see how it would be less timing critical for many characters and most numbers. Except for the obvious "iambic" characters like 'c', 'k', 'r', and the period, it would require less practice to send most code. I'd like to try it sometime. Wonder why it isn't more widely used?

73 - Will, AI4VE

______________________________________________________________
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