K3 NR
Locked
12
12
 
|
Well the SSB folks lose out yet again on the latest FW revision. Just when the next to useless NR was made to work we have yet another version that favours one mode over others.
Rather disappointing result but that appears to be the way of the k3 world at times. Great radio for some but so great for others perhaps..:-( Don't know could be a replacement but the search has started. Gary VK4WT Sent via BlackBerry® from Telstra ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
Uh oh.
This isn't good news. I just installed 3.27, but haven't had time to test out the updated NR algorithms. Prior to 3.25, my biggest complaint was lousy SSB NR performance. 3.25 did a good job addressing those problems, however a lot of CW operators complained. Now if what you say is true, then that's pretty unfortunate. Perhaps Lyle is having difficulty finding a happy medium. The problem with DSP noise reduction is you can't really have a particular algorithm do both things well; CW or speech isolation. At least none of the DSP NR units that claim to do both that I've tried were able to do it well. It was either one or the other. The BHI ANEM module is a perfect example of excellent SSB isolation but lousy for CW. I'm too knackered to test the NR tonight, plus the bands are dead anyway. Hope other reflector participants chime in. 73 de James K2QI -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of [hidden email] Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 10:59 PM To: Elecraft Subject: [Elecraft] K3 NR Well the SSB folks lose out yet again on the latest FW revision. Just when the next to useless NR was made to work we have yet another version that favours one mode over others. Rather disappointing result but that appears to be the way of the k3 world at times. Great radio for some but so great for others perhaps..:-( Don't know could be a replacement but the search has started. Gary VK4WT Sent via BlackBerryR from Telstra ______________________________________________________________ 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
--... ...-- -.. . .--- .- -- . ...
|
|
|
In reply to this post by rfenabled
> Well the SSB folks lose out yet again on the latest FW revision.
> Just when the next to useless NR was made to work we have yet > another version that favours one mode over others. The 3.27 NR F3-1 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F1-4. The 3.27 NR F3-2 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F2-4. The 3.27 NR F3-3 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F3-4. The 3.27 NR F3-4 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F4-4. The 3.27 NR F1- is "lighter" than the 3.25 NR. The 3.27 NR F2- is a little lighter than the 3.25 NR. The 3.27 NR F4- is "heavier" than the 3.25 NR. I am an SSB op, not a CW op, and the NR now works much better for me. There were some changes we had to make from 3.25 (and previous releases as well) in the Fx-1, -2 and -3 settings which resulted in "scolloping" of the passband. Some CW ops at certain pitches thought it gave their signals a boost, others at other pitches really bemoaned the attenuation. While less noticeable on SSB, it was there nonetheless. 73, Lyle KK7P (aka Not Sleeping Mt Vernon) ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K2QI
> The > problem with DSP noise > reduction is you can't really have a particular algorithm > do both things > well; CW or speech isolation. This is precisely why I asked if the DSP NR parameters are fixed or variable; in the K2 DSP denoiser the user had total control of the beta and decay parameters. If the K3 had the same controls, I believe the users could tailor the NR to his or her taste, SSB or CW, agressive or lazy, heavy or light, and all of this thrashing between the two camps would go away. But I guess the K3 has no such access to these parameters. That surprises me. Too bad. Al W6LX ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by KK7P
Lyle,
Your post below indicating how the F3 NR settings have been re-ordered in the new f/w reminds me of something I brought up earlier: When NR ADJ is on, the VFO-A knob has no function. Could I suggest that it be used to step through the NR settings in this sequence: F1-1, F2-1, F3-1, F4-1 F1-2, F2-2, F3-2, F4-2, etc. This sequence is "orthogonal" to the current VFO-B sequence: F1-1, F1-2, F1-3, etc. Having both would make it a lot easier to compare the different NR settings and find the optimum one. Also, is there any reason why when AGC is OFF and the NR button is subsequently pushed it does not just automatically switch on the AGC instead of flashing "N/A" on the display? That is pretty annoying to those of us who frequently switch between AGC OFF and ON (and who can't remember which state it is in whey we reach for the NR). BTW, the NR works just fine for this typically wide-bw CW user... 73, Drew AF2Z On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:40:50 -0700, Lyle KK7P wrote: >> Well the SSB folks lose out yet again on the latest FW revision. >> Just when the next to useless NR was made to work we have yet >> another version that favours one mode over others. > >The 3.27 NR F3-1 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F1-4. >The 3.27 NR F3-2 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F2-4. >The 3.27 NR F3-3 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F3-4. >The 3.27 NR F3-4 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F4-4. > >The 3.27 NR F1- is "lighter" than the 3.25 NR. >The 3.27 NR F2- is a little lighter than the 3.25 NR. >The 3.27 NR F4- is "heavier" than the 3.25 NR. > >I am an SSB op, not a CW op, and the NR now works much better for me. > >There were some changes we had to make from 3.25 (and previous releases >as well) in the Fx-1, -2 and -3 settings which resulted in "scolloping" >of the passband. Some CW ops at certain pitches thought it gave their >signals a boost, others at other pitches really bemoaned the >attenuation. While less noticeable on SSB, it was there nonetheless. > >73, > >Lyle KK7P > >(aka Not Sleeping Mt Vernon) > >______________________________________________________________ >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 |
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by rfenabled
Hi Gary,
Please remember that this is a -beta test- release and not a formal final K3 f/w release. The purpose of any beta test release is to test new features and gather constructive feedback. It is not something you should be using to form a final judgment or complain loudly about, sine we certainly will react to feedback on it and respond with follow on releases. That's the whole point of releasing a beta test release before making it final. It gives us real feedback from a much broader swath of users than we ever could get in the lab. Also, have no fear, we are working to provide the best NR out there for BOTH SSB and CW ops. That's why we are experimenting with it in these beta test releases. Stay tuned! And thanks to everyone for the constructive feedback. We really appreciate it. 73, Eric [hidden email] wrote: > Well the SSB folks lose out yet again on the latest FW revision. Just when the next to useless NR was made to work we have yet another version that favours one mode over others. > > Rather disappointing result but that appears to be the way of the k3 world at times. > > Great radio for some but so great for others perhaps..:-( > > Don't know could be a replacement but the search has started. > > Gary > VK4WT > 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by KK7P
I found the NR in v3.25 to be excellent to my ears and a big improvement to previous versions, but I'm having a lot of trouble finding a NR setting with v3.27 that I'm comfortable with -- everything sounds like it's coming through a tunnel, even the x-1 settings. I generally prefer minimal DPS noise reduction for SSB and have rarely used the x-4 settings. I generally stuck to 4-1 or 4-2 in previous versions and rode the RF Gain to further reduce background noise when needed. Just can't find a happy setting with v3.27. It might sound OK on one signal but awful on another, resulting in far more dial tweaking than I usually like to do.
RX EQ is flat as has been suggested, just doesn't help much. The tunnel effect is a bit less bothersome when using headphones, but I generally prefer using a pair of powered desktop speakers with AFX (Bin) turned on. Haven't tried NR in CW mode yet, my comments apply only to SSB. I've reverted to 3.25 and then back to 3.27 just to make sure I'm hearing what I think I'm hearing. I think I can live with the new NR settings, but sure would like to have them *in addition to* the 3.25 filters which were damn near perfect for my ears. Maybe some additional less aggressive NR settings (5-1 through 5-4, 6-1 through 6-4, etc.) will make everyone happy? Just more free advice... ;-) 73, Paul WW2PT
|
|
|
Make sure and try it with AFX on and off.
On 8/26/09, Paul - WW2PT <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I found the NR in v3.25 to be excellent to my ears and a big improvement to > previous versions, but I'm having a lot of trouble finding a NR setting with > v3.27 that I'm comfortable with -- everything sounds like it's coming > through a tunnel, even the x-1 settings. I generally prefer minimal DPS > noise reduction for SSB and have rarely used the x-4 settings. I generally > stuck to 4-1 or 4-2 in previous versions and rode the RF Gain to further > reduce background noise when needed. Just can't find a happy setting with > v3.27. It might sound OK on one signal but awful on another, resulting in > far more dial tweaking than I usually like to do. > > RX EQ is flat as has been suggested, just doesn't help much. The tunnel > effect is a bit less bothersome when using headphones, but I generally > prefer using a pair of powered desktop speakers with AFX (Bin) turned on. > Haven't tried NR in CW mode yet, my comments apply only to SSB. > > I've reverted to 3.25 and then back to 3.27 just to make sure I'm hearing > what I think I'm hearing. I think I can live with the new NR settings, but > sure would like to have them *in addition to* the 3.25 filters which were > damn near perfect for my ears. Maybe some additional less aggressive NR > settings (5-1 through 5-4, 6-1 through 6-4, etc.) will make everyone happy? > > Just more free advice... ;-) > > 73, > Paul WW2PT > > > > Lyle Johnson wrote: >> >> >> The 3.27 NR F3-1 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F1-4. >> The 3.27 NR F3-2 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F2-4. >> The 3.27 NR F3-3 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F3-4. >> The 3.27 NR F3-4 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F4-4. >> >> The 3.27 NR F1- is "lighter" than the 3.25 NR. >> The 3.27 NR F2- is a little lighter than the 3.25 NR. >> The 3.27 NR F4- is "heavier" than the 3.25 NR. >> >> I am an SSB op, not a CW op, and the NR now works much better for me. >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/K3-NR-tp3515659p3518140.html > Sent from the Elecraft 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 |
|
|
Did that, Brett - should have mentioned it in my last post. The tunnel effect that I'm hearing is actually less objectionable with the AFX on.
Paul WW2PT
|
|
|
In reply to this post by KK7P
Is it still the case that the interpretation of the NR parameters is
as described in the K3 manual (D4)? The manual states: "The second part (-y) controls how much of the signal is routed through noise reduction, from 1 (50%) to 4 (100%)" If so I'm confused by the identities: > The 3.27 NR F3-1 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F1-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-2 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F2-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-3 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F3-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-4 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F4-4. where F-1, -2 etc. are asserted to be identical to Fx-4. Has the scheme changed? Bob NW8L On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Lyle Johnson<[hidden email]> wrote: >> Well the SSB folks lose out yet again on the latest FW revision. >> Just when the next to useless NR was made to work we have yet >> another version that favours one mode over others. > > The 3.27 NR F3-1 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F1-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-2 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F2-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-3 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F3-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-4 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F4-4. > > The 3.27 NR F1- is "lighter" than the 3.25 NR. > The 3.27 NR F2- is a little lighter than the 3.25 NR. > The 3.27 NR F4- is "heavier" than the 3.25 NR. > > I am an SSB op, not a CW op, and the NR now works much better for me. > > There were some changes we had to make from 3.25 (and previous releases > as well) in the Fx-1, -2 and -3 settings which resulted in "scolloping" > of the passband. Some CW ops at certain pitches thought it gave their > signals a boost, others at other pitches really bemoaned the > attenuation. While less noticeable on SSB, it was there nonetheless. > > 73, > > Lyle KK7P > > (aka Not Sleeping Mt Vernon) > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 |
|
|
> Is it still the case that the interpretation of the NR parameters is
> as described in the K3 manual (D4)? Not with the latest beta release. > The manual states: > > "The second > part (-y) controls how much of the signal is routed > through noise reduction, from 1 (50%) to 4 (100%)" > > If so I'm confused by the identities: > >> The 3.27 NR F3-1 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F1-4. >> The 3.27 NR F3-2 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F2-4. >> The 3.27 NR F3-3 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F3-4. >> The 3.27 NR F3-4 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F4-4. > > where F-1, -2 etc. are asserted to be identical to Fx-4. > > Has the scheme changed? Yes. The mixing action of unprocessed and processed audio was resulting in the scalloping effect I mentioned. The best thing to do is to just listen as you adjust the slowly adjust the NR parameters. The type of signal, type of noise, strength, AGC settings and so on are likely to have some effect. This is why there isn't just a "one size fits all" recommended setting. 73, Lyle KK7P ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Sure, I know what to do in practice, and I'm not looking for a "one
size fits all" solution. However, it's nice to know if the behavior is no longer in accordance with the documentation, this was not mentioned in the change notes. For now I'll treat the parameter as an opaque series of magic numbers. Thanks, Bob NW8L >> >> Has the scheme changed? > > Yes. The mixing action of unprocessed and processed audio was resulting in > the scalloping effect I mentioned. > > The best thing to do is to just listen as you adjust the slowly adjust the > NR parameters. The type of signal, type of noise, strength, AGC settings > and so on are likely to have some effect. This is why there isn't just a > "one size fits all" recommended setting. > > 73, > > Lyle KK7P > > 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 |
|
|
> ...For now I'll treat the parameter as an opaque
> series of magic numbers. The way the new beta NR works is: Fx-y x selects the length of the filter. F1 = 121 taps, F2 = 91 taps, F3 = 61 taps, F4 = 31 taps (The Beta 3.25 release used FIR filters of 61 taps.) y selects values of Beta (gain), decay, and delay (how long the NR algorithm waits to process a signal) (The Beta 3.5 release used the "x" parameter for these selections) 73, Lyle KK7P ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Lyle:
Just played with the NR in both SSB and CW, on 80 and 40. First, I can hear the change of the filters now without turning things on and off, as you mentioned it would work. The frequency response is decidedly less "flat" (less bassy) than the sound of 3.25. For CW, the 3 and 4 settings are much more efficient, not so in SSB, where the 1 and 2 settings are much cleaner sounding and better copy. I found that with no antenna and with the RF gain turned to 12 o'clock... Turn on the NR and all receiver white noise mutes and slowly ramps up. That's a recursive effect, I guess. I prefer the sound of the 3.25 version for ssb, its cleaner and somewhat less bright (flatter in response). I had to tweak the RX EQ to add some bass in the 3.27 version or it sounds "harsh" in my headsets (I dont use speakers hardly ever, btw). Inteligibility is marginally better with 3.27 on ssb and quite a bit better on CW, so you have drifted a bit to the CW side of the equation, but with a decent compromise for SSB. No more boingy peakyness in any mode, which is good, and the level while it still drops a bit, is better behaved. Can I assume from some comments I have read here that the NR process is pre EQ and AGC? How exactly do the processes "stack" in the radio architecture? If NR is at the top of the stack, a decent "fix" might be to somehow gang these three processes using presets so that they can be set up ahead of time and recalled from a memory button by the user. As an old brodcaster, we used to preset things in Switchers (vision mixers to UK readers) using a process called E-MEM... Which could recall preset parameters in "salvos" to preset multiple settings. This might work here. This would be handy in a contest environment where a minimum of tweaking and rapid adaptation to changing conditions is needed... You could play outside of a contest and create the settings then in the heat of battle, recall them with a single button push from a "canned" setup. It wouldnt be perfect for any environment, but it might mean the difference between working a mult and not working a mult. And multipliers, after all, are.... :) As you said, every receiving environment is different, but some generalizations can be made and being able to recall the multiple settings would be a definite plus feature of the radio. Thanks for letting us test these iterations. Lu Romero - W4LT K3 # 3192
|
|
|
> I prefer the sound of the 3.25 version for ssb, its cleaner > and somewhat less bright (flatter in response). I had to > tweak the RX EQ to add some bass in the 3.27 version or it > sounds "harsh" in my headsets (I dont use speakers hardly > ever, btw). What is the impedance of your headphones? With anything less than 100 Ohms or so, the stock 10 uF headphone coupling caps cause a significant LF roll off - particularly with 8 Ohm cans. 73, ... Joe, W4TV > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Lu > Romero - W4LT > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 10:09 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] K3 NR > > > > Lyle: > > Just played with the NR in both SSB and CW, on 80 and 40. > > First, I can hear the change of the filters now without > turning things on and off, as you mentioned it would work. > The frequency response is decidedly less "flat" (less bassy) > than the sound of 3.25. For CW, the 3 and 4 settings are > much more efficient, not so in SSB, where the 1 and 2 > settings are much cleaner sounding and better copy. I found > that with no antenna and with the RF gain turned to 12 > o'clock... Turn on the NR and all receiver white noise mutes > and slowly ramps up. That's a recursive effect, I guess. > > I prefer the sound of the 3.25 version for ssb, its cleaner > and somewhat less bright (flatter in response). I had to > tweak the RX EQ to add some bass in the 3.27 version or it > sounds "harsh" in my headsets (I dont use speakers hardly > ever, btw). Inteligibility is marginally better with 3.27 on > ssb and quite a bit better on CW, so you have drifted a bit > to the CW side of the equation, but with a decent compromise for SSB. > > No more boingy peakyness in any mode, which is good, and the > level while it still drops a bit, is better behaved. > > Can I assume from some comments I have read here that the NR > process is pre > EQ and AGC? How exactly do the processes "stack" in the > radio architecture? > > If NR is at the top of the stack, a decent "fix" might be to > somehow gang these three processes using presets so that they > can be set up ahead of time and recalled from a memory button > by the user. > > As an old brodcaster, we used to preset things in Switchers > (vision mixers to UK readers) using a process called E-MEM... > Which could recall preset parameters in "salvos" to preset > multiple settings. This might work here. > > This would be handy in a contest environment where a minimum > of tweaking and rapid adaptation to changing conditions is > needed... You could play outside of a contest and create the > settings then in the heat of battle, recall them with a > single button push from a "canned" setup. It wouldnt be > perfect for any environment, but it might mean the difference > between working a mult and not working a mult. And > multipliers, after all, are.... :) > > As you said, every receiving environment is different, but > some generalizations can be made and being able to recall the > multiple settings would be a definite plus feature of the radio. > > Thanks for letting us test these iterations. > > Lu Romero - W4LT > K3 # 3192 > > > Lyle Johnson wrote: > > > >> ...For now I'll treat the parameter as an opaque > >> series of magic numbers. > > > > The way the new beta NR works is: > > > > Fx-y > > > > x selects the length of the filter. > > > > F1 = 121 taps, F2 = 91 taps, F3 = 61 taps, F4 = 31 taps > > > > (The Beta 3.25 release used FIR filters of 61 taps.) > > > > y selects values of Beta (gain), decay, and delay (how long the NR > > algorithm waits to process a signal) > > > > (The Beta 3.5 release used the "x" parameter for these selections) > > > > 73, > > > > Lyle KK7P > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/K3-NR-tp3515659p3520809.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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by rfenabled
Joe:
I listended with a Heil ProSet last night... I will check the impedance, dont know it offhand. True, a mismatch would add to the effect. -lu- ----- Original Message Follows ----- From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <[hidden email]> To: "'Lu Romero - W4LT'" <[hidden email]>, <[hidden email]> Subject: RE: [Elecraft] [K3] K3 NR Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 22:19:23 -0400 >> I prefer the sound of the 3.25 version for ssb, its >> cleaner and somewhat less bright (flatter in response). >> I had to tweak the RX EQ to add some bass in the 3.27 >> version or it sounds "harsh" in my headsets (I dont use >> speakers hardly ever, btw). > >What is the impedance of your headphones? With anything >less than 100 Ohms or so, the stock 10 uF headphone >coupling caps cause a significant LF roll off - >particularly with 8 Ohm cans. > >73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [hidden email] >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Lu >> Romero - W4LT >> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 10:09 PM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] K3 NR >> >> >> >> Lyle: >> >> Just played with the NR in both SSB and CW, on 80 and 40. >> >> First, I can hear the change of the filters now without >> turning things on and off, as you mentioned it would >> work. The frequency response is decidedly less "flat" >> (less bassy) than the sound of 3.25. For CW, the 3 and >> 4 settings are much more efficient, not so in SSB, where >> the 1 and 2 settings are much cleaner sounding and >> better copy. I found that with no antenna and with the >> RF gain turned to 12 o'clock... Turn on the NR and all >> receiver white noise mutes and slowly ramps up. That's >> a recursive effect, I guess. >> I prefer the sound of the 3.25 version for ssb, its >> cleaner and somewhat less bright (flatter in response). >> I had to tweak the RX EQ to add some bass in the 3.27 >> version or it sounds "harsh" in my headsets (I dont use >> speakers hardly ever, btw). Inteligibility is >> marginally better with 3.27 on ssb and quite a bit >> better on CW, so you have drifted a bit to the CW side >> of the equation, but with a decent compromise for SSB. >> No more boingy peakyness in any mode, which is good, and >> the level while it still drops a bit, is better behaved. >> >> Can I assume from some comments I have read here that the >> NR process is pre >> EQ and AGC? How exactly do the processes "stack" in the >> radio architecture? >> >> If NR is at the top of the stack, a decent "fix" might be >> to somehow gang these three processes using presets so >> that they can be set up ahead of time and recalled from >> a memory button by the user. >> >> As an old brodcaster, we used to preset things in >> Switchers (vision mixers to UK readers) using a process >> called E-MEM... Which could recall preset parameters in >> "salvos" to preset multiple settings. This might work >> here. >> This would be handy in a contest environment where a >> minimum of tweaking and rapid adaptation to changing >> conditions is needed... You could play outside of a >> contest and create the settings then in the heat of >> battle, recall them with a single button push from a >> "canned" setup. It wouldnt be perfect for any >> environment, but it might mean the difference between >> working a mult and not working a mult. And multipliers, >> after all, are.... :) >> As you said, every receiving environment is different, >> but some generalizations can be made and being able to >> recall the multiple settings would be a definite plus >> feature of the radio. >> Thanks for letting us test these iterations. >> >> Lu Romero - W4LT >> K3 # 3192 >> >> >> Lyle Johnson wrote: >> > >> >> ...For now I'll treat the parameter as an opaque >> >> series of magic numbers. >> > >> > The way the new beta NR works is: >> > >> > Fx-y >> > >> > x selects the length of the filter. >> > >> > F1 = 121 taps, F2 = 91 taps, F3 = 61 taps, F4 = 31 taps >> > >> > (The Beta 3.25 release used FIR filters of 61 taps.) >> > >> > y selects values of Beta (gain), decay, and delay (how >> > long the NR algorithm waits to process a signal) >> > >> > (The Beta 3.5 release used the "x" parameter for these >> > selections) >> > 73, >> > >> > Lyle KK7P >> > >> > >___________________________________________________________ >> > ___ 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 >> > >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://n2.nabble.com/K3-NR-tp3515659p3520809.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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ
I loaded bata 3.27 yesterday have played with it on cw and ssb so far I
like what I hear the NR is more to my liking adding the AFX is a nice touch to get the audio to pop out a bit. The bands are not the best here for me using a Hy Tower vertical as the only HF antenna I would say that 3.27 is an over all improvement so far as I see and hear it. Regards Art ka9zap Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft wrote: > Hi Gary, > > Please remember that this is a -beta test- release and not a formal > final K3 f/w release. > > The purpose of any beta test release is to test new features and gather > constructive feedback. It is not something you should be using to form a > final judgment or complain loudly about, sine we certainly will react to > feedback on it and respond with follow on releases. That's the whole > point of releasing a beta test release before making it final. It gives > us real feedback from a much broader swath of users than we ever could > get in the lab. > > Also, have no fear, we are working to provide the best NR out there for > BOTH SSB and CW ops. That's why we are experimenting with it in these > beta test releases. Stay tuned! > > And thanks to everyone for the constructive feedback. We really > appreciate it. > > 73, Eric > > > [hidden email] wrote: > >> Well the SSB folks lose out yet again on the latest FW revision. Just when the next to useless NR was made to work we have yet another version that favours one mode over others. >> >> Rather disappointing result but that appears to be the way of the k3 world at times. >> >> Great radio for some but so great for others perhaps..:-( >> >> Don't know could be a replacement but the search has started. >> >> Gary >> VK4WT >> >> > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by KK7P
Lyle, Is the noise reduction more or less aggressive with a larger number of taps (length) of the filter? 73, ... Joe, W4TV > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Lyle Johnson > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 4:23 PM > To: Bob Cunnings > Cc: Elecraft > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 NR > > > > ...For now I'll treat the parameter as an opaque > > series of magic numbers. > > The way the new beta NR works is: > > Fx-y > > x selects the length of the filter. > > F1 = 121 taps, F2 = 91 taps, F3 = 61 taps, F4 = 31 taps > > (The Beta 3.25 release used FIR filters of 61 taps.) > > y selects values of Beta (gain), decay, and delay (how long the NR > algorithm waits to process a signal) > > (The Beta 3.5 release used the "x" parameter for these selections) > > 73, > > Lyle KK7P > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 |
|
|
> Is the noise reduction more or less aggressive with a larger
> number of taps (length) of the filter? It is less aggressive with more taps. There is also a different coloring of the audio. 73, Lyle KK7P ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Paul - WW2PT
Yeah, I agree with what you are saying. I like the NB on CW, but on SSB
even at F1-1 it sounds somewhat like being in a tunnel. I would like to see a NB setting that is less aggressive and that doesn't change the audio as much. Also it would be nice if the audio didn't reduce in volume when turning on the NB. Will any of the AGC settings like SLP, THR, PLS, HLD, DCY have an impact on what SSB sounds like with the NB? N2TK, Tony -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul - WW2PT Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:17 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 NR I found the NR in v3.25 to be excellent to my ears and a big improvement to previous versions, but I'm having a lot of trouble finding a NR setting with v3.27 that I'm comfortable with -- everything sounds like it's coming through a tunnel, even the x-1 settings. I generally prefer minimal DPS noise reduction for SSB and have rarely used the x-4 settings. I generally stuck to 4-1 or 4-2 in previous versions and rode the RF Gain to further reduce background noise when needed. Just can't find a happy setting with v3.27. It might sound OK on one signal but awful on another, resulting in far more dial tweaking than I usually like to do. RX EQ is flat as has been suggested, just doesn't help much. The tunnel effect is a bit less bothersome when using headphones, but I generally prefer using a pair of powered desktop speakers with AFX (Bin) turned on. Haven't tried NR in CW mode yet, my comments apply only to SSB. I've reverted to 3.25 and then back to 3.27 just to make sure I'm hearing what I think I'm hearing. I think I can live with the new NR settings, but sure would like to have them *in addition to* the 3.25 filters which were damn near perfect for my ears. Maybe some additional less aggressive NR settings (5-1 through 5-4, 6-1 through 6-4, etc.) will make everyone happy? Just more free advice... ;-) 73, Paul WW2PT Lyle Johnson wrote: > > > The 3.27 NR F3-1 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F1-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-2 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F2-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-3 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F3-4. > The 3.27 NR F3-4 is *identical* to 3.25 NR F4-4. > > The 3.27 NR F1- is "lighter" than the 3.25 NR. > The 3.27 NR F2- is a little lighter than the 3.25 NR. > The 3.27 NR F4- is "heavier" than the 3.25 NR. > > I am an SSB op, not a CW op, and the NR now works much better for me. > > -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/K3-NR-tp3515659p3518140.html Sent from the Elecraft 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 |
«
Return to [K3]
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |