Elecraft

K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

Classic

List

Threaded

14 messages Options

K5WA

K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

Maybe I've missed an answer since I don't read all the posts but I'm
wondering if the K4HD's design should beat the K3S's on Sherwood's RX list.
I'm sure it will be at least a year before that list is updated with a
production K4HD so plenty of time to speculate. I have not seen any
detailed specifications out yet but it confuses me when I read that the K4HD
will have a K3S front end. I've got 3 K3's that are fully upgraded so maybe
the K4 line is just a nice product packaging idea and not a serious jump in
performance? As you can tell, I am no RF engineer but simply a numbers guy
who is interested in having a better performing rig purely for ego sake
because the K3 already supplies and outperforms my contesting skills
significantly.

Maybe this is an Eric or Wayne question.

Thanks,

Bob K5WA

______________________________________________________________
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]

Grant Youngman-2

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

The way I operate, I’d probably be fine with a DX-20 and SX-99 :-)

Grant NQ5T
K3 #2091 KX3 #8342

> As you can tell, I am no RF engineer but simply a numbers guy
> who is interested in having a better performing rig purely for ego sake
> because the K3 already supplies and outperforms my contesting skills
> significantly.

______________________________________________________________
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]

Drew AF2Z

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

I wouldn't go that far but a much improved standing on the Sherwood list
would probably be lost on me. I would be more interested in the improved
NB/NR processing of the K4 and several operational features.

73,
Drew
AF2Z

On 06/06/19 13:27, Grant Youngman wrote:

> The way I operate, I’d probably be fine with a DX-20 and SX-99 :-)
>
> Grant NQ5T
> K3 #2091 KX3 #8342
>
>> As you can tell, I am no RF engineer but simply a numbers guy
>> who is interested in having a better performing rig purely for ego sake
>> because the K3 already supplies and outperforms my contesting skills
>> significantly.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]
>

Scott Manthe-2

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

In reply to this post by K5WA

Where a particular rig lands on "The List" isn't the only consideration.
The K4 seems improved in a number of ways beyond its raw performance
compared to the K3. It is a more modern design (direct sampling) with
the ability to add extra features as needed. I'm not sure I'll be
upgrading soon, but the package is a lot nicer and the interface
improvements (band stacking, etc.) seem to be a real step forward.

73,
Scott N9AA

On 6/6/19 12:38 PM, K5WA wrote:

> Maybe I've missed an answer since I don't read all the posts but I'm
> wondering if the K4HD's design should beat the K3S's on Sherwood's RX list.
> I'm sure it will be at least a year before that list is updated with a
> production K4HD so plenty of time to speculate. I have not seen any
> detailed specifications out yet but it confuses me when I read that the K4HD
> will have a K3S front end. I've got 3 K3's that are fully upgraded so maybe
> the K4 line is just a nice product packaging idea and not a serious jump in
> performance? As you can tell, I am no RF engineer but simply a numbers guy
> who is interested in having a better performing rig purely for ego sake
> because the K3 already supplies and outperforms my contesting skills
> significantly.
>
>
>
> Maybe this is an Eric or Wayne question.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob K5WA
>
> ______________________________________________________________

Grant Youngman-2

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

Certainly agree. And you never know — if the K4 has a life-cycle similar to the K3/K3S, there may one day be new (affordable) plug-in 24 bit A/D boards without having to buy.a whole new radio :-)

Grant NQ5T
K3 #2091 KX3 #8342

> On Jun 6, 2019, at 1:47 PM, Scott Manthe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Where a particular rig lands on "The List" isn't the only consideration. The K4 seems improved in a number of ways beyond its raw performance compared to the K3. It is a more modern design (direct sampling) with the ability to add extra features as needed. I'm not sure I'll be upgrading soon, but the package is a lot nicer and the interface improvements (band stacking, etc.) seem to be a real step forward.
>

______________________________________________________________
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]

wayne burdick

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

Administrator

To quote the K4 product brochure:

Modular, upgradeable architecture

The K4 is our radio for the present and foreseeable future, extensible in both software and hardware.

Wayne
N6KR

> On Jun 6, 2019, at 10:53 AM, Grant Youngman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Certainly agree. And you never know — if the K4 has a life-cycle similar to the K3/K3S, there may one day be new (affordable) plug-in 24 bit A/D boards without having to buy.a whole new radio :-)
>
> Grant NQ5T
> K3 #2091 KX3 #8342
>
>> On Jun 6, 2019, at 1:47 PM, Scott Manthe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Where a particular rig lands on "The List" isn't the only consideration. The K4 seems improved in a number of ways beyond its raw performance compared to the K3. It is a more modern design (direct sampling) with the ability to add extra features as needed. I'm not sure I'll be upgrading soon, but the package is a lot nicer and the interface improvements (band stacking, etc.) seem to be a real step forward.
>>

hbjr

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

Speaking of the foreseeable future 😉

How long will the K3S be in production? I'm a new owner as of last fall and hope pieces/parts and upgrades will continue for some time.

Hank
K4HYJ
K3s, P3, KX3

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Wayne Burdick
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2019 1:59 PM
To: Grant Youngman <[hidden email]>
Cc: Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

To quote the K4 product brochure:

Modular, upgradeable architecture

The K4 is our radio for the present and foreseeable future, extensible in both software and hardware.

Wayne
N6KR

> On Jun 6, 2019, at 10:53 AM, Grant Youngman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Certainly agree. And you never know — if the K4 has a life-cycle
> similar to the K3/K3S, there may one day be new (affordable) plug-in
> 24 bit A/D boards without having to buy.a whole new radio :-)
>
> Grant NQ5T
> K3 #2091 KX3 #8342
>
>> On Jun 6, 2019, at 1:47 PM, Scott Manthe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Where a particular rig lands on "The List" isn't the only consideration. The K4 seems improved in a number of ways beyond its raw performance compared to the K3. It is a more modern design (direct sampling) with the ability to add extra features as needed. I'm not sure I'll be upgrading soon, but the package is a lot nicer and the interface improvements (band stacking, etc.) seem to be a real step forward.
>>

______________________________________________________________
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]

Wes Stewart-2

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

In reply to this post by K5WA

Rob doesn't use Elecraft equipment so I'm not sure whether he reads this list of
not. I do know that he has repeatedly said that any radio in the top 10 or more
on his list would suit almost any user. He also tries to implore people to NOT
judge a radio purely on the sort order of the presented data. Many other factors
are important too: ergonomics and reliability are prime concerns for me.

Even though my personal radio (loaned to Rob for testing) is near the top of the
sorted list, based on my criteria it would be nowhere close to equipment I've
owned before. YMMV

Wes N7WS

On 6/6/2019 9:38 AM, K5WA wrote:

Bob McGraw - K4TAX

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

Yes, yes, and yes.   One can download the Receiver Test Report and
import it into an EXCEL file.   That will then allow one to sort on 1 or
2 or 3 or more different criteria.

The 2 kHz Narrow Spaced number, to me, is not as important as some other
numbers.   It is nice to have a radio, K3S, that falls in the upper
position of the list, but I suggest one look at "OTHER NUMBERS".

I do wish he would post transmit IMD numbers.   You might surprised at
the radios that are clean and the radios that are.......well not so clean.

73

Bob, K4TAX

On 6/8/2019 1:13 PM, Wes wrote:

> Rob doesn't use Elecraft equipment so I'm not sure whether he reads
> this list of not. I do know that he has repeatedly said that any
> radio in the top 10 or more on his list would suit almost any user.
> He also tries to implore people to NOT judge a radio purely on the
> sort order of the presented data. Many other factors are important
> too: ergonomics and reliability are prime concerns for me.
>
> Even though my personal radio (loaned to Rob for testing) is near the
> top of the sorted list, based on my criteria it would be nowhere close
> to equipment I've owned before. YMMV
>
> Wes N7WS
>
>

Jim Brown-10

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

On 6/8/2019 3:08 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote:
> I do wish he would post transmit IMD numbers. You might surprised at
> the radios that are clean and the radios that are.......well not so
> clean.

There are alternative measurements, done by ARRL as part of their lab
tests, that quantify an even more important performance spec -- CW
keying bandwidth. Several years ago, after discussions about excessive
CW bandwidth at a WRTC, N0AX arranged for me to get ARRL's data in
electronic form. I exported that data to a spreadsheet and plotted data
for most of the rigs on the same graph. That report is at
http://k9yc.com/TXNoise.pdf

I've also done some of my own measurements, using my second K3/P3. The
first set of data is at http://k9yc.com/P3_Spectrum_Measurements.pdf A
second set of data focuses on the FTDX5000. I measured my neighbor's rig
before and after he had loaded Yaesu's "fix" for it's very excessive
bandwidth. It's at http://k9yc.com/FTDX5000_Report.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]

ANDY DURBIN

K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

In reply to this post by K5WA

"I do wish he would post transmit IMD numbers. You might surprised at
the radios that are clean and the radios that are.......well not so clean."

Rob previously owned a Kenwood TS-990 and now owns, among other rigs, a Kenwood TS-890. He is active on groups.io for those radios and quite often posts very interesting comments on these and other radio. There are lots of subtleties that are not shown by reading the table alone and Rob has posted several comments about TX IMD and TX harmonics.

It bugs me that so many latch on to "top of the list" and I have, perhaps tongue in check (perhaps not), suggested to Rob that he sort on some completely irrelevant parameter to see people's reactions. I wonder how many would dump what they had and buy new "top of list".

In my opinion being very familiar with what you own, and knowing how to get the best out of it, is far more important than having the "best" rig. I've been a TS-590S owner for nearly 8 years and still not seen anything that would tempt me to get rid of either of them.

73,
Andy, k3wyc

______________________________________________________________
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 H Russell

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

In reply to this post by Wes Stewart-2

Even though my personal radio (loaned to Rob for testing) is near the top of the sorted list, based on my criteria it would be nowhere close to equipment I've owned before. YMMV

Wes N7WS

>>> Other radios nowhere close? Sounds like you have some potentially very useful information. Details, please!

THANKS,
73 ED W2RF

______________________________________________________________
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]

NK7Z

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10

What a nice piece of work Jim, thank you!

73s and thanks,
Dave (NK7Z)
https://www.nk7z.net
ARRL Technical Specialist
ARRL Volunteer Examiner
ARRL Asst. Director, NW Division, Technical Resource

On 6/8/19 3:53 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

> On 6/8/2019 3:08 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote:
>> I do wish he would post transmit IMD numbers. You might surprised at
>> the radios that are clean and the radios that are.......well not so
>> clean.
>
> There are alternative measurements, done by ARRL as part of their lab
> tests, that quantify an even more important performance spec -- CW
> keying bandwidth. Several years ago, after discussions about excessive
> CW bandwidth at a WRTC, N0AX arranged for me to get ARRL's data in
> electronic form. I exported that data to a spreadsheet and plotted data
> for most of the rigs on the same graph. That report is at
> http://k9yc.com/TXNoise.pdf
>
> I've also done some of my own measurements, using my second K3/P3. The
> first set of data is at http://k9yc.com/P3_Spectrum_Measurements.pdf A
> second set of data focuses on the FTDX5000. I measured my neighbor's rig
> before and after he had loaded Yaesu's "fix" for it's very excessive
> bandwidth. It's at http://k9yc.com/FTDX5000_Report.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]

Wes Stewart-2

Re: K4 standing on Sherwood's RX list

In reply to this post by Bob McGraw - K4TAX

I agree that TX IMD is an important parameter. In my experience (measuring a
sample of two, my K3 and K3S) regrettably, there is no one number to be
published. IMD varies with Vcc (or Vdd), output power, load Z and most
interesting, frequency. In a K3(S)/100 case, there is another wrinkle, there
are two PAs, LPA and HPA and those numbers vary as well.

If you want to cherry-pick data, you can get pretty much any answer you want.

Wes N7WS

On 6/8/2019 3:08 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote:

> Yes, yes, and yes.   One can download the Receiver Test Report and import it
> into an EXCEL file.   That will then allow one to sort on 1 or 2 or 3 or more
> different criteria.
>
> The 2 kHz Narrow Spaced number, to me, is not as important as some other
> numbers.   It is nice to have a radio, K3S, that falls in the upper position
> of the list, but I suggest one look at "OTHER NUMBERS".
>
> I do wish he would post transmit IMD numbers.   You might surprised at the
> radios that are clean and the radios that are.......well not so clean.
>
> 73
>
> Bob, K4TAX
>
>
> On 6/8/2019 1:13 PM, Wes wrote:
>> Rob doesn't use Elecraft equipment so I'm not sure whether he reads this list
>> of not. I do know that he has repeatedly said that any radio in the top 10
>> or more on his list would suit almost any user. He also tries to implore
>> people to NOT judge a radio purely on the sort order of the presented data.
>> Many other factors are important too: ergonomics and reliability are prime
>> concerns for me.
>>
>> Even though my personal radio (loaned to Rob for testing) is near the top of
>> the sorted list, based on my criteria it would be nowhere close to equipment
>> I've owned before. YMMV
>>
>> Wes N7WS