[K3] QRQ/CW+ and split

[GW0ETF]

=================================================================================
Note 1: There are limitations to QRQ CW mode at present. You cannot use SHIFT, or turn on RIT, XIT, or SPLIT. However, you can still use splits, in effect, if you have the sub receiver installed: Turn the SUB on, and use VFO B as the receive VFO. (In a subsequent firmware release, RIT/XIT will be usable over a small range in QRQ mode.)
=================================================================================

Is the plan to eventually implement normal split with CW+....?

To use SO2V in N1MM with the K3 requires using normal SPLIT. It would be a pity not to be able to take advantage of the greatly improved keying with CW+ at the higher speeds used in contesting.  

73,

Stewart Rolfe, GW0ETF

[Guy, K2AV]

At 35 WPM, I do not perceive any change in transmitted keying between
CW and CW+.  There is a difference in QSK receive.  I certainly do not
hear anything that would be described by "greatly improved keying" on
the transmitted waveform.  Perhaps the circumstances of your keying
complaint needs further detailing?

Part of the issue with split, RIT, XIT, etc., is settling time for the
complete reversal of most of the circuitry paths involved in TX/RX
state change. CW+ removes the most time-costly state change reversals
to accomplish the 70 WPM clarity.  We need to remember that the change
as currently implemented was introduced to service very high speed
QRQ.  Working some of this backward to mid-speed QSK code without
introducing chirp and other artifacts will likely take some time.  The
lack of split in the reintroduce list for CW+ was deliberate and
probably marks split as the most difficult item for quick transition.

What seems more workable is pulling some of the CW+ code back into CW
to improve the QSK there.  Also, perhaps the K3 SO2V coding strategy
used by N1MM bears rethinking in light of the CW+ changes.

73, Guy.

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:13 AM, GW0ETF <[hidden email]> wrote:

> To use SO2V in N1MM with the K3 requires using normal SPLIT. It would be a
> pity not to be able to take advantage of the greatly improved keying with
> CW+ at the higher speeds used in contesting.
______________________________________________________________
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

[Andrew Moore-3]

> Is the plan to eventually implement normal split with CW+....?

Wayne mentioned in the release notes for 3.99 firmware: "In a subsequent
firmware release, RIT/XIT will be usable over a small range in QRQ mode."

> To use SO2V in N1MM with the K3 requires using normal SPLIT. It would be a
pity not to be able to take advantage of the greatly improved keying with
CW+ at the higher speeds used in contesting.

CW+ mode benefits begin at farily high speeds (I'm not sure what the
threshold is).  I'm not a contester but from what I hear, even with typical
speeds of contest reports, you'll be fine in regular CW mode.  Use the CW+
mode when you want to fly at say  60+ (again don't quote me on that cutoff
speed).

--Andrew
..


On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]>wrote:

> At 35 WPM, I do not perceive any change in transmitted keying between
> CW and CW+.  There is a difference in QSK receive.  I certainly do not
> hear anything that would be described by "greatly improved keying" on
> the transmitted waveform.  Perhaps the circumstances of your keying
> complaint needs further detailing?
>
> Part of the issue with split, RIT, XIT, etc., is settling time for the
> complete reversal of most of the circuitry paths involved in TX/RX
> state change. CW+ removes the most time-costly state change reversals
> to accomplish the 70 WPM clarity.  We need to remember that the change
> as currently implemented was introduced to service very high speed
> QRQ.  Working some of this backward to mid-speed QSK code without
> introducing chirp and other artifacts will likely take some time.  The
> lack of split in the reintroduce list for CW+ was deliberate and
> probably marks split as the most difficult item for quick transition.
>
> What seems more workable is pulling some of the CW+ code back into CW
> to improve the QSK there.  Also, perhaps the K3 SO2V coding strategy
> used by N1MM bears rethinking in light of the CW+ changes.
>
> 73, Guy.
>
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:13 AM, GW0ETF <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > To use SO2V in N1MM with the K3 requires using normal SPLIT. It would be
> a
> > pity not to be able to take advantage of the greatly improved keying with
> > CW+ at the higher speeds used in contesting.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

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

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

[DK4XL]

If everybody would be able to zero beat / qnz, nobody
would need rit/xit/split :-)

[Andrew Moore-3]

> If everybody would be able to zero beat / qnz, nobody would need
rit/xit/split :-)

True, though some QRQ ops (and even QRS) will deliberately run  slightly off
freq in a net to differentiate themselves from one another easily.
______________________________________________________________
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

[N5GE]

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:42:30 -0400, Andrew Moore
<[hidden email]> wrote:

See below...

[snip]
>CW+ mode benefits begin at farily high speeds (I'm not sure what the
>threshold is).  I'm not a contester but from what I hear, even with typical
>speeds of contest reports, you'll be fine in regular CW mode.  Use the CW+
>mode when you want to fly at say  60+ (again don't quote me on that cutoff
>speed).
>
>--Andrew
>..

Yes, but one of the outstanding things about the CW+ feature is the
excellent QSK operation.  I seldom work CW at more than 25 WPM, but I
like to use the CW+ setting for it's better QSK.

>
>
>On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
[snip]

I agree with Guy.  I'd like to see the QSK performance of CW+ in the
standard CW QSK setting.  If it were there, I would never use the CW+
setting.

>> What seems more workable is pulling some of the CW+ code back into CW
>> to improve the QSK there.  Also, perhaps the K3 SO2V coding strategy
>> used by N1MM bears rethinking in light of the CW+ changes.
>>
>> 73, Guy.
>>
[snip]

BT 73 ES GUD LUK
DE N5GE,
QCWA LIFE MEMBER 35102 AR SK

[hidden email]
http://www.n5ge.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

[Andrew Moore-3]

> Yes, but one of the outstanding things about the CW+ feature is the
excellent QSK operation.  I seldom work CW at more than 25 WPM, but I like
to use the CW+ setting for it's better QSK.

Agreed.  Hopefully in the future it will be addressed - as Wayne mentioned
in the firmware release.

In the meantime, if RIT is the only thing missing, assigning the PF1 key to
CW+ mode lets us quickly and easily toggle between CW+ mode (during
transmit) and CW mode with RIT (during receive) by using a single keypress.
Ideally it would all be done at once but I'm so happy with Elecraft's quick
and innovative solution, with plans to improve it in the future, that I can
live with the workaround in the meantime.

--Andrew, NV1B
..
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

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

[Cookie]

If everyone zero beat exactly then no one would be able to copy anything in a double or triple unless one station was extremely more powerful than all the others.  If three stations are transmitting simultaneously with 50 Hz separation then most proficient CW operators could copy at least one and some extremely proficient operators could copy all three.
 Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ




________________________________
From: Andrew Moore <[hidden email]>
To: DK4XL <[hidden email]>
Cc: [hidden email]
Sent: Thu, June 24, 2010 8:15:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] QRQ/CW+ and split

> If everybody would be able to zero beat / qnz, nobody would need
rit/xit/split :-)

True, though some QRQ ops (and even QRS) will deliberately run  slightly off
freq in a net to differentiate themselves from one another easily.
______________________________________________________________
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