K3S audio board for K3 upgrade?

[Grant Youngman]

Well .. I'd get a headache listening to most ANYTHING after 4-5 hours.  The symphony in Bass Hall, or even good vinyl on a great turntable/arm/cartridge and a very good amp and very good headphones is no different.  

Maybe I just found the "right" speakers for my K3.  They're old RatShack (RCA) speakers with linaeum tweeters.  I have a lot of them, and use them on everything (new, old) in the shack.   I've never  found a powered set of "computer" speakers worth bothering with ... and I've tried quite a few not so cheapie ones, or the usual-suspect ham speakers.  I haven't tried the Elecraft offering yet, but probably will at some point.

After the LPF daughter-board update (or rev D DSP) I haven't had an issue with anything related to K3 audio.  And certainly nothing I'd call a "screech".   The internal speaker is the speaker of last resort. My RX EQ is set to flat.

That said, I'd still probably buy the updated DSP board for the improved IMD performance. Just because ....

Grant NQ5T

Sent from my iPhone

>
> I can't define "fatiguing" either, but running AFSK at 915 Hz MARK, I start getting a headache after 4 or 5 hours.
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Edward R Cole]

My two cents:

Never cared much for audio quality of the internal K3 speaker.  I use
a very old 8-inch round National Radio speaker (probably 4-ohm as was
most of the 1950 era stuff).

But when I need to dig out a signal from the noise I use my trusty
SONY MDR-V600 headset (definitely used for CW).

I'm looking forward to when I next purchase hearing aids and will get
blue-tooth capability to directly listen to the radio without use of
speaker/headset...probably a couple years away on that.

My KX3 uses West Mountain Radio COMspkr's

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
     "Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
     [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Ron Castro]

The sounds being described are probably not just related to frequency
response, but to any type of harmonic, intermod or digital distortion, or
noise that is created in the final IF and analog audio stages of the radio.
This was referenced by Rob Sherwood in an early review of the K3 and
demonstrated with an audio spectrum analyzer.  A CW tone with these
characteristics might be described as "raspy", "brassy", "busy", or with
some other term audiophiles like to use, and in any case, would likely lead
to fatigue.  

If this is the case, equalization may mask it but won't fix it, and could
make the problem worse.

          Ron Castro
           N6IE
    www.N6IE.com

Member:
                  ARRL
     Redwood Empire DX Assn.
 Northern California Contest Club
Northern California DX Foundation
  Society of Broadcast Engineers



-----Original Message-----
From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jim
Bolit
Sent: March 21, 2016 12:46 PM
To: 'Bill'; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3S audio board for K3 upgrade?

My TS-480 also sounds better than my K3.  My K3 was sent back to factory to
see if there was an audio issue with my particular K3.  They compared mine
to a factory unit, using an audio spectrum analyzer and noted that my K3 and
a new factory K3 were "the same".

The TS-480 just sounds better to these ears.

Oh, and it is magic........

Jim
W6AIM

.


______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[lstavenhagen]

Another BTW, I'm definitely not asserting any _distortion_ of the signals or tones in either radio. Both my K3 and K3S are giving pure clean tones and voices. My complaints are only centering around (what I believe to be only) the equalization in the audio, particularly the mid/high frequency noise. Though as I said the K2 audio is a tough act to follow and I'm a bit spoiled by it.

The only time I have any impurities at all are with agressive settings of the noise blanker or DSP with certain types of wide-band noise, which is entirely expected.

So just want to clarify that I'm not describing any distortion products at all. Just aging hearing mostly hi hi..

73,
LS
W5QD

[Gary Smith-2]

So true!

I use tube audio gear. My Audio pre-amplifier is a McIntosh C2500 and
I regularly use the USB input to its internal digital soundcard. The
sound from that preamp is magnificent. When I ran the same source to
a USB soundcard, bypassing the McIntosh digital card, with that  
signal sent to the Mc preamp & then to the amplifier, the audio was
pitiful in comparison. The difference is remarkable in depth and
transparency. The better soundcard stands out like a sore thumb.

The quality of the soundcards do make a tremendous difference and
with that said; I do prefer the sound of my K3s to the K3.

73,

Gary
KA1J


> Nor does using some non certified soundcard does not sound like the
> path to pristine audio...
>
> --
> 73's, and thanks,
> Dave (NK7Z)

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Jim Brown-10]

On Mon,3/21/2016 12:46 PM, Jim Bolit wrote:
> The TS-480 just sounds better to these ears.
>
> Oh, and it is magic........

Look at the RX current drain on both radios. A K3 comes in at about 1A,
1.1A with the new KXV3B preamp or the old PR6 installed. This is the
result of Wayne's philosophy of optimizing for portable/battery
operation, and it leaves the speaker output stage a bit low on current
for those who want/need it loud.

And it's more than frequency response. There's analog distortion, both
in the electronics and the loudspeaker. And there are distortions
associated with A/D and D/A conversions, and the number of bits used.

Early production K3s (2008-9) had the design error of placing 600 ohm
resistance between the line output stage and the transformer, which
caused the transformer to produce distortion, even at pretty low signal
levels. Pro audio circuits have not used 600 ohm inputs and outputs for
at least 40 years, but too many manufacturers of ham gear (and even
broadcast transmitters) never got the memo. Pro output stages are about
100 ohms, that value chosen to prevent instability when the stage drives
the capacitance of a long line, and pro inputs are around 10K (so that
the output stage driving doesn't have to provide current.

73, Jim K9YC


______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Kevin Stover]

Exactly!

I remember the trail of audio tears well.
The difference back then being they had never heard a receiver as good
as the K3 and all it was picking up compared to their Yaecomwood.
Couldn't possibly be their favorite old radio had been feeding them the
RF equivalent of mush and passing it off as "great audio"?

On 3/21/2016 2:20 PM, Doug Turnbull wrote:

> Friends,
>       Perhaps it is because I largely operate CW but for me the original K3
> audio is just lovely.    I am 71, my hearing is not so great but I use the
> lowest pitch possible around 360 Hz and have RX EQ set for good performance
> at low frequencies.   It is just a sweet sound to me and so restful.   Maybe
> if I was a phone man the story would be different though I do monitor SSB
> and work it for rare DX and it also sounds good.
>
>       Could it be that the great flexibility in setting up the audio results
> in some people being put off as they have not found the sweet spot for their
> ears.    I seem to remember a few years ago many people had troubles with
> the FT2000 because it was complex to set up.   There were also people who
> did not like the Orion II again because setting the radio up initially was
> problematic for them.
>
>

--
R. Kevin Stover
AC0H
ARRL
FISTS #11993
SKCC #215
NAQCC #3441


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ]

Hi Ron,

That review of the K3 audio by Rob Sherwood was on a very early K3. We quickly
addressed the high freq harmonic issues (most of which were above 4-5 kHz and
were more than 50-60 dB down) with a K3 DSP board revision that included a
change to a beefier low ESR power supply filter choke feeding the audio amp and
the addition of an audio LPF that rolls off above the DSPs max output of 4 kHz.
We made even more audio improvements to the new K3S DSP board's audio chain.

On another note, Rob has run spectra on the newer K3S DSP and he has noted it is
substantially improved over the first K3 he tested almost 7 years ago.

One thought for those using the 2.7 or 2.8 SSB filters. Try reducing the DSP
bandwidth to 2.4 kHz or so, and shifting the center freq. down 100 Hz.  Many
other radios have a 2.4 kHz SSB filter, and while it does restrict the audio
fidelity as compared to the 2.7/2.8 kHz filters, the reduction in the upper
cutoff to 2.4 kHz reduces the amount of high frequency band noise and
interference, which may account for what some construe as a 'smoother' sound.

Also note that the stock 2.7 kHz filter has a much slower roll off than the
optional 8 pole 2.8 kHz filter, and as a result may hear more higher frequency
RX components.

Lastly, try listening with our new external SP3 speaker for the K3S and K3. It
has an engineered audio response for a very clean and 'smooth' flat response,
without major resonances.   :-)

73,

Eric
/elecraft.com/

On 3/21/2016 1:59 PM, Ron Castro wrote:

> The sounds being described are probably not just related to frequency
> response, but to any type of harmonic, intermod or digital distortion, or
> noise that is created in the final IF and analog audio stages of the radio.
> This was referenced by Rob Sherwood in an early review of the K3 and
> demonstrated with an audio spectrum analyzer.  A CW tone with these
> characteristics might be described as "raspy", "brassy", "busy", or with
> some other term audiophiles like to use, and in any case, would likely lead
> to fatigue.
>
> If this is the case, equalization may mask it but won't fix it, and could
> make the problem worse.
>
>            Ron Castro
>             N6IE
>

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Joe Subich, W4TV-4]

On 3/21/2016 7:38 PM, Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft wrote:

> One thought for those using the 2.7 or 2.8 SSB filters. Try reducing
> the DSP bandwidth to 2.4 kHz or so, and shifting the center freq.
> down 100 Hz. Many other radios have a 2.4 kHz SSB filter, and while
> it does restrict the audio fidelity as compared to the 2.7/2.8 kHz
> filters, the reduction in the upper cutoff to 2.4 kHz reduces the
> amount of high frequency band noise and interference, which may
> account for what some construe as a 'smoother' sound.

Many "traditional" transceivers also have a 3 to 6 dB per octave roll-
off in audio frequency response above 800/1000/1500 Hz (depending on
the manufacturer) which limits the high frequency "crud".

While there are some who have a "religious" opposition to using RX EQ
in the K3/K3S, I've found that setting the 3200 Hz "band" to - 6dB (or
-10dB) greatly helps with the sound on SSB and setting both 2400 and
3200 to -16dB is useful in CW.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Vic Rosenthal]

"Too much noise" might mean the AGC threshold is low. One way to adjust it is to set it so that AGC does not activate on band noise (of course it's different on different bands/times). I have mine set to 12. I want AGC to do as little as possible except protect my ears.

Vic 4X6GP/K2VCO

> On 21 Mar 2016, at 11:11 PM, lstavenhagen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Another BTW, I'm definitely not asserting any _distortion_ of the signals or
> tones in either radio. Both my K3 and K3S are giving pure clean tones and
> voices. My complaints are only centering around (what I believe to be only)
> the equalization in the audio, particularly the mid/high frequency noise.
> Though as I said the K2 audio is a tough act to follow and I'm a bit spoiled
> by it.
>
> The only time I have any impurities at all are with agressive settings of
> the noise blanker or DSP with certain types of wide-band noise, which is
> entirely expected.
>
> So just want to clarify that I'm not describing any distortion products at
> all. Just aging hearing mostly hi hi..
>
> 73,
> LS
> W5QD
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3S-audio-board-for-K3-upgrade-tp7615346p7615423.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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[N1EU]

I agree with Vic - I want minimal AGC action, only kicking in on the
strongest signals to keep the audio level below the ear's attenuation
reflex (see http://n1eu.com/K3NA_rx_audio.pdf )

I have my threshold set at 14 (along with AF Gain at approx 9 o'clock and
RF Gain adjusted so I can just hear band noise).  (btw, you might try
mysettings if you ever experience pileup mush when on the receiving end of
packet pileups).

73, Barry N1EU

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:29 AM, Vic Rosenthal <[hidden email]> wrote:

> "Too much noise" might mean the AGC threshold is low. One way to adjust it
> is to set it so that AGC does not activate on band noise (of course it's
> different on different bands/times). I have mine set to 12. I want AGC to
> do as little as possible except protect my ears.
>
> Vic 4X6GP/K2VCO
>
> > On 21 Mar 2016, at 11:11 PM, lstavenhagen <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Another BTW, I'm definitely not asserting any _distortion_ of the
> signals or
> > tones in either radio. Both my K3 and K3S are giving pure clean tones and
> > voices. My complaints are only centering around (what I believe to be
> only)
> > the equalization in the audio, particularly the mid/high frequency noise.
> > Though as I said the K2 audio is a tough act to follow and I'm a bit
> spoiled
> > by it.
> >
> > The only time I have any impurities at all are with agressive settings of
> > the noise blanker or DSP with certain types of wide-band noise, which is
> > entirely expected.
> >
> > So just want to clarify that I'm not describing any distortion products
> at
> > all. Just aging hearing mostly hi hi..
> >
> > 73,
> > LS
> > W5QD
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3S-audio-board-for-K3-upgrade-tp7615346p7615423.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
> > Message delivered to [hidden email]
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[ke9uw]

I had a 480 and did not care for the sort of pinched up audio compared to say the 850.
I am using a couple of 6 by 9 speakers in enclosures on the K3, one on each side of the stereo and the sound is just fine. As they say, opinions vary and have so many variables like speakers, what/how/where you operate, physical hearing anomalies, etc. that audio reviews are just about useless.

[Charlie T, K3ICH]

Using a couple old Radio Shack "Minimus"
speakers, I find the K3s to be the best sounding
and easiest to listen to radio I have ever had.
I agree, the TS-2000 as well as the TS-480, while
an excellent mobile rig, does in fact roll off the
higher frequencies too much for my antique ears.  
This started to happen around the time Kenwood
went to digital demodulation instead of analog
circuitry.

I was on one of the nets the other day using my
K3s and noticed the net control  station was
particularly hard to understand.   I thought my
hearing had gone or maybe I had set some parameter
incorrectly. Then I looked at the panadapter
display.  There was a very pronounced peak in his
audio around 300 hz and practically no energy past
about 800Hz. No distortion, just a widely skewed
audio passband.  It was a boatanchor radio, so
there was something obviously wrong somewhere as
everyone else sounded great.

My gut feel is that the K3s IS an improvement over
the K3 in regard to the recovered audio.

73, Charlie k3ICH







-----Original Message-----
From: Elecraft
[mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of ke9uw
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 9:30 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3S audio board for K3
upgrade?

I had a 480 and did not care for the sort of
pinched up audio compared to say the 850.
I am using a couple of 6 by 9 speakers in
enclosures on the K3, one on each side of the
stereo and the sound is just fine. As they say,
opinions vary and have so many variables like
speakers, what/how/where you operate, physical
hearing anomalies, etc. that audio reviews are
just about useless.



-----
Chuck, KE9UW
--
View this message in context:
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3S-audio-boa
rd-for-K3-upgrade-tp7615346p7615445.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 Message delivered
to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Elecraft mailing list]

  I am not much of a "poster", but this thread has had my close attention. I guess even though I have been hamming for over 60yrs, I had somehow grown to believe that speakers for voice communication or CW, for that matter, were very NON- critical. In recent years I have come to a very much DIFFERENT opinion.
  For close to 10yrs my 2m SSB rig was an Icom 746Pro. I loved the audio out of that rig. It had a 2m SSB only TX issue that Icom could not resolve after multiple trips back for repair. I sold it and bought a Kenwood TS2000. Swapped the rigs out and was dismayed at how horrible the rec audio sounded out of the 2000. That was with the same Motorola 2way speaker that I had used for years with the 746Pro! I mean horrible! I have quite a collection of the Motorola speakers and trying them one at a time, I found one that I could live with, not quite as good as the Pro but ok. Boy that 2000 was fussy about speakers.
  Fall of 2009 when I added a K3 to the operating position, I found a similar "fussyness", when it came to speaker selection. I was NOT satisfied with the Motorola speaker that I had used happily with a IC-735 for many years. Speaker selection seem "critical" just like the 2000. That coupled with how one sets the Shift/ Width/Hi-Low cut make huge differences in the way the radio sounds (obvious). Huge variability with the Shift/ Width/Hi-Low combined with mode and filter. WE HAVE CONTROL of these variables, they are not predetermined. I can make the K3 unpleasant to listen to with some combinations, no question.

  Last month a K3s entered the picture and again I was trying about every speaker I had. Trying to find one that sounded as good as the K3 / Motorola speaker combo. None of my Motorola speakers came close. In the end I found a speaker from a failed power speaker system that I had relegated to the garage. I very much like the sound of that speaker and the K3s.
  I use RX equalization AFTER I find a speaker that I can live with. I know that in this time of my life, my ears are not what they were  decades ago. I suspect that not only do I have known losses, but I may have certain frequency ranges that may be ANNOYING as well.
I know back in my HiFi / Stereo days with vacuum tube amplifiers, speaker selection was pretty simple for me. When I transitioned to solid state amps, not so much. 

To anyone who dislikes the sound of your K3 or K3s, my experience is try LOTs of different speakers. I saw huge differences, not subtle, but HUGE. I'll bet you can find one that will work satisfactorily. These solid state AF amplifiers just may be more fussy about that transducer that is attached than what some of us would expect.

73 Bill K0AWU

 

      From: ke9uw <[hidden email]>
 To: [hidden email]
 Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 8:30 AM
 Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3S audio board for K3 upgrade?
   
I had a 480 and did not care for the sort of pinched up audio compared to say
the 850.
I am using a couple of 6 by 9 speakers in enclosures on the K3, one on each
side of the stereo and the sound is just fine. As they say, opinions vary
and have so many variables like speakers, what/how/where you operate,
physical hearing anomalies, etc. that audio reviews are just about useless.



-----
Chuck, KE9UW
--
View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3S-audio-board-for-K3-upgrade-tp7615346p7615445.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
Message delivered to [hidden email]


 
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Deni F5VJC]

Behringer MS40 outstanding with my K3, no RFI problems either.

73,  Deni - F5VJC



On 22 March 2016 at 16:36, Bill Davis via Elecraft <[hidden email]
> wrote:

>   I am not much of a "poster", but this thread has had my close attention.
> I guess even though I have been hamming for over 60yrs, I had somehow grown
> to believe that speakers for voice communication or CW, for that matter,
> were very NON- critical. In recent years I have come to a very much
> DIFFERENT opinion.
>   For close to 10yrs my 2m SSB rig was an Icom 746Pro. I loved the audio
> out of that rig. It had a 2m SSB only TX issue that Icom could not resolve
> after multiple trips back for repair. I sold it and bought a Kenwood
> TS2000. Swapped the rigs out and was dismayed at how horrible the rec audio
> sounded out of the 2000. That was with the same Motorola 2way speaker that
> I had used for years with the 746Pro! I mean horrible! I have quite a
> collection of the Motorola speakers and trying them one at a time, I found
> one that I could live with, not quite as good as the Pro but ok. Boy that
> 2000 was fussy about speakers.
>   Fall of 2009 when I added a K3 to the operating position, I found a
> similar "fussyness", when it came to speaker selection. I was NOT satisfied
> with the Motorola speaker that I had used happily with a IC-735 for many
> years. Speaker selection seem "critical" just like the 2000. That coupled
> with how one sets the Shift/ Width/Hi-Low cut make huge differences in the
> way the radio sounds (obvious). Huge variability with the Shift/
> Width/Hi-Low combined with mode and filter. WE HAVE CONTROL of these
> variables, they are not predetermined. I can make the K3 unpleasant to
> listen to with some combinations, no question.
>
>   Last month a K3s entered the picture and again I was trying about every
> speaker I had. Trying to find one that sounded as good as the K3 / Motorola
> speaker combo. None of my Motorola speakers came close. In the end I found
> a speaker from a failed power speaker system that I had relegated to the
> garage. I very much like the sound of that speaker and the K3s.
>   I use RX equalization AFTER I find a speaker that I can live with. I
> know that in this time of my life, my ears are not what they were  decades
> ago. I suspect that not only do I have known losses, but I may have certain
> frequency ranges that may be ANNOYING as well.
> I know back in my HiFi / Stereo days with vacuum tube amplifiers, speaker
> selection was pretty simple for me. When I transitioned to solid state
> amps, not so much.
>
> To anyone who dislikes the sound of your K3 or K3s, my experience is try
> LOTs of different speakers. I saw huge differences, not subtle, but HUGE.
> I'll bet you can find one that will work satisfactorily. These solid state
> AF amplifiers just may be more fussy about that transducer that is attached
> than what some of us would expect.
>
> 73 Bill K0AWU
>
>
>
>       From: ke9uw <[hidden email]>
>  To: [hidden email]
>  Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 8:30 AM
>  Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3S audio board for K3 upgrade?
>
> I had a 480 and did not care for the sort of pinched up audio compared to
> say
> the 850.
> I am using a couple of 6 by 9 speakers in enclosures on the K3, one on each
> side of the stereo and the sound is just fine. As they say, opinions vary
> and have so many variables like speakers, what/how/where you operate,
> physical hearing anomalies, etc. that audio reviews are just about useless.
>
>
>
> -----
> Chuck, KE9UW
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3S-audio-board-for-K3-upgrade-tp7615346p7615445.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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Jim Brown-10]

On Tue,3/22/2016 7:58 AM, Charlie T, K3ICH wrote:
>   There was a very pronounced peak in his
> audio around 300 hz and practically no energy past
> about 800Hz. No distortion, just a widely skewed
> audio passband.  It was a boatanchor radio, so
> there was something obviously wrong somewhere as
> everyone else sounded great.

Yes, this is one of the most common causes of lousy SSB audio. Here's a
tutorial I wrote for the most recent issue of the National Contest Journal.

k9yc.com/ContestAudio.pdf

73, Jim K9YC
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Jim Brown-10]

On Tue,3/22/2016 8:36 AM, Bill Davis via Elecraft wrote:
>   I use RX equalization AFTER I find a speaker that I can live with.

I suspect that the frequency response of the Motorola speakers are
carefully shaped for maximum speech intelligibility in a noisy
environment, and their response may be peaked a bit in the upper speech
range. In the years when those loudspeakers were developed, Motorola was
the premier 2-way radio company on the planet, and full of great engineers.

IMO, the BEST speakers and headphones for ham radio are those which have
FLAT response (that is, equal at all frequencies) within the speech
range (100 - 5,000 Hz) and low distortion. If they have wider response
(like hi-fi speakers), that's still good. And if their low frequency
response is rolled off, that's even better!

I would adjust RXEQ WHILE choosing an external speaker, tweaking
settings for each one as you try it. If, for example, peaky response of
a particular loudspeaker bothers you but it's a good quality (low
distortion) loudspeaker, RXEQ can be used to reduce that peak to make
your ear/brain happy.

73, Jim K9YC
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Edward R Cole]

two more cents - are we rich, yet?

Couple more comments on K3 audio quality and etc.

The MOT metal mobile speakers were designed for FM mobile and did
sound good.  I don't have any so have not tried marrying one to a
K3.  SSB sounds different than FM, especially full quieted FM.
Installed a lot of Micors, Mitrek, Syntors, etc.

I did note the difference in sound when I went from the old FT-847 to
the K3.  Did take a little time to adjust to "its" sound.
I have made a couple adjustments in the AGC attack with subtle
changes in the sound.  But boy did it hear better on HF!

The full spectrum response of the SONY MDR-V600 stereo headset is nicest.

I often run bw down to as low as 2.1 KHz on SSB  (2.8-KHz filter) and
that reduces white noise level.  SNR is directly proportional to
bw.  So that improves the SNR.  Of course in a crowded band it also
reduces QRM.  HF QRM is not so bad here as it must be in civilized
areas.  Year's ago I ran off the grid on batteries and had S0 noise
floor on 75m phone using a TS-180S and dipole.  I could really hear
the weak one's.  Now its more likely S5 noise floor (different radio
- different s-meter - on the grid!).

Not sure upgrading my K3 audio board would make enough difference for
me.  Any guess on cost and difficulty of installation?  I have yet to
install my new synth boards - too busy building 2m amplifiers.  It
will be interesting to see what difference that will make.

I think audio quality is too personal to provide universal
solution.  In the old day's choosing a stereo or speakers, I would go
to an up-scale shop in Hollywood or Beverly Hills to chose the
equipment as they had lavish sound rooms - then head back to West LA
discount stores to buy one.  I found JBL were the best to my ears.



73, Ed - KL7UW, AL7EB (1982), KN8MWA (1958)
http://www.kl7uw.com
     "Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
     [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Joe Subich, W4TV-4]

On 3/22/2016 1:30 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
 >
> IMO, the BEST speakers and headphones for ham radio are those which
> have FLAT response (that is, equal at all frequencies) within the
> speech range (100 - 5,000 Hz) and low distortion. If they have wider
> response (like hi-fi speakers), that's still good. And if their low
> frequency response is rolled off, that's even better!

I've found "Pyle 3" Mini Cube" speakers excellent for the K3.  Not
only are they small (about 3 5/8" x 3 5/8" x 4 1/2") their response
is noticeably rolled off below 100 Hz - and, I suspect somewhat below
200 Hz.  These "front facing" speakers are a treat with the K3 and
most other rigs I've had a chance to try them with ... and they even
manage to make the "flat to zero Hz" ESSB fools sound reasonable.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Gary Smith-2]

I so agree.

What I use are a pair of speakers with a truly flat response all the
way from 80 Hz to 22 KHz but extreme overkill...: Mackie HR824
powered Studio monitors. They are perfect to me and extremely flat. I
already owned them because I used to do recording. In this vein, if
you can find a cheap studio monitor on fleabay or wherever, you will
surely love it with your K3s/K3.

73,

Gary
KA1J

> IMO, the BEST speakers and headphones for ham radio are those which have
> FLAT response (that is, equal at all frequencies) within the speech
> range (100 - 5,000 Hz) and low distortion. If they have wider response
> (like hi-fi speakers), that's still good. And if their low frequency
> response is rolled off, that's even better!
>
> I would adjust RXEQ WHILE choosing an external speaker, tweaking
> settings for each one as you try it. If, for example, peaky response of
> a particular loudspeaker bothers you but it's a good quality (low
> distortion) loudspeaker, RXEQ can be used to reduce that peak to make
> your ear/brain happy.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]