K3 Kenwood mic question
Locked
 
|
I have a Kenwood hand mic that I believe came with a TS-850SAT that I once had. It has no part number on it. Just says Kenwood on the front and on the back says "Dynamic Microphone Impedance 600 ohms." It has UP and DWN buttons on top, and PTT. It has served me well with my K2. How would this compare with the Elecraft MH2 mic? Should I get the MH2 for the K3 or stick with the Kenwood? I'm only an occasional SSB op, so I'm not looking for outstanding phone performance, just adequate.
73, Randy, KS4L K2 #337 K3 on order! |
|
|
I'm on vacation here, and the only mic I have for use with
the K3 is that Kenwood hand mic that you described. I've been experimenting with ESSB and various tx equalizer settings, but just two days ago I turned all that stuff off and checked into the local net with eq flat, essb turned off, and using the 2.7 filter. The local guys (very attentive and critical audio observers) spontaneously reported that whatever I had done to the audio, it sounded excellent, and had great DX punch. They told me to save whatever settings I was using and cast them in concrete. I do have a computer headset on order from EBay (buy it now, $1) with an electret mic that is supposed to be flat from 20-20,000 Hz, and will play some more with essb, etc, but from what the guys are telling me, the Kenwood mic sounds super, and is going to be hard to beat! Dave Hachadorian, K6LL Big Bear Lake, CA ----- Original Message ----- From: "wrmoore" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 7:49 AM Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Kenwood mic question > > I have a Kenwood hand mic that I believe came with a > TS-850SAT that I once > had. It has no part number on it. Just says Kenwood on > the front and on > the back says "Dynamic Microphone Impedance 600 ohms." It > has UP and DWN > buttons on top, and PTT. It has served me well with my > K2. How would this > compare with the Elecraft MH2 mic? Should I get the MH2 > for the K3 or stick > with the Kenwood? I'm only an occasional SSB op, so I'm > not looking for > outstanding phone performance, just adequate. > > 73, > Randy, KS4L > K2 #337 > K3 on order! > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/K3-Kenwood-mic-question-tp722105p722105.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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by wrmoore
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 07:49:02 -0700 (PDT), wrmoore wrote:
>Should I get the MH2 for the K3 or stick with the Kenwood? Heil mics are overrated and over priced. Stick with the Kenwood. All you need to do is verify the correct pin for pin wiring. The K3 has all the audio features you need to make it sound VERY good. 73, Jim Brown 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dave Hachadorian
Dave,
Keep in mind there are 33x33x33x33x33x33x33x33 equalizer settings. Most of them are bad. Give me a mike with a shaped response for communications and a flat set of equalizer settings any day. 73 de Brian/K3KO Dave Hachadorian wrote: > I'm on vacation here, and the only mic I have for use with > the K3 is that Kenwood hand mic that you described. I've > been experimenting with ESSB and various tx equalizer > settings, but just two days ago I turned all that stuff off > and checked into the local net with eq flat, essb turned > off, and using the 2.7 filter. The local guys (very > attentive and critical audio observers) spontaneously > reported that whatever I had done to the audio, it sounded > excellent, and had great DX punch. They told me to save > whatever settings I was using and cast them in concrete. > > I do have a computer headset on order from EBay (buy it now, > $1) with an electret mic that is supposed to be flat from > 20-20,000 Hz, and will play some more with essb, etc, but > from what the guys are telling me, the Kenwood mic sounds super, and > is going to be hard to beat! > > Dave Hachadorian, K6LL > Big Bear Lake, CA > _______________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:45:48 +0000, Brian Alsop wrote:
>Give me a mike with a shaped response for communications and a flat set >of equalizer settings any day. That assumes an infinite number of monkeys and typewriters. Hopefully we're smarter than that. See Appendix 6 of http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf and http://audiostemsgroup.com/HamInterfacing.pdf to lift your self out of the monkey category. Unless, of course, you're rich and don't care about throwing money at things you don't understand. 73, Jim Brown 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by wrmoore
MC-43 microphone. I also saved mine from my TS-850-SAT. It was originally
selected by Electraft as the standard mic for the K2 years ago. Steve, W2MY _______________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by wrmoore
Randy, I think you will find that is either an MC-43S or equivalent. The
MC-43S was used on the later TS-570 series and is still available as a spare today from Kenwood dealers. I haven't used the MH2 microphone but I understand the above Kenwood microphone may have a more flexible cable and an easier to press PTT button. I often receive unsolicited "excellent" reports on my audio using the above microphone with my K3. I have increased the higher frequencies with the TX EQ in the K3, which is easy to adjust by monitoring yourself on the K3 via headphones, TX test and the front panel monitor level control. My voice is very gravelly but sounds good on the K3. The DWN/UP buttons on the microphone work without modification too. 73 Dave, G4AON K3/100 #80 ------------------ I have a Kenwood hand mic that I believe came with a TS-850SAT that I once had. It has no part number on it. Just says Kenwood on the front and on the back says "Dynamic Microphone Impedance 600 ohms." It has UP and DWN buttons on top, and PTT. It has served me well with my K2. How would this compare with the Elecraft MH2 mic? Should I get the MH2 for the K3 or stick with the Kenwood? I'm only an occasional SSB op, so I'm not looking for outstanding phone performance, just adequate. 73, Randy, KS4L K2 #337 K3 on order! _______________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by wrmoore
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:08:03 -0400, Bob wrote:
> Looks like a typo slipped into the lower link. Thanks! http://audiosystemsgroup.com/HamInterfacing.pdf 73, Jim _______________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10
OK Jim,
Show me your smarter than those monkeys. Let's assume you don't talk to just one or a few stations over and over again but instead the random type contacts most of us make. How are you going to reduce the 12 trillion combos to a few dozen to try given: 1) You don't know the filter width the station listening to you has. Is it 1.8, 2.1. 2.8, 6 KHz? 2) You don't know the speaker or earphone frequency response of the other station 3) You don't know the ear frequency response of the listener 4) Most hams probably don't know their microphones frequency response 5) The propogation and QRM conditions are highly variable 6) How does compression factor in? There clearly is no one set of settings that will make them all stations happy or be always be near optimum. So what is the algorithm to get to the one of 12 trillion possibilities? We would all like to know this, it would be a significant benefit to the community. Your references don't really address much of the above. I maintain there is a high probability of doing more harm than good. You hear the bad results every day. 73 de Brian/K3KO
|
|
|
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:35:05 -0700 (PDT), alsopb wrote:
>Let's assume you don't talk to just one or a few stations over and over >again but instead the random type contacts most of us make. >How are you going to reduce the 12 trillion combos to a few dozen to try >given: You're thinking as a mathematician. I'm an engineer. I deal with the real world and practical solutions, not wild circumstances. >1) You don't know the filter width the station listening to you has. Is it >1.8, 2.1. 2.8, 6 KHz? >2) You don't know the speaker or earphone frequency response of the other >station >3) You don't know the ear frequency response of the listener This is ham radio. It's about communications, not hi-fi. Paraphrasing Riley Hollingsworth, if you want to transmit broadcat audio, buy a radio station. >4) Most hams probably don't know their microphones frequency response That CAN be a known if you're not mentally lazy and you buy REAL mics with real spec sheets, not products with big advertising budgets and cut sheets written by marketing weasels. >5) The propogation and QRM conditions are highly variable Has nothing to do with frequency response. >6) How does compression factor in? Is different from frequency response, but from a communications point of view, it's a good thing. I'm an EE by training and an audio engineer by trade. I'm also a Fellow of the AES. I make my living by doing great audio. But this is ham radio. Excellence is about maximizing communications, which requires good linearity in the speech region and efficient use of the bandwidth. I suggest that you study the tutorials I've prepared on this topic, previously cited. 73, Jim Brown 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 |
|
|
I'm surprised. You're missing the point entirely. It is not all about communications as you define it, given the postings here.
The wild circumstances you refer to seem like the real world to me. Ham radio is not a laboratory with carefully controlled experiments. It's a bunch of random happenings. Guys are trying to obtain fidelity. That is their goal. Hence all enumerated factors of my posting are important and frame the difficulty obtaining good set of equalizer settings. BTW: I agree with you and Reily that it SHOULD be about communications not fidelity. Clearly a large percentage of phone ops don't agree. Even for your communications scenerio adjustments, which allow getting through under tough QRM and tough propogation conditions, have to be a relevant consideration. You can't dismiss this reality. Ham bands are not the audio laboratory. Since you have again booted me to an irrelevant reference, I assume you have no answer or algorithm to achieve what posters seem to be after. Alternatively, given you're response, I (or maybe we) are too lazy or dumb to figure it out. We obviously need someone less lazy/less dumb to spell out the steps. 73 de Brian/K3KO
|
Re: K3 Kenwood mic question
|
|
In reply to this post by Dave Hachadorian
Dave K6LL opined:
> ... two days ago I turned all that stuff off > and checked into the local net with eq flat, > essb turned off, and using the 2.7 filter. The > local guys (very attentive and critical audio > observers) spontaneously reported that > whatever I had done to the audio, it sounded > excellent, and had great DX punch. I've had exactly the same reaction from 98% of the hams who have listened to my 6m SSB signal. I've taken these numerous unsolicited comments to heart and have kept my hands off the audio settings. :-) (BTW, I'm using a Heil ProSet with the HC5 element.) Having said that, I know a couple of non-K3 guys who (using whatever rigs they have) are always a little harder to copy under adverse conditions because their voices are heavy in the bass register with attenuated high-frequency overtones. I can see the K3's TXEQ being an outstanding solution for guys like that. Finally, I think the K3's compression model is simply outstanding. In all the on-air tests I've done with other guys, they say that the K3 compression, when adjusted as per the K3 manual, renders the audio much stronger and more intelligible with absolutely no distortion that can be perceived by ear. The K3's designers have done an outstanding job of tailoring the transmit audio capabilities of this radio to a very high level of quality. IMO, the K3 raises the bar on SSB TX audio quality, with or without ESSB. :-) Bill W5WVO _______________________________________________ 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 |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |