K3 Keying
Locked
 
|
Has anyone else noticed that there is a substantial difference in the mark
space ratio of the keying dependent on whether you operate QSK/semi break in compared with manual transmit, eg push the transmit button on the front panel or use a foot switch to enter transmit. The QSK/semi break in are similar but they are much lighter than in the constant transmit mode. I did notice when I first got the K3 that the QSK/semi break in was light and I had to compensate for that in my keyer. Likewise the built in keyer seems to have a default setting to cater for the light keying. No great drama - just an observation. Just for general information I have just wired up my K3 to my FL7000 linear for auto band change as per the directions from W4TV back on 23 May. It works great but the tx inhibit is unusable in other than QSK. However I don't need it for proper operation and have turned it back off in the Config setting. 73 Barry VK2BJ _______________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
By George, you're right! No, I never noticed it, but now that you
point it out and I'm testing it -- sure enough. The difference is detectable to the ear, at 25 WPM anyway. A 'scope would tell you exactly what the difference is. Should be an easy bug to track down and fix (he said glibly, knowing nothing). :-) Put it on the list! Bill W5WVO ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barry Simpson" <[hidden email]> To: "'Elecraft'" <[hidden email]> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 9:46 PM Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Keying > Has anyone else noticed that there is a substantial difference in the mark > space ratio of the keying dependent on whether you operate QSK/semi break in > compared with manual transmit, eg push the transmit button on the front > panel or use a foot switch to enter transmit. > > > > The QSK/semi break in are similar but they are much lighter than in the > constant transmit mode. > > > > I did notice when I first got the K3 that the QSK/semi break in was light > and I had to compensate for that in my keyer. Likewise the built in keyer > seems to have a default setting to cater for the light keying. No great > drama - just an observation. > > > > Just for general information I have just wired up my K3 to my FL7000 linear > for auto band change as per the directions from W4TV back on 23 May. It > works great but the tx inhibit is unusable in other than QSK. However I > don't need it for proper operation and have turned it back off in the Config > setting. > > > > 73 > > > > Barry VK2BJ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 |
|
|
Not on my K3 (1594) using internal keyer and FW 02.34
Exactly same in QSK, semi BK or PTT. 73 gl Jim SM2EKM -------------------------------- Bill W5WVO wrote: > By George, you're right! No, I never noticed it, but now that you > point it out and I'm testing it -- sure enough. The difference is > detectable to the ear, at 25 WPM anyway. A 'scope would tell you > exactly what the difference is. Should be an easy bug to track > down and fix (he said glibly, knowing nothing). :-) > > Put it on the list! > > Bill W5WVO > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Barry Simpson" <[hidden email]> > To: "'Elecraft'" <[hidden email]> > Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 9:46 PM > Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Keying > > >> Has anyone else noticed that there is a substantial difference > in the mark >> space ratio of the keying dependent on whether you operate > QSK/semi break in >> compared with manual transmit, eg push the transmit button on > the front >> panel or use a foot switch to enter transmit. >> >> >> >> The QSK/semi break in are similar but they are much lighter than > in the >> constant transmit mode. >> >> >> >> I did notice when I first got the K3 that the QSK/semi break in > was light >> and I had to compensate for that in my keyer. Likewise the built > in keyer >> seems to have a default setting to cater for the light keying. > No great >> drama - just an observation. >> >> >> >> Just for general information I have just wired up my K3 to my > FL7000 linear >> for auto band change as per the directions from W4TV back on 23 > May. It >> works great but the tx inhibit is unusable in other than QSK. > However I >> don't need it for proper operation and have turned it back off > in the Config >> setting. >> >> >> >> 73 >> >> >> >> Barry VK2BJ >> _______________________________________________ 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 Barry Simpson
Barry, Character shortening in QSK seems to be common in many radios but is normally a function of qsk v semi break-in as well as manual ptt. Most good external keyers offer 'keying compensation' in msecs to offset this; my FT990 needed as much as 8ms extra on the characters to give a 1:1 dit ratio in qsk v semi break-in. Just done a quick 'scope check here using my Microham cw keyer and the results are 'inconclusive'. In qsk the space is actually slightly less if measured from the end of the fall to the start of the rise, but slightly more if the dit is measured across the 'top' ignoring the rise/fall time. I forgot to check using the internal keyer but this seems pretty good to me. Having said all that I see that I have configured my Winkeyer with 3ms 'keying compensation' which was done on the basis of it sounding a little choppy previously. 73, Stewart Rolfe, GW0ETF (K3 145) |
|
|
> "Just done a quick 'scope check here using my Microham cw keyer and the results are 'inconclusive'. In qsk the space is actually slightly less if measured from the end of the fall to the start of the rise, but slightly more if the dit is measured across the 'top' ignoring the rise/fall time. I forgot to check using the internal keyer but this seems pretty good to me. Having said all that I see that I have configured my Winkeyer with 3ms 'keying compensation' which was done on the basis of it sounding a little choppy previously..."
I modified my microHam CW Keyer to produce a buffered +5 VDC pulse for triggering a dual-trace scope. The most recent K3 firmware shows that the CW envelope rises ~ 13 ms after external contact closure. And more to the point, the RF envelope matches the duration of the external key closure when measuring from the beginning of the envelope rise to the trailing edge. This closely matches other radios, including many Ten Tec models, and precisely matches the envelope of my Icom 7700 and 7800 (with latest firmware). It's interesting that you use 3 ms of added external compensation as that is my value used on all three transceivers since their envelopes happen to perfectly match in duration. My personal preference would be to have all manufacturers match the envelope time to the contact closure referenced at the time the rise ramp completes, to the beginning of where the envelope begins to fall. If you think about it, the combined rise/fall comprises a full 10 ms in the K3. For that reason, compensation of 3-5 ms sounds less choppy to the ear and more closely matches that of the perfect 1:3 ratio generated by an electronic keyer. Since the required compensation is constant as a function of keying speed, the envelope only needs to be "pulse stretched" to one value, regardless of key speed. Psul, W9AC |
|
|
I would be interested to know why folks use external keyers in preference to
the internal keyer. David G3UNA _______________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Hi David, in my case I am using external keyer (ETM-8) having - more memories - better programming possibilities (loops, nested loops, programable changes of speed in message, incremental numbering,...) - no need to touch FP for memory start/stop (keyer has own paddle so paddle and buttons are close operate without hand moving from key) not using keying from PC (yet) 73! Lexa, ok1dst David Cutter napsal(a): > I would be interested to know why folks use external keyers in > preference to the internal keyer. > > David > G3UNA > > _______________________________________________ > 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 David Cutter
on Fri, 2008-09-05 at 18:11 +0100, David Cutter wrote:
> I would be interested to know why folks use external keyers in preference to > the internal keyer. I use a logikey K5 keyer reasons 1/ more memories in 3 banks (6 in each bank, 3 banks in total ) 2/ user definable speed range, keying type, weight etc 3/ Macros, ability to edit memories etc. 4/ frees up the 4 memory buttons on the k3 to be user defined shortcuts 5/ serial # facilities for casual contesting lastly I use a logikey CMOS4 in my mobile setup, the keyer 'feel' is identical between both setups For contesting I use a Winkey USB keyer, it generates nicer CW than serial port keying and makes doing hand fills etc easy. for hand keying it's not a patch on the logikey keyers Personally I think that elecraft aought to do a licence deal with the logikey people so that the logikey CMOS4 feature set could be done using the internal keyer. logikey's user interface o nthe CMOS4 requires 4 buttons and a speed pot. I would happily pay extra to have the CMOS 4 feature-set internal to the K3 73 Brendan EI6IZ -- Don‘t complain. Nobody will understand. Or care. And certainly don‘t try to fix the situation yourself. It‘s dangerous. Leave it to a highly untrained, unqualified, expendable professional. _______________________________________________ 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 David Cutter
Hi David:
1) More versatile CW generation features 2) More memories (in memory-type keyers) 3) More versatile CW memories (often) 4) Greater range of control These are my main reasons for using my Idiom Press CMOS Super Keyer (II/III/or IV) in deference to the K3's internal keyer. Cheers, Tom Hammond N0SS At 12:11 09/05/2008, David Cutter wrote: >I would be interested to know why folks use external keyers in >preference to the internal keyer. > >David >G3UNA > >_______________________________________________ >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 David Cutter
I use a Logikey K-3 external keyer because I find that it is just a little
bit different than the internal keyer. I'm used to it and seem to make less mistakes with it so that't what I use. On the other hand when I had a K2 I found that the internal keyer was not nearly as good (for me) as the external keyer. With the K3 there is practically no difference at all (to me). I need all the help I can get. I'm old enough now that some days I have a little twitch in my hands. I would have no problem using the K3 internal keyer if my external keyer died or if I was away from my shack. 73, Roger, W1EM -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Cutter Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 1:11 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Keying I would be interested to know why folks use external keyers in preference to the internal keyer. David G3UNA _______________________________________________ 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 Tom Hammond-2
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
|
|
In reply to this post by David Cutter
I got in the habit of using an external keyer before most rigs had internal
keyers. As others have mentioned, external keyers are more flexible and quicker to set than internal keyers, so I continued to use an external keyer. When I first got into contesting in a serious way, I found that virtually all rigs with internal keyers had a conflict between internal and external keying. For example, on Yaesu rigs, the paddle and external keyer input use the same jack. The expectation is that if you use the internal keyer, a paddle will be connected to the jack. If you use an external keyer or PC, the hot lead will be connected to one of the two paddle inputs (usually tip), and the internal keyer will be turned off. You can parallel the paddle and external keyer or PC, but you can't use them together. If you have the internal keyer off, you can key with the external keyer or PC, but not with the paddle. If you have the internal keyer on, you can key with the paddle, but you get gibberish if you try to key from the external keyer or PC (which results in a keyer keying a keyer.) In the heat of a contest it's just not feasible to switch the internal keyer on and off when you want to use the paddle. Of course, the K3 has solved this problem by providing two separate inputs: one for the paddle and one for the key. Now I don't have to turn off the internal keyer to use an external keyer, and have the option of putting a second paddle on the K3 (I haven't done so.) There are other ways to solve the paddle problem in contests. Some contest programs support paddle input through the LPT port. That's one viable solution. The better solution is to use an external contest keyer. As others have mentioned, PC-generated CW isn't reliable on many computers due to Windows multitasking. An external keyer solves that problem, too. I use Writelog's W5XD+ keyer, which has paddle inputs and generates CW in response to commands from Writelog on the PC. It also does paddle, mic, PTT and audio switching for SO2R contesting. The keyer can also be used without Writelog running, though with limited functionality. There's a remote speed pot and L/R switch for selecting the rig. It's possible to build a switch to shift the paddle between the W5XD+ keyer and the rig (or two rigs, or three rigs...), but for me it's not worth the trouble. The W5XD+ keyer is adequate for my needs. 73, Dick WC1M > -----Original Message----- > From: David Cutter [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 1:11 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Keying > > I would be interested to know why folks use external keyers in > preference to > the internal keyer. > > David > G3UNA > _______________________________________________ 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 Roger Marrotte-2
I've been thinking about hooking my K-3 keyer up too. I'm assuming none
of the internal keyer controls work of course but wish/hope the NEW QSK default ("reduces keying artifacts...") might still be effective. As it relates to the speed of muting/unmuting the rx, it seems possible. Gary W7TEA
73,
Gary W7TEA K3 #1001, #5763 |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |