Giving Up
Locked
12
12
 
|
Sadly, I've decided to give up waiting for the K4. I'm probably far down
the list anyway. Their are numerous reason for this decision. First, there is the cost. With a tuner the price is $4600 making it one of the most expensive transceivers on the market. I fully realize that the K4 is feature rich and extremely well designed. I would never take anything away from Elecraft's engineering ability. The K3 set a new standard of performance that made the other manufacturers substantially up their game - which they did. But is the K4 going to do the same thing the K3 did? To me, it doesn't look like it. Innovative in some, perhaps many ways - yes. A new trend setter? I'm not so sure. When the K3 came out it was very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe the K4 with the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. At this point the price/performance just isn't there for me. I sold my very complete K3 station several years ago in anticipation of the K4. But now the waiting has left me thinking about how much I'm willing to invest and whether or not another brand whose transceivers are as much as $1500 less and whose performance seems quite impressive will meet my needs. After literally several years of contemplation I conclude that, for me, the K4 is not worth the price. $3600 (with the tuner since every other significant radio includes one) would seem competitive and I would jump on it at this price. But as it is? Can't see doing it. I apologize if feelings are hurt or I've made anyone angry. I'm leaving the list since I'm no longer waiting patiently for what we once called Vaporware. Good luck to everyone on their current and future K4s. Doug -- K0DXV ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
GM Doug, A fully loaded K3 P3 was always dear. It rivalled the 7850 price but did not reach the cost while arguably being the better radio. The fully loaded K4 is less expensive to my reckoning in todays money than the loaded K3 with P3 and physically smaller. I suspect it may not be so much superior to the K3 in RF terms except that it is in the important area of ergonomics. The wait has been excessive for sure.Your reasonng is understandable. Hope the next radio is great. Meanwhile keep enjoying ham radio.I will keep waiting.73 Doug EI2CNSent from my Galaxy
-------- Original message --------From: Doug Person <[hidden email]> Date: 08/06/2021 03:34 (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: [Elecraft] Giving Up Sadly, I've decided to give up waiting for the K4. I'm probably far down the list anyway. Their are numerous reason for this decision. First, there is the cost. With a tuner the price is $4600 making it one of the most expensive transceivers on the market. I fully realize that the K4 is feature rich and extremely well designed. I would never take anything away from Elecraft's engineering ability. The K3 set a new standard of performance that made the other manufacturers substantially up their game - which they did. But is the K4 going to do the same thing the K3 did? To me, it doesn't look like it. Innovative in some, perhaps many ways - yes. A new trend setter? I'm not so sure. When the K3 came out it was very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe the K4 with the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. At this point the price/performance just isn't there for me. I sold my very complete K3 station several years ago in anticipation of the K4. But now the waiting has left me thinking about how much I'm willing to invest and whether or not another brand whose transceivers are as much as $1500 less and whose performance seems quite impressive will meet my needs. After literally several years of contemplation I conclude that, for me, the K4 is not worth the price. $3600 (with the tuner since every other significant radio includes one) would seem competitive and I would jump on it at this price. But as it is? Can't see doing it. I apologize if feelings are hurt or I've made anyone angry. I'm leaving the list since I'm no longer waiting patiently for what we once called Vaporware.Good luck to everyone on their current and future K4s.Doug -- K0DXV______________________________________________________________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.htmlMessage delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
I agree that the price for the K4 has to be compared with the fully loaded K3 plus P3. In that respect it is not overpriced.
I don't think we should make too much of the Sherwood Engineering test data at this point. I would suspect it would be hard for the human ear to tell the difference among the top eight or ten models on the list. I also think that when the K4 HD unit is out you might see higher results. I suspect direct sampling technology is not as capable as superhet when it comes to separating out closely spaced signals which is what Sherwood Engineering uses to rank radios. -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of turnbull Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 11:27 PM To: Doug Person <[hidden email]>; [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up GM Doug, A fully loaded K3 P3 was always dear. It rivalled the 7850 price but did not reach the cost while arguably being the better radio. The fully loaded K4 is less expensive to my reckoning in todays money than the loaded K3 with P3 and physically smaller. I suspect it may not be so much superior to the K3 in RF terms except that it is in the important area of ergonomics. The wait has been excessive for sure.Your reasonng is understandable. Hope the next radio is great. Meanwhile keep enjoying ham radio.I will keep waiting.73 Doug EI2CNSent from my Galaxy -------- Original message --------From: Doug Person <[hidden email]> Date: 08/06/2021 03:34 (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: [Elecraft] Giving Up Sadly, I've decided to give up waiting for the K4. I'm probably far down the list anyway. Their are numerous reason for this decision. First, there is the cost. With a tuner the price is $4600 making it one of the most expensive transceivers on the market. I fully realize that the K4 is feature rich and extremely well designed. I would never take anything away from Elecraft's engineering ability. The K3 set a new standard of performance that made the other manufacturers substantially up their game - which they did. But is the K4 going to do the same thing the K3 did? To me, it doesn't look like it. Innovative in some, perhaps many ways - yes. A new trend setter? I'm not so sure. When the K3 came out it was very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe the K4 with the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. At this point the price/performance just isn't there for me. I sold my very complete K3 station several years ago in anticipation of the K4. But now the waiting has left me thinking about how much I'm willing to invest and whether or not another brand whose transceivers are as much as $1500 less and whose performance seems quite impressive will meet my needs. After literally several years of contemplation I conclude that, for me, the K4 is not worth the price. $3600 (with the tuner since every other significant radio includes one) would seem competitive and I would jump on it at this price. But as it is? Can't see doing it. I apologize if feelings are hurt or I've made anyone angry. I'm leaving the list since I'm no longer waiting patiently for what we once called Vaporware.Good luck to everyone on their current and future K4s.Doug -- K0DXV______________________________________________________________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.htmlMessage delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
I am afraid K4HD is going to be even more expensive and when compared
performance/features/price ratio with FTDX101 that has the same architecture Elecraft K4HD does not look to me like a good investment. I will keep my K3 and KX3 though and will possibly consider FTDX10 which sounds like a good value for money. If only Yaesu did not have those tiny difficult to find and deal with connectors. I have also got used to at least 3 audio output ports on K3 with own AF amplifier each. UI on Elecraft radios is sure much better thought out but the price tag overweight. 73, Igor UA9CDC 08.06.2021 11:53, George Thornton пишет: > I agree that the price for the K4 has to be compared with the fully loaded K3 plus P3. In that respect it is not overpriced. > > I don't think we should make too much of the Sherwood Engineering test data at this point. I would suspect it would be hard for the human ear to tell the difference among the top eight or ten models on the list. I also think that when the K4 HD unit is out you might see higher results. I suspect direct sampling technology is not as capable as superhet when it comes to separating out closely spaced signals which is what Sherwood Engineering uses to rank radios. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of turnbull > Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 11:27 PM > To: Doug Person <[hidden email]>; [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up > > GM Doug, A fully loaded K3 P3 was always dear. It rivalled the 7850 price but did not reach the cost while arguably being the better radio. The fully loaded K4 is less expensive to my reckoning in todays money than the loaded K3 with P3 and physically smaller. I suspect it may not be so much superior to the K3 in RF terms except that it is in the important area of ergonomics. The wait has been excessive for sure.Your reasonng is understandable. Hope the next radio is great. Meanwhile keep enjoying ham radio.I will keep waiting.73 Doug EI2CNSent from my Galaxy > -------- Original message --------From: Doug Person <[hidden email]> Date: 08/06/2021 03:34 (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: [Elecraft] Giving Up Sadly, I've decided to give up waiting for the K4. I'm probably far down the list anyway. Their are numerous reason for this decision. First, there is the cost. With a tuner the price is $4600 making it one of the most expensive transceivers on the market. I fully realize that the K4 is feature rich and extremely well designed. I would never take anything away from Elecraft's engineering ability. The K3 set a new standard of performance that made the other manufacturers substantially up their game - which they did. But is the K4 going to do the same thing the K3 did? To me, it doesn't look like it. Innovative in some, perhaps many ways - yes. A new trend setter? I'm not so sure. When the K3 came out it was very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe the K4 with the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. At this point the price/performance just isn't there for me. I sold my very complete K3 station several years ago in anticipation of the K4. But now the waiting has left me thinking about how much I'm willing to invest and whether or not another brand whose transceivers are as much as $1500 less and whose performance seems quite impressive will meet my needs. After literally several years of contemplation I conclude that, for me, the K4 is not worth the price. $3600 (with the tuner since every other significant radio includes one) would seem competitive and I would jump on it at this price. But as it is? Can't see doing it. I apologize if feelings are hurt or I've made anyone angry. I'm leaving the list since I'm no longer waiting patiently for what we once called Vaporware.Good luck to everyone on their current and future K4s.Doug -- K0DXV______________________________________________________________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.htmlMessage delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ > 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by George Thornton
Rob Sherwood's data is excellent. The problem is hams thinking the order of
listing is based on an overall figure of merit. It is *not*. Rob had to choose *one column* on which to sort his list. When he first published it, he chose third-order dynamic range (narrow spaced), probably because many receivers *of that day* had poor performance on that important metric. For consistency, he has chosen to retain that sort order even though many (most?) modern receivers have improved to the point where that particular parameter is almost irrelevant when choosing among top radios. George is correct that most of us can't tell the difference among radios due to minor differences in DR - they are ALL excellent and Rob is careful to point that out when he speaks at hamfests. In fact, most modern transceivers excel in so many receiver performance metrics that Rob and others are now rightly crusading for improvements in transmitter performance which has not advanced as much as receiver performance across the industry. K4 (and K3 before it) and a few others have excellent transmitter IMD and clean keying that make them best choices, especially in crowded or multi-transmitter environments and among hams who care about not generating unnecessarily broad signals. That plus ergonomics and operating features should be the new basis of comparison but they don't fit on a list of *receiver performance* metrics. I'd like to see a new table of select transmitter performance measurements. Ergonomics and feature sets don't lend themselves as easily to tabular comparison except by manufacturers who can choose which things to mention, so it's important to read the descriptions, read the reviews, listen to owners and, if still unsure, sit down with the radios before making a decision. The Sherwood data is good. Just don't interpret it the wrong way. 73, /Rick N6XI On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 11:54 PM George Thornton < [hidden email]> wrote: > I agree that the price for the K4 has to be compared with the fully loaded > K3 plus P3. In that respect it is not overpriced. > > I don't think we should make too much of the Sherwood Engineering test > data at this point. I would suspect it would be hard for the human ear > to tell the difference among the top eight or ten models on the list. I > also think that when the K4 HD unit is out you might see higher results. I > suspect direct sampling technology is not as capable as superhet when it > comes to separating out closely spaced signals which is what Sherwood > Engineering uses to rank radios. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> > On Behalf Of turnbull > Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 11:27 PM > To: Doug Person <[hidden email]>; [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up > > GM Doug, A fully loaded K3 P3 was always dear. It rivalled the 7850 > price but did not reach the cost while arguably being the better radio. > The fully loaded K4 is less expensive to my reckoning in todays money than > the loaded K3 with P3 and physically smaller. I suspect it may not be so > much superior to the K3 in RF terms except that it is in the important area > of ergonomics. The wait has been excessive for sure.Your reasonng is > understandable. Hope the next radio is great. Meanwhile keep enjoying > ham radio.I will keep waiting.73 Doug EI2CNSent from my Galaxy > -------- Original message --------From: Doug Person <[hidden email]> > Date: 08/06/2021 03:34 (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] > Subject: [Elecraft] Giving Up Sadly, I've decided to give up waiting for > the K4. I'm probably far down the list anyway. Their are numerous reason > for this decision. First, there is the cost. With a tuner the price is > $4600 making it one of the most expensive transceivers on the market. I > fully realize that the K4 is feature rich and extremely well designed. I > would never take anything away from Elecraft's engineering ability. The K3 > set a new standard of performance that made the other manufacturers > substantially up their game - which they did. But is the K4 going to do the > same thing the K3 did? To me, it doesn't look like it. Innovative in some, > perhaps many ways - yes. A new trend setter? I'm not so sure. When the K3 > came out it was very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe > the K4 with the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. At > this point the price/performance just isn't there for me. I sold my very > complete K3 station several years ago in anticipation of the K4. But now > the waiting has left me thinking about how much I'm willing to invest and > whether or not another brand whose transceivers are as much as $1500 less > and whose performance seems quite impressive will meet my needs. After > literally several years of contemplation I conclude that, for me, the K4 is > not worth the price. $3600 (with the tuner since every other significant > radio includes one) would seem competitive and I would jump on it at this > price. But as it is? Can't see doing it. I apologize if feelings are hurt > or I've made anyone angry. I'm leaving the list since I'm no longer waiting > patiently for what we once called Vaporware.Good luck to everyone on their > current and future K4s.Doug -- > K0DXV______________________________________________________________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.htmlMessage delivered to [hidden email] > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > Message delivered to [hidden email] > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > Message delivered to [hidden email] -- -- Rick Tavan Truckee and Saratoga, CA ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Hopefully Elecraft will put a priority on pre-distortion which will vault the K4/KPA1500 combo to the top on the transmitter performance list. Only the Anan rigs from Apache Labs employs pre-distortion now.
73, Bill WE5P Comfortably Numb > On Jun 8, 2021, at 10:31, Rick Tavan <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Rob Sherwood's data is excellent. The problem is hams thinking the order of > listing is based on an > overall figure of merit. It is *not*. Rob had to choose *one column* on > which to sort his list. When he > first published it, he chose third-order dynamic range (narrow spaced), > probably because many > receivers *of that day* had poor performance on that important metric. For > consistency, he has chosen > to retain that sort order even though many (most?) modern receivers have > improved to the point > where that particular parameter is almost irrelevant when choosing among > top radios. George is > correct that most of us can't tell the difference among radios due to minor > differences in > DR - they are ALL excellent and Rob is careful to point that out when he > speaks at > hamfests. In fact, most modern transceivers excel in so many receiver > performance metrics that > Rob and others are now rightly crusading for improvements in transmitter > performance which > has not advanced as much as receiver performance across the industry. K4 > (and K3 before it) > and a few others have excellent transmitter IMD and clean keying that make > them best choices, > especially in crowded or multi-transmitter environments and among hams who > care about not > generating unnecessarily broad signals. That plus ergonomics and operating > features should be > the new basis of comparison but they don't fit on a list of *receiver > performance* metrics. > I'd like to see a new table of select transmitter performance measurements. > Ergonomics > and feature sets don't lend themselves as easily to tabular comparison > except by manufacturers > who can choose which things to mention, so it's important to read the > descriptions, read the > reviews, listen to owners and, if still unsure, sit down with the radios > before making a decision. > > The Sherwood data is good. Just don't interpret it the wrong way. > > 73, > > /Rick N6XI > >> On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 11:54 PM George Thornton < >> [hidden email]> wrote: >> >> I agree that the price for the K4 has to be compared with the fully loaded >> K3 plus P3. In that respect it is not overpriced. >> >> I don't think we should make too much of the Sherwood Engineering test >> data at this point. I would suspect it would be hard for the human ear >> to tell the difference among the top eight or ten models on the list. I >> also think that when the K4 HD unit is out you might see higher results. I >> suspect direct sampling technology is not as capable as superhet when it >> comes to separating out closely spaced signals which is what Sherwood >> Engineering uses to rank radios. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> >> On Behalf Of turnbull >> Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 11:27 PM >> To: Doug Person <[hidden email]>; [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up >> >> GM Doug, A fully loaded K3 P3 was always dear. It rivalled the 7850 >> price but did not reach the cost while arguably being the better radio. >> The fully loaded K4 is less expensive to my reckoning in todays money than >> the loaded K3 with P3 and physically smaller. I suspect it may not be so >> much superior to the K3 in RF terms except that it is in the important area >> of ergonomics. The wait has been excessive for sure.Your reasonng is >> understandable. Hope the next radio is great. Meanwhile keep enjoying >> ham radio.I will keep waiting.73 Doug EI2CNSent from my Galaxy >> -------- Original message --------From: Doug Person <[hidden email]> >> Date: 08/06/2021 03:34 (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] >> Subject: [Elecraft] Giving Up Sadly, I've decided to give up waiting for >> the K4. I'm probably far down the list anyway. Their are numerous reason >> for this decision. First, there is the cost. With a tuner the price is >> $4600 making it one of the most expensive transceivers on the market. I >> fully realize that the K4 is feature rich and extremely well designed. I >> would never take anything away from Elecraft's engineering ability. The K3 >> set a new standard of performance that made the other manufacturers >> substantially up their game - which they did. But is the K4 going to do the >> same thing the K3 did? To me, it doesn't look like it. Innovative in some, >> perhaps many ways - yes. A new trend setter? I'm not so sure. When the K3 >> came out it was very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe >> the K4 with the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. At >> this point the price/performance just isn't there for me. I sold my very >> complete K3 station several years ago in anticipation of the K4. But now >> the waiting has left me thinking about how much I'm willing to invest and >> whether or not another brand whose transceivers are as much as $1500 less >> and whose performance seems quite impressive will meet my needs. After >> literally several years of contemplation I conclude that, for me, the K4 is >> not worth the price. $3600 (with the tuner since every other significant >> radio includes one) would seem competitive and I would jump on it at this >> price. But as it is? Can't see doing it. I apologize if feelings are hurt >> or I've made anyone angry. I'm leaving the list since I'm no longer waiting >> patiently for what we once called Vaporware.Good luck to everyone on their >> current and future K4s.Doug -- >> K0DXV______________________________________________________________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.htmlMessage delivered to [hidden email] >> ______________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> Message delivered to [hidden email] >> ______________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> Message delivered to [hidden email] > > > > -- > -- > > Rick Tavan > Truckee and Saratoga, CA > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Doug Person-4
I would not exactly call this giving up. Would I like to have a K4? Sure, but I wouldn’t know what to do with it . . . KX2 + KXPA100 + a wire in a tree is more than enough for me. Just my two cents.
Keeping Watch - shu Joe Shuman, NZ8P ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Doug Person-4
Not so, Doug.
My K3, including accessories and filters, was $4,500 in 2007. That's $5,722 in today's dollars. A K4 with all its advanced technology at $4,600 (your quote) is a steal compared to a K3. The word "expensive" can be applied to the K4 (or any product) only when answering the question, "compared to what?" Otherwise it has no meaning. Nothing is expensive or inexpensive on its own. The word has relevance only when comparing the price of two or more products. 73, Kent K9ZTV On 6/7/2021 9:33 PM, Doug Person, KØDXV, wrote: > ... With a tuner the [K4] price is $4600 making it one of the most > expensive transceivers on the market ... When the K3 came out it was > very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe the K4 with > the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. . -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Igor Sokolov-2
On 6/8/2021 3:00 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote:
> FTDX10 which sounds like a good value for money. Except that Yaesu radios have a long history of generating nasty clicks, and have more recently established the reputation of severe splatter on SSB. 73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
This is not like a departure in a plane from O’Hare airport. You do not have to announce your intentions before leaving here. Thank You.
> On Jun 8, 2021, at 11:47, Jim Brown <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On 6/8/2021 3:00 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote: >> FTDX10 which sounds like a good value for money. > > Except that Yaesu radios have a long history of generating nasty clicks, and have more recently established the reputation of severe splatter on SSB. > > 73, Jim K9YC > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Rick Tavan-2
On 6/8/2021 7:30 AM, Rick Tavan wrote:
> Rob Sherwood's data is excellent. When studying Rob's work, remember that his table only addresses RECEIVE performance. He has only very recently begun to look at transmit quality. 73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10
I run a FTDX101 MP-no SSB splatter ( 20W/65W), no CW clicks (6ms)- May 2021
FW update implemented. Latest issue of QST (June) ARRL Lab: Test Report - Review on FTDX10 does not confirm clicks or SSB splatter. Tnx, Cu, vy 73 de Andy HB9CVQ, DK2VQ, AK4IG https://www.qrz.com/db/HB9CVQ -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jim Brown Sent: Dienstag, 8. Juni 2021 19:47 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up On 6/8/2021 3:00 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote: > FTDX10 which sounds like a good value for money. Except that Yaesu radios have a long history of generating nasty clicks, and have more recently established the reputation of severe splatter on SSB. 73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by KENT TRIMBLE
Except that the K4 (not K4HD) does not equal the K3 for raw performance. The K4HD with equivalent performance and accessories is going to cost a fortune, with the extra cost going mostly into creature features. And you're forgetting comparison to rigs from other manufacturers. If you create a sliding scale of cost versus performance for various rigs, Elecraft doesn't come out on top on any rig anymore. Dave AB7E On 6/8/2021 10:25 AM, KENT TRIMBLE wrote: > Not so, Doug. > > My K3, including accessories and filters, was $4,500 in 2007. That's > $5,722 in today's dollars. > > A K4 with all its advanced technology at $4,600 (your quote) is a > steal compared to a K3. > > The word "expensive" can be applied to the K4 (or any product) only > when answering the question, "compared to what?" Otherwise it has no > meaning. Nothing is expensive or inexpensive on its own. The word > has relevance only when comparing the price of two or more products. > > 73, > > Kent K9ZTV > > > On 6/7/2021 9:33 PM, Doug Person, KØDXV, wrote: >> ... With a tuner the [K4] price is $4600 making it one of the most >> expensive transceivers on the market ... When the K3 came out it was >> very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe the K4 with >> the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. > . > > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10
I don't know the FTDX10 but it looks like it has a single receiver and can't be updated.
I note these Yaesu rigs seem to have crystal filters and use a combination of superhet and direct sampling architecture whereas the K4D is direct sampling. I would hold off on reaching conclusions on relative performance until the K4HD comes out and is tested. Only then would you get comparable radios. -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jim Brown Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 10:47 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up On 6/8/2021 3:00 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote: > FTDX10 which sounds like a good value for money. Except that Yaesu radios have a long history of generating nasty clicks, and have more recently established the reputation of severe splatter on SSB. 73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by David Gilbert-2
I think it is correct to say the basic k4 does not exceed the K3 raw performance (based on the Sherwood engineering standard) but I think the results are pretty close for practical purposes. I would not say the K4 is materially worse. I think it would be up to individual K3 owners to decide whether to sell and pay the difference for an upgrade.
I looked at pricing for the Yaesu stuff and the comparable dual receiver model comes out at $4700. Their 200 watt version is advertised at $5200. We don't really know how much the superhet option will cost but what if it was a grand more, that would put the top of the line K4HD at $5000. At that level I would look more at a full feature comparison before I reached a conclusion about which is a better deal. I don't have full information on pricing and options so I don't know if my numbers are off. We are dealing with a US company versus foreign made and that may also be a factor. I also suspect Elecraft could in the future come out with a scaled down model that has only one receiver and that could become a lower cost option. -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of David Gilbert Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 12:08 PM To: Elecraft <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up Except that the K4 (not K4HD) does not equal the K3 for raw performance. The K4HD with equivalent performance and accessories is going to cost a fortune, with the extra cost going mostly into creature features. And you're forgetting comparison to rigs from other manufacturers. If you create a sliding scale of cost versus performance for various rigs, Elecraft doesn't come out on top on any rig anymore. Dave AB7E On 6/8/2021 10:25 AM, KENT TRIMBLE wrote: > Not so, Doug. > > My K3, including accessories and filters, was $4,500 in 2007. That's > $5,722 in today's dollars. > > A K4 with all its advanced technology at $4,600 (your quote) is a > steal compared to a K3. > > The word "expensive" can be applied to the K4 (or any product) only > when answering the question, "compared to what?" Otherwise it has no > meaning. Nothing is expensive or inexpensive on its own. The word > has relevance only when comparing the price of two or more products. > > 73, > > Kent K9ZTV > > > On 6/7/2021 9:33 PM, Doug Person, KØDXV, wrote: >> ... With a tuner the [K4] price is $4600 making it one of the most >> expensive transceivers on the market ... When the K3 came out it was >> very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe the K4 with >> the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. > . > > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10
Except all of that has been fixed in later offerings.
On 6/8/2021 10:47 AM, Jim Brown wrote: > On 6/8/2021 3:00 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote: >> FTDX10 which sounds like a good value for money. > > Except that Yaesu radios have a long history of generating nasty clicks, and > have more recently established the reputation of severe splatter on SSB. > > 73, Jim K9YC > ______________________________________________________________ > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
My FTdx010d has no problems.
Carl Yaffey K8NU 614 268 6353, Columbus OH http://www.carl-yaffey.com http://www.bluesswing.com http://www.timbrewolvesband.com http://www.folkramblers.carl-yaffey.com Http:www.clintonvillegrass.com > On Jun 8, 2021, at 3:51 PM, Wes <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Except all of that has been fixed in later offerings. > > > > On 6/8/2021 10:47 AM, Jim Brown wrote: >> On 6/8/2021 3:00 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote: >>> FTDX10 which sounds like a good value for money. >> >> Except that Yaesu radios have a long history of generating nasty clicks, and have more recently established the reputation of severe splatter on SSB. >> >> 73, Jim K9YC >> ______________________________________________________________ >> > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Doug Person-4
Performance simply is not the issue here.
Elecraft has made a marketing decision to market one radio and it is priced in the middle of the Ham-consumer pack with other radios with similar performance. They have opted to skip the entry-level market (like Icom with the 7300 that you can get for basically $1000, and a range of radios at different price points). Many people can't pony up the $4,000+ for the new (now) entry level Elecraft (no matter what the performance) and will go elsewhere for their radios. This is a different model than the entry level K3 that initially started barely over $1,000. That's what's up here... As Rob says in all of his talks... "Any of the radios in the top 10+ are about the same in performance... you serve yourself best buying one with the options that suit you". Unless, of course, you are a performance number chaser... Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ email: [hidden email] -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by George Thornton
Except the OP gave up on waiting.
I did too. I haven't cancelled my no-deposit K4 order, but I turn 80 later this year and I wanted a new radio before then. So I bought a TS-890S. It too is a single-receiver box. But, I'm two away from top of the Honor Roll and have 9-band DXCC all from withing a 10 mile circle and I've never owned a transceiver with two receivers. A contester might want one but as a DXer I've never seen the need. I've only had the Kenwood for about 7 months, but it's already been more reliable than either my K3 or K3S. Prior to the Elecrafts I had a TS-870SAT that was flawless for over 12 years. The '890 isn't perfect, the K3 and K3S are better on RTTY, I don't like not having mic and headphone jacks on the rear panel, among other nits. But the feel of the tuning knob, the ergonomics, the better frequency stability, the audio and the far better TX IMD are pluses. It has a built in tuner, albeit with a lesser range. Although I don't use or have an interest in remote operation, the Kenwood has built-in capability. Although the prices have actually gone up since i bought mine, they are still less than a base K4. Wes N7WS On 6/8/2021 12:09 PM, George Thornton wrote: > I don't know the FTDX10 but it looks like it has a single receiver and can't be updated. > > I note these Yaesu rigs seem to have crystal filters and use a combination of superhet and direct sampling architecture whereas the K4D is direct sampling. I would hold off on reaching conclusions on relative performance until the K4HD comes out and is tested. Only then would you get comparable radios. > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
I have kind of given up, too. I did a no deposit order just about this time
2 years ago. I recently bought an IC-7610. I guess I'll see what I will do when they call me to tell me my order is ready. John N1JM Wes Stewart-2 wrote > Except the OP gave up on waiting. > > I did too. I haven't cancelled my no-deposit K4 order, but I turn 80 > later this > year and I wanted a new radio before then. So I bought a TS-890S. It too > is a > single-receiver box. But, I'm two away from top of the Honor Roll and > have > 9-band DXCC all from withing a 10 mile circle and I've never owned a > transceiver > with two receivers. A contester might want one but as a DXer I've never > seen > the need. > > I've only had the Kenwood for about 7 months, but it's already been more > reliable than either my K3 or K3S. Prior to the Elecrafts I had a > TS-870SAT that > was flawless for over 12 years. The '890 isn't perfect, the K3 and K3S are > better on RTTY, I don't like not having mic and headphone jacks on the > rear > panel, among other nits. But the feel of the tuning knob, the ergonomics, > the > better frequency stability, the audio and the far better TX IMD are > pluses. It > has a built in tuner, albeit with a lesser range. Although I don't use or > have > an interest in remote operation, the Kenwood has built-in capability. > > Although the prices have actually gone up since i bought mine, they are > still > less than a base K4. > > Wes N7WS > > > On 6/8/2021 12:09 PM, George Thornton wrote: >> I don't know the FTDX10 but it looks like it has a single receiver and >> can't be updated. >> >> I note these Yaesu rigs seem to have crystal filters and use a >> combination of superhet and direct sampling architecture whereas the K4D >> is direct sampling. I would hold off on reaching conclusions on >> relative performance until the K4HD comes out and is tested. Only then >> would you get comparable radios. >> > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto: > Elecraft@.qth > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to > lists+1215531472858-365791@.nabble -- Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.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 Message delivered to [hidden email] |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |