K3: Is it wrong?

[Tom Price]

Is it wrong to give 5x2 signal reports? I was just listening to a 40 meter net last night and pretty much heard everyone. I would say that many of the signals were fully copyable but also clearly weak. (5x2 or 5x1 even) Also noted that I heard more people than many others in the net. I was using a little Outbacker on my truck tailgate. I didn't check in as it was clear that not many would have heard me anyways. I am so impressed with this radio. It is obvious to me that the K3 receiver is exceptional.

[w7aqk]

Tom and All,

A 5 X 2 report is fine, and conveys just about what you described.  It may
be a bit unusual to copy someone "Q5" when they only have an "S2" signal,
but it does happen on occasion.  A band relatively free of noise (QRN) or
other interfering stations (QRM)  can allow you to copy an "S2" signal
pretty much error free.  Just remember that you are effectively saying that
you are copying everything, not just most of a transmission.  If that's not
the case, a "4" might be more appropriate.  About the only report that isn't
valid, or at least indicates an incomplete QSO, is a 1 X 1.  That means "I
can't really hear you, and I can't tell what you are saying.".  Yet I hear
people sometimes give that report to another station when intending to say
that they did, in fact, hear the report given them.  In other words, the
lowest report you can give someone that still indicates receipt of at least
some of the info is a "2 X 2" report.  Anything lower says you can't copy!

Dave W7AQK

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom WA6SUS" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 5:25 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] K3: Is it wrong?

>
> Is it wrong to give 5x2 signal reports? I was just listening to a 40 meter
> net last night and pretty much heard everyone. I would say that many of
> the
> signals were fully copyable but also clearly weak. (5x2 or 5x1 even) Also
> noted that I heard more people than many others in the net. I was using a
> little Outbacker on my truck tailgate. I didn't check in as it was clear
> that not many would have heard me anyways. I am so impressed with this
> radio. It is obvious to me that the K3 receiver is excetional.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/K3%3A-Is-it-wrong--tp17766899p17766899.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Post to: [hidden email]
> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
>

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[AC7AC]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[G3MLO]

Having had my K3 for about 2 weeks now I have been
listening to the bands more than operating.
During this time I have found groups chatting and often
I seem to be able to copy everyone where as others in the net struggle.
I have done A - B comparisons between my K3 and
my Orion 1, the K3 has cleaner recovered audio
than the Orion and under extreme conditions always
comes out on top. Thanks Elecraft for a super Receiver
Peter G3MLO.
BTW nothing wrong with a 5/1 report

Tom WA6SUS wrote

Is it wrong to give 5x2 signal reports? I was just listening to a 40 meter net last night and pretty much heard everyone. I would say that many of the signals were fully copyable but also clearly weak. (5x2 or 5x1 even) A

[Jim Brown-10]

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:25:48 -0700 (PDT), Tom WA6SUS wrote:

>Is it wrong to give 5x2 signal reports? I was just listening to a 40 meter
>net last night and pretty much heard everyone. I would say that many of the
>signals were fully copyable but also clearly weak. (5x2 or 5x1 even) Also
>noted that I heard more people than many others in the net. I was using a
>little Outbacker on my truck tailgate. I didn't check in as it was clear
>that not many would have heard me anyways. I am so impressed with this
>radio. It is obvious to me that the K3 receiver is excetional.

There are at least two out of the ordinary things going here. First, your
antenna was not a very efficient one, so it's not going to put a lot of voltage
into the K3 input. That will make the S-meter read lower than if you were on a
nice dipole. Second, although I haven't measured it yet, I suspect that the K3
S-meter is probably more linear than most S-meters. Most S-meters are 6 dB per
S-unit only around S9; by the time you get below S6, it's more like 3 dB per S-
unit. That means that most radios are far too generous at the bottom end of
their range. Third, you may have had your atttenator on, which would also make
the S-meter read low, unless you also had gone into Config and set the S-meter
for Absolute readings.

I live in a fairly quiet area, and often am able to give honest signal reports
of 539, even 529 sometimes. Most hams give signal reports that are far too
generous.

73,

Jim K9YC


_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Julian, G4ILO]

Peter G3MLO wrote

BTW nothing wrong with a 5/1 report

I would love to be able to give someone a 5/1 report. The QRN level at this QTH is never less than S3. :(

[Geoffrey Mackenzie-Kennedy]

Tom,

IMO it is much more useful to give and receive honest signal reports. It is
a bit sad to hear somebody give out a 599 report and then ask for
confirmation of the other person's callsign, a repeat of the name and report
sent and QTH etc etc. This habit of giving out 599 or 59 reports regardless
of the actual signal strength started at about the time logging programs
appeared on the scene if I remember correctly. I would much rather receive
an honest signal strength report which would give me some idea as to how
well my antenna in use is working (or not).

The noise level here can be very low indeed on 40m, and giving out a 5 x 1
or 5 x 2 report on SSB has not resulted in any complaint yet.

73,
Geoff
GM4ESD


Tom WA6SUS wrote on Wednesday, June 11, 2008 at 1:25 AM

> Is it wrong to give 5x2 signal reports? I was just listening to a 40 meter
> net last night and pretty much heard everyone. I would say that many of
> the
> signals were fully copyable but also clearly weak. (5x2 or 5x1 even) Also
> noted that I heard more people than many others in the net. I was using a
> little Outbacker on my truck tailgate. I didn't check in as it was clear
> that not many would have heard me anyways. I am so impressed with this
> radio. It is obvious to me that the K3 receiver is excetional.



_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[w7aqk]

I think I disagree that a 5/1 report is appropriate.  But I suppose this is
a matter of interpretation.  Strength "1" is intended to convey that the
signal is "barely perceptible".  A signal that is truly that weak should not
equate to one that is readability "5" in my view.  Loosely translated, it
means to me that "I can tell you are there, but that's it!"  It is an
absolutely de minimis signal strength report.  I don't even think a
readability "4" would be appropriate in combination with a strength "1"
report, since that means you can copy with "almost no difficulty".  The
highest readability report I consider possibly appropriate with a strength
"1" report would be perhaps a "3", or "readable with considerable
difficulty".  But I still think that's a stretch, since a strength "1"
signal should really convey that the signal is so weak that nothing
significant can really be interpreted from it.  If you are able to copy
anything from the other station, a strength "2" report should be the lowest
report given.  A "1" report for either readability or strength should mean
that there is no communication occuring.  I know some will disagree with
this, and the RST matrix is open to considerable interpretation.  But if you
think about it, it only makes sense that the matrix would provide a range of
report options all the way from "I copy you perfectly", to "I can't copy you
at all".  The latter conveyence can be for either a lack of signal strength,
or a readability problem (due to QRM, QRN, etc.), or both.  Also, I think
(intuitively perhaps) there is intended to be some correlation between
readability and strength reports on the RST scale.  A readability "1" report
clearly states that you are "unreadable".  Accordingly, I would assume that
a strength "1" report is intended to convey that signal strength is so low
as to preclude any significant degree of readability.  In other words, real
communications only occurs at the "2" level for both reports.

Dave W7AQK

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter G3MLO" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3: Is it wrong?

> Peter G3MLO.
> BTW nothing wrong with a 5/1 report
>
> Tom WA6SUS wrote:
>>
>> Is it wrong to give 5x2 signal reports? I was just listening to a 40
>> meter
>> net last night and pretty much heard everyone. I would say that many of
>> the signals were fully copyable but also clearly weak. (5x2 or 5x1 even)
>> A

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[N2TK]

 I believe one aspect of the signal reports depends on the operating
situation. As one example, when I am down at KP2 and just rag chewing  I
will give accurate signal reports based on how the sending station sounds to
me. When the pileup grows and there are several calling I switch to a
somewhat "contest" style mode. Anyone I can copy on their first call I give
a 59 (599). If the calling station is weak, I will give a lower report.
When "running" I don't look at the  s-meter.
When in a contest I will typically give all 59 (599) reports. This helps
speed up the process for both persons. To me getting the call correct and
the rest of the report such as power, state, country, serial number are more
important than the signal report. In fact in some contests the signal report
is optional. During a contest, the signal report is almost irrelevant. Bu
the way, this way of operating started long before logging programs. I would
venture a guess to say it started with the first contests and DXpeditions.

When the signal report is needed (wanted), what is important is copying
exactly what is sent, whether a 22, 51 (519) or 59 (599). You can get into a
debate what each number is supposed to represent signal wise. But I think it
is more easily defined to copy exactly what is sent, regardless of the
actual signal strength numbers. Then you have a good QSO.

Signal reports are only arbitrary with lots of variables. Your actual
s-meter reading is dependent on a ton of variables. To me it is more
important how "loud" and "clear" the calling station sounds - my opinion. If
the station isn't loud and only has a signal strength of s7, should I turn
on a preamp so he(she) is now s9 and I can give him a 599? I don't think so.
By the way I am amazed how often I am asked that when I give a signal report
- "is your preamp on?". Nice new feature of the K3 is you can set the
s-meter so it doesn't change with the preamp on or off.

Just thought of something funny (at least to me). Maybe 25 years or more ago
I would have the receiver on in the background while working in my office (I
still do). I used to get a kick out of listening to a net on 20M that ran
DX. Some of these calling had no clue when the DX was listening and
transmitting. If it wasn't for the person running the net they would have
never "worked" the DX. I had to chuckle at the "22, 22, twenty-two, bang
bang, 22, 22 over " reports. Then they would wait for the net host to let
them know if they were in the log. I guess to them 22 meant please put me in
your log even though I can't copy you.

All just opinions.

73,
N2TK, Tony

PS: Pse keep giving me those 599 reports.


-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Geoffrey
Mackenzie-Kennedy
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:24 AM
To: Elecraft Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3: Is it wrong?

Tom,

IMO it is much more useful to give and receive honest signal reports. It is
a bit sad to hear somebody give out a 599 report and then ask for
confirmation of the other person's callsign, a repeat of the name and report
sent and QTH etc etc. This habit of giving out 599 or 59 reports regardless
of the actual signal strength started at about the time logging programs
appeared on the scene if I remember correctly. I would much rather receive
an honest signal strength report which would give me some idea as to how
well my antenna in use is working (or not).

The noise level here can be very low indeed on 40m, and giving out a 5 x 1
or 5 x 2 report on SSB has not resulted in any complaint yet.

73,
Geoff
GM4ESD


Tom WA6SUS wrote on Wednesday, June 11, 2008 at 1:25 AM

> Is it wrong to give 5x2 signal reports? I was just listening to a 40 meter
> net last night and pretty much heard everyone. I would say that many of
> the
> signals were fully copyable but also clearly weak. (5x2 or 5x1 even) Also
> noted that I heard more people than many others in the net. I was using a
> little Outbacker on my truck tailgate. I didn't check in as it was clear
> that not many would have heard me anyways. I am so impressed with this
> radio. It is obvious to me that the K3 receiver is excetional.



_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Geoffrey Mackenzie-Kennedy]

David Yarnes wrote on Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:42 PM

> A readability "1" report clearly states that you are "unreadable".
> Accordingly, I would assume that a strength "1" report is intended to
> convey that signal strength is so low as to preclude any significant
> degree of readability.  In other words, real communications only occurs at
> the "2" level for both reports.

------------------------------------------------------------

I believe that you are right if the signal strength report is not given in
terms of 'S' Units. On the other hand, assuming 6db per S unit and S9 being
50 uV input across 50 ohms, a S1 signal can usually be perfectly readable in
the absence of stronger QRM or QRN even on 40m. The use of 'S' units to
report received signal strength becomes of questionable value IMO in those
cases where good or perfect copy of a signal several db below a S1 noise
level is possible by using the filter between the ears.

73,
Geoff
GM4ESD



_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[k6dgw]

Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
>
> I far prefer the QSA reporting system: 1 to 5. 5 perfect copy. 1 is
> detectable but not readable signal.

Well ... not exactly.  QSA? means "What is the strength of my signals?"
   QRK? means "What is the readability of my signals (or those of ...)?"

QKB? was at one time informally assigned the meaning, "How many knobs
does your radio have?", and QKK? -- "How many of those do you actually
know how to use?"  I haven't heard them in a long time :-)

> Works for any mode. It's commonly used
> on commercial systems, but we Hams aren't that logical <G>.

Well ... I don't hit the phone bands much except in a few contests, so I
don't know if the usage is still around, but again years ago it was
common to hear someone say, "Well Mike, you're Q five tonight as usual."
  I never knew if that meant QSA five or QRK five, but it did seem to
mean "armchair copy."

When I was a relief op at a coastal marine station in 1956 [16 and a HS
senior], the prosign INT [for interrogatory] would precede the Q-sig to
make it take its question form.  The Morse "?" was also IMI for "repeat"
or "I will repeat."  I don't know when INT disappeared, and I don't ever
remember hearing it on the ham bands.

To the question of giving an RST 529, sure.  My place is pretty quiet,
sometimes the powerline noise will occasionally go to S1.  I've found I
can copy signals on my K3 that don't register on the S-meter.  I was
just listening, but had it been my QSO, I'd have given him 509 and we
then could have had some fun discussing it.  I can also copy signals I
can't hear at all on my beloved TS-850.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2008 Cal QSO Party  4-5 Oct 08
- www.cqp.org



_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ]

Let's let this thread (and the ones directly related to it) continue
through 0600Z (Wed. in CA, Thurs. in the UK). After that, lets end it.

Its another thread that goes on forever here and on other reflectors. :-)

73, Eric   WA6HHQ
Elecraft List Moderator
----


Fred Jensen wrote:

> Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
>>
>> I far prefer the QSA reporting system: 1 to 5. 5 perfect copy. 1 is
>> detectable but not readable signal.
>
> Well ... not exactly.  QSA? means "What is the strength of my
> signals?"   QRK? means "What is the readability of my signals (or
> those of ...)?"
>
> QKB? was at one time informally assigned the meaning, "How many knobs
> does your radio have?", and QKK? -- "How many of those do you actually
> know how to use?"  I haven't heard them in a long time :-)
>
>> Works for any mode. It's commonly used
>> on commercial systems, but we Hams aren't that logical <G>.
>
> Well ... I don't hit the phone bands much except in a few contests, so
> I don't know if the usage is still around, but again years ago it was
> common to hear someone say, "Well Mike, you're Q five tonight as
> usual."  I never knew if that meant QSA five or QRK five, but it did
> seem to mean "armchair copy."
>
> When I was a relief op at a coastal marine station in 1956 [16 and a
> HS senior], the prosign INT [for interrogatory] would precede the
> Q-sig to make it take its question form.  The Morse "?" was also IMI
> for "repeat" or "I will repeat."  I don't know when INT disappeared,
> and I don't ever remember hearing it on the ham bands.
>
> To the question of giving an RST 529, sure.  My place is pretty quiet,
> sometimes the powerline noise will occasionally go to S1.  I've found
> I can copy signals on my K3 that don't register on the S-meter.  I was
> just listening, but had it been my QSO, I'd have given him 509 and we
> then could have had some fun discussing it.  I can also copy signals I
> can't hear at all on my beloved TS-850.
>
> 73,
>
> Fred K6DGW
> - Northern California Contest Club
> - CU in the 2008 Cal QSO Party  4-5 Oct 08
> - www.cqp.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Post to: [hidden email]
> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com