K3 noise reduction vs. Clear Speech speaker

[nn5g]

I have a Clear Speech that is about 5 years old and a one year old
product called a BHI Hear It Now (Distributed by GAP Antenna).
 I have had my K3 for two months now and feel like I know how to
use the NR. I have added the above two products in the audio
chain and compared everything. The BHI device is more effective
than the Clear Speech and K3 NR on all levels of interference and
distortion. The NR on the K3 seems to be very suppressive of
the overall signal compared to the other two products....
73 Paul NN5G


Somebody recently was asking if anyone has compared K3 NR with  
external NR systems. I just did, again.

With my old analog rig, I used a Clear Speech speaker (it has built-in
 
digital NR). It is VERY effective at reducing any sound that is steady
 
for more than about 1/2 second, like stable QRN, and even pretty good  
with less stable QRN. It introduces very little distortion to the  
signal. Really an excellent product. It has since evolved into another
 
company's product, but I'm not sure which one.

When I got the K3, I tried the Clear Speech and found it redundant  
with the NR in the K3, so I retired it and went stereo.

Then, NR seemed to improve considerably somewhere around FW 1.88. I  
thought I'd never use the Clear Speech again with the K3.

Changes again ocurred in the NR with subsequent FW versions. I'm not  
so happy with it. Even on low settings, it seems overly agressive.  
There is no setting, even 1-1, that does not unpleasantly distort the  
audio and make the volume unstable.

So I dusted off the Clear Speech guess what? It now works better for  
reducing steady QRN than the K3. By "better", I mean I it pleases me  
enough to want to use it. I have nearly given up on using the NR after
 
upgrades of the past 2 months or so. I think it got better, then worse.

All it needs to do on low settings is cancel out any sound that's  
steady. That was done nicely with a $120 product in the 90's. What's  
up, Elecraft?

Windy KM5Q
Santa Fe, NM
K3 #764

_______________________________________________
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

[KM5Q]

Here is a comment I got off-line from a fellow who comments about CW  
(and I agree, though my comments applied to SSB):

quote -->  I have been using MCU 2.23, but an older DSP 1.81 to get a  
decent
sound on CW.  The newer DSP takes too long to sync on the CW signal  
and it sounds like very soft keying when NR is on and about F=2--3 or  
so. ...  It brings the signal up out of the static, but destroys the  
leading edge of the CW signal.  At least that's what I'm seeing here.

--end of quote

Some guys like it the way it is, but there's a lot of agreement here  
that it's a work in progress, and has even been in digress lately. I  
know the developers are listening and I'm it's going to be improved.

Windy KM5Q
Santa Fe, NM
K3 #764
_______________________________________________
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

[Brett Howard]

I think I've noticed that... Its like the filter opens up a bit and
the static comes up but then when the tone is present the filter locks
in on it after a bit and the static comes down.  I have a feeling that
this phenomenon probably helps it to not obliterate weak signal CW
sigs but it can be a tad bit annoying with some of the mediocre to
loud sigs.

I agree that its a work in progress and if there was ever a guy who
will figure out a really slick way to do it its Lyle.  Lyle seems to
be growing and learning what works better along with the k3.  It takes
time to get things just right.  This coupled with the fact that there
is NO way to make everyone happy it can get even tougher.  But knowing
Lyle he'll strike a good balance and things will improve over time.

I'm interested to see/hear what they've been cooking up as of late...

~Brett

On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 2:41 PM, KM5Q <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Here is a comment I got off-line from a fellow who comments about CW (and I
> agree, though my comments applied to SSB):
>
> quote -->  I have been using MCU 2.23, but an older DSP 1.81 to get a decent
> sound on CW.  The newer DSP takes too long to sync on the CW signal and it
> sounds like very soft keying when NR is on and about F=2--3 or so. ...  It
> brings the signal up out of the static, but destroys the leading edge of the
> CW signal.  At least that's what I'm seeing here.
>
> --end of quote
>
> Some guys like it the way it is, but there's a lot of agreement here that
> it's a work in progress, and has even been in digress lately. I know the
> developers are listening and I'm it's going to be improved.
>
> Windy KM5Q
> Santa Fe, NM
> K3 #764
> _______________________________________________
> 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

[Brett Howard]

I take this back..  After doing a bit of playing with the AGC decay
rate I was able to get things back in line with what I wanted for the
band conditions at the moment.  I gotta admit the AGC in the K3 is WAY
more than I've ever had available before.

On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Brett Howard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think I've noticed that... Its like the filter opens up a bit and
> the static comes up but then when the tone is present the filter locks
> in on it after a bit and the static comes down.  I have a feeling that
> this phenomenon probably helps it to not obliterate weak signal CW
> sigs but it can be a tad bit annoying with some of the mediocre to
> loud sigs.
>
> I agree that its a work in progress and if there was ever a guy who
> will figure out a really slick way to do it its Lyle.  Lyle seems to
> be growing and learning what works better along with the k3.  It takes
> time to get things just right.  This coupled with the fact that there
> is NO way to make everyone happy it can get even tougher.  But knowing
> Lyle he'll strike a good balance and things will improve over time.
>
> I'm interested to see/hear what they've been cooking up as of late...
>
> ~Brett
>
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 2:41 PM, KM5Q <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Here is a comment I got off-line from a fellow who comments about CW (and I
>> agree, though my comments applied to SSB):
>>
>> quote -->  I have been using MCU 2.23, but an older DSP 1.81 to get a decent
>> sound on CW.  The newer DSP takes too long to sync on the CW signal and it
>> sounds like very soft keying when NR is on and about F=2--3 or so. ...  It
>> brings the signal up out of the static, but destroys the leading edge of the
>> CW signal.  At least that's what I'm seeing here.
>>
>> --end of quote
>>
>> Some guys like it the way it is, but there's a lot of agreement here that
>> it's a work in progress, and has even been in digress lately. I know the
>> developers are listening and I'm it's going to be improved.
>>
>> Windy KM5Q
>> Santa Fe, NM
>> K3 #764
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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