How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?

[Andrew Moore-3]

Very few rigs are capable of handling high speed CW, full break-in, without
a poor sounding CW note, splatter, clicks +/- a few kc's, etc.  So far I'm
aware of the Ten-Tec Corsair II and Icom IC-7700 being able to do 100 WPM
with superb results.

How does the K3 perform in this regard at speeds in excess of 50 WPM?

Thanks,
--Andrew
______________________________________________________________
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

[Steve Ellington]

Andrew:
Above 45 wpm the K3 begins to produce dits of random and uneven length. The
ability to hear between characters trails off rapidly after 30 wpm. I
reported this to Elecraft about a year ago. As far as I know, nothing has
changed. I think you can forget about it ever doing 100 wpm! 73

Steve
N4LQ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Moore" <[hidden email]>
To: "Elecraft" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 4:52 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?

> Very few rigs are capable of handling high speed CW, full break-in,
> without
> a poor sounding CW note, splatter, clicks +/- a few kc's, etc.  So far I'm
> aware of the Ten-Tec Corsair II and Icom IC-7700 being able to do 100 WPM
> with superb results.
>
> How does the K3 perform in this regard at speeds in excess of 50 WPM?
>
> Thanks,
> --Andrew
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

[DK4XL]

Hi Andrew,

unfortunately I have to confirm what Steve writes.
Elecrafts service is outstanding, no question about
it - as long as you don't ask for QRQ  for the internal
keyer or improvements of sign quality and qsk.

Martin
DK4XL

[Steve Ellington]

Martin:
Using an external keyer or computer to key the K3 does not help QSK or
affect erratic dit length.
Steve
N4LQ
----- Original Message -----
From: "DK4XL" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 12:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?

>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> unfortunately I have to confirm what Steve writes.
> Elecrafts service is outstanding, no question about
> it - as long as you don't ask for QRQ  for the internal
> keyer or improvements of sign quality and qsk.
>
> Martin
> DK4XL
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/How-is-K3-QRQ-QSK-performance-50-100-WPM-tp5048269p5049497.html
> Sent from the [K3] mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[DK4XL]

that's what I wanted to write...

[Andrew Moore-3]

DK4XL> Elecrafts service is outstanding, no question about it - as long as
you don't ask for QRQ  for the internal keyer or improvements of sign
quality and qsk.

Agreed, Elecraft is top notch in all respects, which is why I'm so baffled
by the thought of signal deteriorating above 45 WPM or so.

Since I haven't heard this for myself, I won't put this all out as fact
though.

I'm also wondering if the keyer can be pushed faster without degrading the
signal if you use an external keyer instead of internal, or if you use
non-QSK instead of QSK.  Can anyone confirm?

--Andrew
..
______________________________________________________________
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

[Cookie]

Andrew, I can't begin to key at 45 WPM so I have not responded.  The best I can copy call signs in contests is around 50 WPM and the K3 sounds fine to me at 50 and I don't have any complaints using a WinKeyer USB.  I have keyed it up to 100 WPM with the WinKeyer and the DTR pin of the RS-232 port.  It sounds like CW, but I cannot copy that fast so I am not sure.  I seldom use the keyer in the K3 because I prefer straight key or bug but it works fine up to 27 or 28 which is my limit for paddle keying.
 Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ




________________________________
From: Andrew Moore <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Fri, May 14, 2010 7:36:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?

DK4XL> Elecrafts service is outstanding, no question about it - as long as
you don't ask for QRQ  for the internal keyer or improvements of sign
quality and qsk.

Agreed, Elecraft is top notch in all respects, which is why I'm so baffled
by the thought of signal deteriorating above 45 WPM or so.

Since I haven't heard this for myself, I won't put this all out as fact
though.

I'm also wondering if the keyer can be pushed faster without degrading the
signal if you use an external keyer instead of internal, or if you use
non-QSK instead of QSK.  Can anyone confirm?

--Andrew
..
______________________________________________________________
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

[lstavenhagen]

Just out of curiosity, why would one need full QSK at those speeds? By then the characters are so fast that, seems to me, you could use a short enough delay to keep from T/R switching between individual dits and dahs but still have QSK for all practical purposes between letters?

I'm like Cookie in that my sending is still poor enough that this won't be an issue for a long long time. Tho ironically I'm now better with my vibroplex bug than with my bencher. And actually having to decide which one I'd rather put the lions share of practice into at this point, hihi. But that's a seperate story.
My copy speed is still only between 25 and 30 wpm, tho I can handle contest style exchanges and very plain/basic language at around 35.

So I'm well well away from this with QRQ QSK ever becoming an issue for me, but am still wondering?

73,
LS
W5QD

[lstavenhagen]

Er, I don't mean that Cookie's sending is poor, I meant only slower than the speeds we're talking about. Sorry about that Cookie hi hi...

73,
LS
W5QD

[Steve Ellington]

I tested QRQ CW using SpectraVue to display the dits and did not rely on my
"opinion" of how it sounded. Above 45 wpm, the dits are of random length
which makes copy difficult for those people who normally copy above those
speeds. I used both Winkey USB, the K3's internal keyer and an external
keyer. Using semi-QSK, QSK mode or even "Test" mode made no difference. The
problem has something to do with the rig's CPU capability.

What got me started on this was during a QSO with a friend at about 50 WPM.
He had a sharp ear and informed me that something wasn't quiet right. Since
then, I've kept my speed below 45 wpm and suffered with the slow QSK at 30
wpm and higher. Otherwise the K3 is the ultimate rig....For some things.

Steve
N4LQ
----- Original Message -----
From: "WILLIS COOKE" <[hidden email]>
To: "Andrew Moore" <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?


Andrew, I can't begin to key at 45 WPM so I have not responded. The best I
can copy call signs in contests is around 50 WPM and the K3 sounds fine to
me at 50 and I don't have any complaints using a WinKeyer USB. I have keyed
it up to 100 WPM with the WinKeyer and the DTR pin of the RS-232 port. It
sounds like CW, but I cannot copy that fast so I am not sure. I seldom use
the keyer in the K3 because I prefer straight key or bug but it works fine
up to 27 or 28 which is my limit for paddle keying.
Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ




________________________________
From: Andrew Moore <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Fri, May 14, 2010 7:36:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?

DK4XL> Elecrafts service is outstanding, no question about it - as long as
you don't ask for QRQ for the internal keyer or improvements of sign
quality and qsk.

Agreed, Elecraft is top notch in all respects, which is why I'm so baffled
by the thought of signal deteriorating above 45 WPM or so.

Since I haven't heard this for myself, I won't put this all out as fact
though.

I'm also wondering if the keyer can be pushed faster without degrading the
signal if you use an external keyer instead of internal, or if you use
non-QSK instead of QSK. Can anyone confirm?

--Andrew
..
______________________________________________________________
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

[Cookie]

I don't have any inside knowledge about the internal design of the K3 but we all know that it is computer based digital.  With any CPU based system there is a limit to the speed it can handle signal processing while continuing other required tasks.  I would think that the task of upgrading the processor speed or improving the code efficiency for unlimited code speed would be an essential redesign of the transceiver computer section and would benefit only a very few.  If you need SpectraVue or some other special device to find a defect then in my opinion the defect is not worth complaint.  With two and a half years of reading this reflector, this is the first time I remember this subject being discussed.  The fastest code that I have heard on the ham bands is about 50 WPM and that is really rare.  I am convinced that there is some limit to the code speed that the K3 will handle, but I am also convinced that it will never be a problem to me.
 Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ




________________________________
From: Steve Ellington <[hidden email]>
To: WILLIS COOKE <[hidden email]>; Andrew Moore <[hidden email]>; [hidden email]
Sent: Fri, May 14, 2010 10:04:47 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?

I tested QRQ CW using SpectraVue to display the dits and did not rely on my "opinion" of how it sounded. Above 45 wpm, the dits are of random length which makes copy difficult for those people who normally copy above those speeds. I used both Winkey USB, the K3's internal keyer and an external keyer. Using semi-QSK, QSK mode or even "Test" mode made no difference. The problem has something to do with the rig's CPU capability.

What got me started on this was during a QSO with a friend at about 50 WPM. He had a sharp ear and informed me that something wasn't quiet right. Since then, I've kept my speed below 45 wpm and suffered with the slow QSK at 30 wpm and higher. Otherwise the K3 is the ultimate rig....For some things.

Steve
N4LQ
----- Original Message ----- From: "WILLIS COOKE" <[hidden email]>
To: "Andrew Moore" <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?


Andrew, I can't begin to key at 45 WPM so I have not responded. The best I can copy call signs in contests is around 50 WPM and the K3 sounds fine to me at 50 and I don't have any complaints using a WinKeyer USB. I have keyed it up to 100 WPM with the WinKeyer and the DTR pin of the RS-232 port. It sounds like CW, but I cannot copy that fast so I am not sure. I seldom use the keyer in the K3 because I prefer straight key or bug but it works fine up to 27 or 28 which is my limit for paddle keying.
Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ




________________________________
From: Andrew Moore <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Fri, May 14, 2010 7:36:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?

DK4XL> Elecrafts service is outstanding, no question about it - as long as
you don't ask for QRQ for the internal keyer or improvements of sign
quality and qsk.

Agreed, Elecraft is top notch in all respects, which is why I'm so baffled
by the thought of signal deteriorating above 45 WPM or so.

Since I haven't heard this for myself, I won't put this all out as fact
though.

I'm also wondering if the keyer can be pushed faster without degrading the
signal if you use an external keyer instead of internal, or if you use
non-QSK instead of QSK. Can anyone confirm?

--Andrew
..
______________________________________________________________
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

[DK4XL]

it is not necessary to use special equipment to hear
the problem - if it is present. Sorry but I hear if a dot
is too short and is missing 1/1000 of a second if the
signal is strengh enough.

It is always the same discussion - only a few people can
judge about CW speed, and only these people know what's
going on in the scene - but lots of guys continue writing
how unimportant this problem must be.

For the qrq community, the knowledge that the K3 has this
QRQ CW problem (that 99% of the other transceivers have
as well), turns into a K.O. criterium. And I can't believe that
the K3 really HAS THIS problem.

I will continue to collect more skilled feedbacks on the bands.


Martin
DK4XL

[P.B. Christensen]

> I will continue to collect more skilled feedbacks on the bands.

QRQ performance may be different between the K3's internal keyer and the use
of an external keyer.  It's been a long time since I've conducted any tests
and those tests were completed many firmware revisions in the past.  As I
recall, certain timing attributes may be more accurate when using the
internal keyer since the K3 can look ahead at the WPM setting -- something
that cannot be done when using an external keyer.

Wayne and Lyle probably have the best information concerning the differences
between the internal and external keyer QRQ speeds.  I would give them an
opportunity to reply after they get back from the Dayton convention.

Paul, W9AC


______________________________________________________________
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

[David Gilbert]

I am just guessing on this, but ...

As I understand it, the K3 has quite short rise and fall times (about
2.5 msec) on CW with carefully shaped (i.e., CPU processed) corners of
the waveform to prevent key clicks.  The faster the CW the more often
the CPU is required to process the signal, and it wouldn't surprise me
to learn that 50 WPM was a practical limit based upon some ceiling that
Elecraft set for CPU usage for that task.  At speeds higher than that
the wave shaping routine possibly becomes unreliable, and dit length
maybe even becomes erratic as a function of their frequency of
occurrence (a "b" versus a "c", for example).

As I said, that's just a guess on my part but it seems like a reasonable
guess to me, at least until someone from Elecraft comments.

73,
Dave   AB7E




On 5/14/2010 8:59 AM, DK4XL wrote:

> it is not necessary to use special equipment to hear
> the problem - if it is present. Sorry but I hear if a dot
> is too short and is missing 1/1000 of a second if the
> signal is strengh enough.
>
> It is always the same discussion - only a few people can
> judge about CW speed, and only these people know what's
> going on in the scene - but lots of guys continue writing
> how unimportant this problem must be.
>
> For the qrq community, the knowledge that the K3 has this
> QRQ CW problem (that 99% of the other transceivers have
> as well), turns into a K.O. criterium. And I can't believe that
> the K3 really HAS THIS problem.
>
> I will continue to collect more skilled feedbacks on the bands.
>
>
> Martin
> DK4XL
>
>    

______________________________________________________________
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 Agsten]

The other side of this coin is that many K3 owners probably could care less about this and are much more interested in other issues/enhancements. I could care less if this ever got on the radar screen as far as "features" are concerned. If it's not there yet, I hope it never appears.

I still like to use my straight key......sorry if I can't get to 50 -100 wpm.
 73,
Dave N8AG


     
______________________________________________________________
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

[W8JI]

I wonder how many radios in the world would ever be used at
50 WPM or more?

Then I wonder what would have to be added to the cost for
every radio, or given up in other performance, to get there.

Personally,  wouldn't pay even a few dollars more for 50 WPM
although I did notice the issue when using a CW pulser to
tune my amps. I can't use my CW pulser with the K3, and now
I know why. That's the only thing I miss!!!

73 Tom

______________________________________________________________
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

[Guy, K2AV]

I think a 50% "pulser" that didn't do state transitions could be added
as a tune option to the radio. Probably a whole lot less heartache
than trying to fix it in QSK.

On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 9:35 PM, Tom W8JI <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I wonder how many radios in the world would ever be used at
> 50 WPM or more?
>
> Then I wonder what would have to be added to the cost for
> every radio, or given up in other performance, to get there.
>
> Personally,  wouldn't pay even a few dollars more for 50 WPM
> although I did notice the issue when using a CW pulser to
> tune my amps. I can't use my CW pulser with the K3, and now
> I know why. That's the only thing I miss!!!
>
> 73 Tom
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

[GREG WILSON]

The K3 has a two tone oscillator built in that you can use for tuning...  73
de Greg-N4CC

______________________________________________________________
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

[juergen piezo]

Hi Guy

That would be a  very useful option.

The 2 tone oscillator is not that useful although a welcome feature.

The ability to  set 2 different duty cycle rates would also be great. If you had  the choice of disabling normal carrier tune and using the pulse tuner in place that would be  great.  Alternatively if you held the tune button for a short couple of seconds it will choose pulser mode,  if held longer it gives normal tune at whatever carrier power its set for.

Another option would be to use the straight key jack when in the SSB mode to engage the tuning pulser. Who knows whats possible, only Elececraft!


John


--- On Fri, 5/14/10, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100 WPM?
> To: "Tom W8JI" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email], "Dave Agsten" <[hidden email]>
> Date: Friday, May 14, 2010, 7:08 PM
> I think a 50% "pulser" that didn't do
> state transitions could be added
> as a tune option to the radio. Probably a whole lot less
> heartache
> than trying to fix it in QSK.
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 9:35 PM, Tom W8JI <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > I wonder how many radios in the world would ever be
> used at
> > 50 WPM or more?
> >
> > Then I wonder what would have to be added to the cost
> for
> > every radio, or given up in other performance, to get
> there.
> >
> > Personally,  wouldn't pay even a few dollars more for
> 50 WPM
> > although I did notice the issue when using a CW pulser
> to
> > tune my amps. I can't use my CW pulser with the K3,
> and now
> > I know why. That's the only thing I miss!!!
> >
> > 73 Tom
> >
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> > 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

[W8JI]

A two-tone generator is OK for testing an amp on a spectrum
analyzer for odd-order IM performance, but is one of the
last things people should use for daily tuning of an
amplifier.

The most desirable thing is something that has a very low
average power and full or even slightly above full peak
power pulse. Single tone is fine, so long as the peaks are
at or slightly over the maximum power ever expected, very
narrow in width, and fairly wide gaps with no power. We
really want low duty cycle  pulses to tune with.

73 Tom



----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 10:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] How is K3 QRQ QSK performance 50-100
WPM?

> The K3 has a two tone oscillator built in that you can use
> for tuning...  73
> de Greg-N4CC
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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