Elecraft

K4

Classic

List

Threaded

32 messages Options

George Thornton

Re: K4

If you are used to working large rigs with lots of buttons, I can see how the K3/K3s might be an adjustment.

I have found the K3 controls to be natural and appropriate. For most of my operation the buttons and dials I need to use in action are right at my fingertips. Once set up correctly, I find little need to venture into the menu system on a day to day basis.

Sure. It would be nice to have band and mode stacks. But is it that big a deal, worth spending many thousands of dollars to change?

We will gain nothing in performance with a bigger rig. Already Elecraft outperforms ALL of the big boxes on the market, per Sherwood Engineering.

Here is an elegant and simple solution for the K4 that will satisfy the big box demand.

Design a modular big front panel that simply plugs into the K3. Design should be relatively easy because you don't have to change the K3s itself, just add a command and control interface for the larger front panel. Can you use the accessory port or do you need more connections? I don't know I am not an engineer. Currently computer radio control programs work with a simple DB9 connection.

Then give an option of mounting the K3s in a larger box. That would have the added convenience of making it easier for us klutzes to be able to get into the rig to make changes such as adding filters.

So, you would have options:
1. standard K3s
2. Standalone large front panel. Put your K3s under the table and mount your front panel wherever.
3. K3s in a larger box with the larger front panel mounted on the front. You can even add options to the large box such as nicer stereo built in speakers, even a built in AC to DC power supply.

It will all still be the best HF radio in the world, made right here in the US.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Martin Sole
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2018 9:39 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4

I'll weigh in on this a little before it gets stamped on again as being, unfortunately, irrelevant and pointless.

I think there is a big gaping hole in the Elecraft product line. Not in performance terms but more in ergonomics. A K3 has been my primary radio for a few years now and before that an Orion, before that a TS940,
TS830- etc etc. Performance wise there is no doubt the K3 bests them all, I recently built a K2 and think that's scarily good in raw performance terms as well. My K3 is pretty much fully kitted out and I have a P3 as well which is extremely useful and they're going nowhere.

From the super small super portable super capable K2 and KX3 to the small and portable and no less capable K3/K3S their market segments are well covered but KenYaeCom have surely sold enough
TS990,FT9000,IC7800/50/51 that shows well the market demand for a quality high end desktop sized radio. If the pictures on QRZ are anything to go by not everyone operates out of a shoe box with many having dedicated rooms for their radio hobbies. If the shoe box is your limitation then the K3 is undoubtedly a superb choice but where space is less restricted a bit more in the way of panel acreage might well sway a lot more FT9000/TS900/IC78xx users I feel, not to mention those of us who just feel the K3 package is, for a desktop radio, just a bit too much of a compromise.

Key requirements on my end after considerable K3 usage. A better more up to date menu system that either removes or better, handles the myriad un-intuitive selections. There are a number of menu options which unless you have significant handbook familiarity lack explanation about additional keypad presses. There are even some for which software updates need to be consulted though that is a different matter. Some menu choices could well be better homed as front panel controls. The keypad is another area I find seriously lacking for a top end product.
Again, great for the type of product it is but I find it lacking. Band keys, mode keys, a proper band stacking register, a better way to deal with the sub receiver settings, more, bigger and wider spaced control knobs, yes all of this needs panel space but that shouldn't really need to be a problem. It's possible the entire form factor could use a rethink, do we need a box 12 inches deep. Why not a front panel that is
16 inches by 6 inches on a radio that is just 5 inches deep. Overall it would likely be a similar volume and contain just as much under the skin. The Orion was probably overkill with the amount of fresh air in every box, some careful plug in board stacking could have reduced the box depth by half whilst retaining the same front panel space. A good display with all info including the somewhat obligatory scope and waterfall properly integrated seems a no brainer today I guess, of course with a port for connection of 36 inch full 4k displays, ideally with different screen displays.

I like the PA options today 10 or 100 watts, not sure how many are sold as just 10 watt radios though. In a bigger box, something like the 7850, 16x17x6, it should be possible to integrate the KPA500 allowing for a
500 watt transceiver in one box.

Where space is a premium the integration of multiple controls carefully arranged for maximum apparent efficiency is obviously a good thing though I feel it can be overdone, the poor operability of the sub receiver is a case in point and I've had heat of the moment run ins with the mic gain compressor and monitor controls as well. Great when it works as you think of it, less so when you're acting more by feel and intuition doing 6 other things at once and get a mis-press.

Much of this is software, packaging and ergonomics/HMI, so far as the pure RF side is concerned it's clear that things are evolving still and it can't be long before pure wideband direct digital SDR becomes the mainstream.

It's hard to fault the K3 on so many levels, it's just such a great radio but it's by no means an unflawed or unlimited radio and there are areas of the ham radio business Elecraft are yet to tread.

Oh and I'd love them to do a 2-35Mhz 125 watt radio suitable for commercial use. So many opportunities where the options today are either VK mobiles or US mil spec but that really is another topic.

Martin, HS0ZED

On 19/05/2018 17:38, Stefan von Baltz, DL1IAO wrote:

> Now that Eric is at the Hamvention we can not annoy him too much with
> mail overflow on this list ;-)
>
> - I would like to see Elecraft revising the NR-function. While you can achieve nearly infinite noise attenuation with the K3’s NR it comes at the cost of signal intelligibility. At least I have failed to hit a setting for CW which works for me. The NR also seems to be dependent on AGC settings. With the IC7851’s NR at ca. 9 o’clock the band noise is cut about in half without affecting signals, even when they are weak. I do not miss this much in everyday operation. But the additional band noise really hurts in my ears when doing SO2R causing fatigue and ultimately increased error rate.
>
> - I continue to be impressed by ICOM’s APF function. Combined with a few dB of additional amplification in the APF level menu this sort of has become a great „panic button“ for me when a weak station calls or QRM shows up. Elecrafts APF is way too sharp for this purpose. Maybe another APF with wider bandwidth could be added?
>
> - It might also be helpful to add a simplified NB-menu which selects among some of your favourite settings. If you are forced to dig into the NB-menu in the middle of the heat the DX will long be gone until you have found the right setting to get rid of noise.
>
> - Elecraft should consider adding mouse support for the panadapter.
>
> - Coming from ICOM rigs I noticed that the knob resolution seems slow. This sticks out with the filter, RIT and power knobs. Too much knob spinning required for my taste. However, this may be subjective and there are work-arounds.
>
> - I would also like to see Elecraft using higher quality buttons which are more responsive. When the K3 came out one of the reasons I never got one was the wobbling feel of the A/B (and other) knobs. It simply was not compatible with my style of operation which involves constantly switching VFOs when S&P. Yes, there are work-arounds, too.
>
>
> I just realize that most of it may be another software upgrade. No K4 required!
>
>
> 73,
>
> Stefan DL1IAO, SA3CWW/SM9A
>
>
> --
> Stefan v. Baltz
> [hidden email]
> http://www.dl1iao.com
>
>
>
>
>
>> Am 19.05.2018 um 06:59 schrieb Jim Brown <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> On 5/18/2018 7:43 PM, Ed W0YK wrote:
>>> There are ham reasons for this request, which I made to Wayne 2 years ago. We need a bit more RX/TX bandwidth for the combined JT65/9 modes.
>>>
>>> With WSJT, the upper end of the JT9 audio range is not available on the K3.
>> Hi Ed,
>>
>> FWIW, I regularly copied JT9 signals up to at least 3 kHz; remember that, in those days, JT9 typically started around 2 kHz baseband, and it is possible to open up the RX IF bandwidth wider than that 2.8 kHz roofing filter.
>>
>> And although the worm will hopefully turn back in favor of JT65/JT9 on 160M, those modes have virtually disappeared since FT8 was introduced. Last season, you, W6GJB, and I all worked SM6 on JT65, and WSJT-X decoder logged several dozen EU stations. This year, I hear east coast stations working (or at least calling) EU, but I've decoded ZERO EU using FT8. (For those reading the mail, all three of us are within about 20 miles of each other, 70 miles S of San Francisco. What I'd love to see is JT9 take over on 160M. If I'm not mistaken, it's good about 10 dB deeper into the noise than FT8.
>>
>> And while it's true that any of the slow WSJT modes would benefit from greater IF and audio bandwidth by providing space for more stations, few other rigs offer that.
>>
>> 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]
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

wb4jfi

Re: K4

I was thinking along similar lines. If enough hams find the smaller K3
front panel difficult, (and are adverse to present computer-based solutions)
maybe an external box that has LOTs of knobs, etc... that plugs into the K3
DB9, could be made. Using any one of several
microcomputers/microcontrollers, such a box could be designed. It might be
somewhat costly, as buttons, knobs, displays, are all physical devices that
cost $$. But, this might give some hams the best of both worlds. A compact
rig when needed, but lots of buttons, knobs, displays when someone wants
them.

I've done some limited K3/KX3 remote control with Arduinos (and wifi), I
doubt a simple Uno would be sufficient. But some device with more GPIO pins
and memory could certainly interface to the K3/KX3. Such as a Due,
Raspberry Pi, BeagleBone Black, Teensy, or even an Arduino Mega.

Interestingly, I now have three "retro" 8080 CP/M computers that use a Due
(or Mega) to emulate a whole Altair/IMSAI computer box. These devices have
enough I/O pins to support all the switches and LEDs of an original Altair
front panel and serial I/O - without any multiplexing. Using encoders
instead of pots would help reduce analog I/O for a radio interface for
example.

Is there much interest in such a device? If so, maybe a group could discuss
this more, and come up with some specific front panel control/display
requirements.

Note that I am happy with my K3 as-is. Also, several computer control
solutions already exist, so I assume that this would be a very limited
"market".
73, Terry, N4TLF (formally WB4JFI)

-----Original Message-----
From: George Thornton
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2018 1:49 PM
To: Martin Sole ; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4

If you are used to working large rigs with lots of buttons, I can see how
the K3/K3s might be an adjustment.

I have found the K3 controls to be natural and appropriate. For most of my
operation the buttons and dials I need to use in action are right at my
fingertips. Once set up correctly, I find little need to venture into the
menu system on a day to day basis.

Sure. It would be nice to have band and mode stacks. But is it that big a
deal, worth spending many thousands of dollars to change?

We will gain nothing in performance with a bigger rig. Already Elecraft
outperforms ALL of the big boxes on the market, per Sherwood Engineering.

Here is an elegant and simple solution for the K4 that will satisfy the big
box demand.

Design a modular big front panel that simply plugs into the K3. Design
should be relatively easy because you don't have to change the K3s itself,
just add a command and control interface for the larger front panel. Can
you use the accessory port or do you need more connections? I don't know I
am not an engineer. Currently computer radio control programs work with a
simple DB9 connection.

Then give an option of mounting the K3s in a larger box. That would have
the added convenience of making it easier for us klutzes to be able to get
into the rig to make changes such as adding filters.

So, you would have options:
1. standard K3s
2. Standalone large front panel. Put your K3s under the table and mount
your front panel wherever.
3. K3s in a larger box with the larger front panel mounted on the front.
You can even add options to the large box such as nicer stereo built in
speakers, even a built in AC to DC power supply.

It will all still be the best HF radio in the world, made right here in the
US.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Martin Sole
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2018 9:39 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4

I'll weigh in on this a little before it gets stamped on again as being,
unfortunately, irrelevant and pointless.

I think there is a big gaping hole in the Elecraft product line. Not in
performance terms but more in ergonomics. A K3 has been my primary radio for
a few years now and before that an Orion, before that a TS940,
TS830- etc etc. Performance wise there is no doubt the K3 bests them all, I
recently built a K2 and think that's scarily good in raw performance terms
as well. My K3 is pretty much fully kitted out and I have a P3 as well which
is extremely useful and they're going nowhere.

From the super small super portable super capable K2 and KX3 to the small
and portable and no less capable K3/K3S their market segments are well
covered but KenYaeCom have surely sold enough
TS990,FT9000,IC7800/50/51 that shows well the market demand for a quality
high end desktop sized radio. If the pictures on QRZ are anything to go by
not everyone operates out of a shoe box with many having dedicated rooms for
their radio hobbies. If the shoe box is your limitation then the K3 is
undoubtedly a superb choice but where space is less restricted a bit more in
the way of panel acreage might well sway a lot more FT9000/TS900/IC78xx
users I feel, not to mention those of us who just feel the K3 package is,
for a desktop radio, just a bit too much of a compromise.

Key requirements on my end after considerable K3 usage. A better more up to
date menu system that either removes or better, handles the myriad
un-intuitive selections. There are a number of menu options which unless you
have significant handbook familiarity lack explanation about additional
keypad presses. There are even some for which software updates need to be
consulted though that is a different matter. Some menu choices could well be
better homed as front panel controls. The keypad is another area I find
seriously lacking for a top end product.
Again, great for the type of product it is but I find it lacking. Band keys,
mode keys, a proper band stacking register, a better way to deal with the
sub receiver settings, more, bigger and wider spaced control knobs, yes all
of this needs panel space but that shouldn't really need to be a problem.
It's possible the entire form factor could use a rethink, do we need a box
12 inches deep. Why not a front panel that is
16 inches by 6 inches on a radio that is just 5 inches deep. Overall it
would likely be a similar volume and contain just as much under the skin.
The Orion was probably overkill with the amount of fresh air in every box,
some careful plug in board stacking could have reduced the box depth by half
whilst retaining the same front panel space. A good display with all info
including the somewhat obligatory scope and waterfall properly integrated
seems a no brainer today I guess, of course with a port for connection of 36
inch full 4k displays, ideally with different screen displays.

I like the PA options today 10 or 100 watts, not sure how many are sold as
just 10 watt radios though. In a bigger box, something like the 7850,
16x17x6, it should be possible to integrate the KPA500 allowing for a
500 watt transceiver in one box.

Where space is a premium the integration of multiple controls carefully
arranged for maximum apparent efficiency is obviously a good thing though I
feel it can be overdone, the poor operability of the sub receiver is a case
in point and I've had heat of the moment run ins with the mic gain
compressor and monitor controls as well. Great when it works as you think of
it, less so when you're acting more by feel and intuition doing 6 other
things at once and get a mis-press.

Much of this is software, packaging and ergonomics/HMI, so far as the pure
RF side is concerned it's clear that things are evolving still and it can't
be long before pure wideband direct digital SDR becomes the mainstream.

It's hard to fault the K3 on so many levels, it's just such a great radio
but it's by no means an unflawed or unlimited radio and there are areas of
the ham radio business Elecraft are yet to tread.

Oh and I'd love them to do a 2-35Mhz 125 watt radio suitable for commercial
use. So many opportunities where the options today are either VK mobiles or
US mil spec but that really is another topic.

Martin, HS0ZED

On 19/05/2018 17:38, Stefan von Baltz, DL1IAO wrote:

> Now that Eric is at the Hamvention we can not annoy him too much with
> mail overflow on this list ;-)
>
> - I would like to see Elecraft revising the NR-function. While you can
> achieve nearly infinite noise attenuation with the K3’s NR it comes at the
> cost of signal intelligibility. At least I have failed to hit a setting
> for CW which works for me. The NR also seems to be dependent on AGC
> settings. With the IC7851’s NR at ca. 9 o’clock the band noise is cut
> about in half without affecting signals, even when they are weak. I do not
> miss this much in everyday operation. But the additional band noise really
> hurts in my ears when doing SO2R causing fatigue and ultimately increased
> error rate.
>
> - I continue to be impressed by ICOM’s APF function. Combined with a few
> dB of additional amplification in the APF level menu this sort of has
> become a great „panic button“ for me when a weak station calls or QRM
> shows up. Elecrafts APF is way too sharp for this purpose. Maybe another
> APF with wider bandwidth could be added?
>
> - It might also be helpful to add a simplified NB-menu which selects among
> some of your favourite settings. If you are forced to dig into the NB-menu
> in the middle of the heat the DX will long be gone until you have found
> the right setting to get rid of noise.
>
> - Elecraft should consider adding mouse support for the panadapter.
>
> - Coming from ICOM rigs I noticed that the knob resolution seems slow.
> This sticks out with the filter, RIT and power knobs. Too much knob
> spinning required for my taste. However, this may be subjective and there
> are work-arounds.
>
> - I would also like to see Elecraft using higher quality buttons which are
> more responsive. When the K3 came out one of the reasons I never got one
> was the wobbling feel of the A/B (and other) knobs. It simply was not
> compatible with my style of operation which involves constantly switching
> VFOs when S&P. Yes, there are work-arounds, too.
>
>
> I just realize that most of it may be another software upgrade. No K4
> required!
>
>
> 73,
>
> Stefan DL1IAO, SA3CWW/SM9A
>
>
> --
> Stefan v. Baltz
> [hidden email]
> http://www.dl1iao.com
>
>
>
>
>
>> Am 19.05.2018 um 06:59 schrieb Jim Brown <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> On 5/18/2018 7:43 PM, Ed W0YK wrote:
>>> There are ham reasons for this request, which I made to Wayne 2 years
>>> ago. We need a bit more RX/TX bandwidth for the combined JT65/9 modes.
>>>
>>> With WSJT, the upper end of the JT9 audio range is not available on the
>>> K3.
>> Hi Ed,
>>
>> FWIW, I regularly copied JT9 signals up to at least 3 kHz; remember that,
>> in those days, JT9 typically started around 2 kHz baseband, and it is
>> possible to open up the RX IF bandwidth wider than that 2.8 kHz roofing
>> filter.
>>
>> And although the worm will hopefully turn back in favor of JT65/JT9 on
>> 160M, those modes have virtually disappeared since FT8 was introduced.
>> Last season, you, W6GJB, and I all worked SM6 on JT65, and WSJT-X decoder
>> logged several dozen EU stations. This year, I hear east coast stations
>> working (or at least calling) EU, but I've decoded ZERO EU using FT8.
>> (For those reading the mail, all three of us are within about 20 miles of
>> each other, 70 miles S of San Francisco. What I'd love to see is JT9 take
>> over on 160M. If I'm not mistaken, it's good about 10 dB deeper into the
>> noise than FT8.
>>
>> And while it's true that any of the slow WSJT modes would benefit from
>> greater IF and audio bandwidth by providing space for more stations, few
>> other rigs offer that.
>>
>> 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]
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

______________________________________________________________
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

Re: K4

In reply to this post by Martin Sole-3

On 5/19/2018 9:38 AM, Martin Sole wrote:
> A better more up to date menu system that either removes or better,
> handles the myriad un-intuitive selections. There are a number of menu
> options which unless you have significant handbook familiarity lack
> explanation about additional keypad presses. There are even some for
> which software updates need to be consulted though that is a different
> matter. Some menu choices could well be better homed as front panel
> controls.

My experience is quite different. From the beginning (in 2008), I found
the user interface very well thought out. Maybe that's because I started
by RTFM. Everything I need while operating is on the front panel. The
menus are organized so that they are almost never needed during
operation except to fix a setting that was wrong in the first place. I
can't remember the last time I needed to go into menus for anything but
setup with new outboard equipment.

My K3s replaced a pair of FT1000MPs. Everything about the K3 performance
and user interface is far superior. AND the change freed up a LOT of
space on my operating desk!

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]

Bill Frantz

Re: K4

My experience is similar to Jim's. I used an Icom 706MK2G where
the UI drove me up the wall. I particularly like the way I can
change between CW, digital, and voice with the K3 without having
to change plugs like I need to on the KX3.

One improvement I can think of in the K3 UI is in setting the
noise reduction parameters. They exist on two dimensions, but
the adjustment is only done with one knob. Perhaps the
adjustment would be more intuitive if the two bandwidth
adjustment knobs -- shift/lo and hi/width -- were temporarily
changed the adjust the two dimensions until leaving NR
adjustment mode.

73 Bill AE6JV

On 5/19/18 at 11:51 AM, [hidden email] (Jim Brown) wrote:

>My experience is quite different. From the beginning (in 2008),
>I found the user interface very well thought out. Maybe that's
>because I started by RTFM. Everything I need while operating
>is on the front panel. The menus are organized so that they are
>almost never needed during operation except to fix a setting
>that was wrong in the first place. I can't remember the last
>time I needed to go into menus for anything but setup with new
>outboard equipment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz | Concurrency is hard. 12 out | Periwinkle
(408)356-8506 | 10 programmers get it wrong. | 16345
Englewood Ave
www.pwpconsult.com | - Jeff Frantz | Los Gatos,
CA 95032

______________________________________________________________
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]

K7TV

Re: K4

In reply to this post by Martin Sole-3

I am currently using two K3 radios with various updates including the new synthesizers, and see no reason to go the the K3S model. Years ago I added the second receiver to my original K3. I liked the diversity capability, but I am not much of a DX'er and eventually got rid of the second receiver.

I went to the K3 from an FT-1000D, and found the K3 user interface very well thought out. Not at all hard to learn with respect to the most needed controls, although more obscure functions still have me looking in the manual. With that said, and since we are discussing possible improvements, I can suggest the following:

I immediately missed the lack of band and mode buttons. Not a big deal, but still noticeable on a frequent basis after many years.

The 4 controls with dual green LED's have a flimsy, cheap feel. The combination of multiple functions is perfect, but something used so often should feel super solid and expensive.
My short term memory is bad, and I constantly find myself activating one of these controls just to see the current power setting and cw speed etc. Dedicated display real estate would be an improvement. I am ashamed to say that I haven't looked closely at whether one can always display the current setting witout changing it, but the reality as of right now is that I frequently go through the motions of changing a setting just to get it displayed, and then changing it back. This is a lot of wasted effort.

The pushbuttons can sometimes malfunction if one doesn't push hard enough, and the dual functions (good idea in general) should be enough justification for buttons with a "Rolls Royce feel". In some cases dedicated buttons would be justified as opposed to the dual functions. I got the DVR option for one of the radios and expected it to be used a lot for getting a second chance to copy something deep in the noise during a contest. I actually never use it because I am not consistent enough in achieving the HOLD of the button that is required, especially in a busy situation. There were several reasons I sold the 2nd receiver. Not involved in DX chasing, I didn't have enough need, and I didn't have enough real estate to make the most of the diversity capability. For years I didn't have much time to operate, and I often updated the K3 firmware just to get on the air for a short period of time. This erased my settings to suppress the birdies caused by the second receiver. Being a b
it of a perfectionist, I would spend an hour entering new settings. Yes, most of those birdies were weak enough that they didn't affect my ability to copy any given signal, but when tuning around each birdie would cause me to pause unnecessarigy for a fraction of a second. Yes, I could have spent some more time than I did adjusting the cable positions inside the radio to minimize the strength of the birdies, but I did spend time on it, and noone has told me that that would eliminate them entirely. I would hope that the K4 will change something fundamentally in the design so as to effect complete elimination of the birdies. Last but not least, I was never comfortable with the user interface for the second receiver. The status of it needs to be more visible through dedicated display real estate.

Although one can argue for additions to the front panel controls and display items, I would not want anything like the size of yakencom top-of-the-line monsters. For one thing, I want my radios to be easily liftable. Something like my old FT-1000D is a nightmare to lift. Also, too much front panel real estate is a problem in SO2R operations, where you have to reach everything quickly. I think most if not all of what I have asked for above could be achieved in a front panel size matching that of the KPA1500. This would be a logical move for Elecraft. Since I have added P3's to both radios, I wouldn't consider being without them. I doubt that a P3-size screen could fit in the KPA1500 size front panel, but since the P3 takes up the space anyway within the reach of the SO2R operator, I would be fine with the KPA1500-sized front panel lengthened by a P3 width. Surely, the combination of the two units would make possible some improvements in panadapter controls and, additional use
s for panadapter screen display items.

Although I mostly operate cw, I have recently been on 20 ssb a bit. I have found that most ssb stations on 20 are effectively channelized. When manually scanning the band I save a lot of time by using the RIT knob as a tuning knob with 0.5 kHz steps. I sometimes wish that knob were bigger and with better feel. The high resolution of the P3 display shows great differences between different stations, and the visual differences often correlate with what one hears. If a station has inadequate emphasis on the highs (or excessive lows), that is easily seen. Also, some stations stand out for having clean smooth flanks, while others have ragged flanks. IC-7300 stations seem to consistently be in the clean-looking group, and sound a lot better than stations with muddy flanks. I have not gotten a feel for where K3/K3S stations fall on the scale, but notice that I haven't been getting a lot of compliments recently compared to years ago. If indeed the K3/K3S should be a little behind at
this time, I would guess it might show up visually on a good panadapter, and that would reinforce any negative impression from the audio. Then of course the muddy signals I see on the P3 may result mostly from overmodulating etc and not necessarily from the equipment design. Anyway, I think many or most of the panadapters that people have built into their radios are inferior to the P3, and don't show much detail in an ssb signal.

73,
Erik K7TV

______________________________________________________________
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]

Buddy Brannan

Re: K4

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

So…you want a new rig for new rig’s sake? Yaecomwoodlinco already do that. …

> On May 18, 2018, at 3:36 PM, mark roz via Elecraft <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Wow. No K4 at Dayton?
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Clay Autery-2

Re: K4

In reply to this post by Stefan von Baltz, DL1IAO

I've been working in the yard all day rather than having ANY fun at my
bench, so I am a little cranky. I recognize this, and am consciously
going to respond inline with the intent of NOT being overly cranky...
<smile>

On 05/19/18 05:38, Stefan von Baltz, DL1IAO wrote:
> - I would like to see Elecraft revising the NR-function. While you can achieve nearly infinite noise attenuation with the K3’s NR it comes at the cost of signal intelligibility. At least I have failed to hit a setting for CW which works for me. The NR also seems to be dependent on AGC settings. With the IC7851’s NR at ca. 9 o’clock the band noise is cut about in half without affecting signals, even when they are weak. I do not miss this much in everyday operation. But the additional band noise really hurts in my ears when doing SO2R causing fatigue and ultimately increased error rate.
I know NOTHING of the "I" radios including their NR or NB capabilities
or approach.
I DO know that Elecraft's NR system has never failed me. I failed IT in
the beginning, but not PROPERLY EDUCATING myself on its operation and
PRACTICING the task until it become second nature, like tuning the VFO.
Once you have actually used it and understand it, you will find that you
can zoom in on the right NR selection in the heat of battle just fine.
<Smile>

> - I continue to be impressed by ICOM’s APF function. Combined with a few dB of additional amplification in the APF level menu this sort of has become a great „panic button“ for me when a weak station calls or QRM shows up. Elecrafts APF is way too sharp for this purpose. Maybe another APF with wider bandwidth could be added?
Again, I know nothing of the APF function on the "I" brand. But I
absolutely LOVE the APF on my K3s. Yeah, it's narrow.... that's the
point. The trick is to do things right from the beginning.... First,
you need to tune the frequency properly.. Use the FINE setting and dial
it in to the 1 Hz. If you get "lost" use SPOT to get in the
neighborhood again and then tune. This is ONE of the reasons I have the
better TXCO, use a good time source, and keep my set calibrated as
accurately as possible with the tools I have at hand.

You can shift the APF center freq, but that's 5 Hz.... and a workaround
for lazy tuning. Another option is to prepare your presets and set APF
to be ON on one or the other. That way you don't even have to reach
over to that button panel. You can stay below the screen around the VFO.

> - Elecraft should consider adding mouse support for the panadapter.
THIS would be great... I'd love to have point and click tuning at least.

> - Coming from ICOM rigs I noticed that the knob resolution seems slow. This sticks out with the filter, RIT and power knobs. Too much knob spinning required for my taste. However, this may be subjective and there are work-arounds.
"Slow knob resolution"? You mean high resolution, right? Because
that's what they are. I absolutely love them. Not twitchy at all and
give me finer control over settings.... Again, the key to making these
"slow" knobs hum right along is PRACTICE using them.

> - I would also like to see Elecraft using higher quality buttons which are more responsive. When the K3 came out one of the reasons I never got one was the wobbling feel of the A/B (and other) knobs. It simply was not compatible with my style of operation which involves constantly switching VFOs when S&P. Yes, there are work-arounds, too.
I'm actually 180 degrees out from you on the push buttons..... they are
"wobbly" so you can hit them at larger angles (activation cone). This
is awesome for touch tuning.... mobile.... contesting.... et al. They
actually remind me of the buttons on a lot of military gear.

Y'all have a great evening!
73,

______________________
Clay Autery, KY5G
(318) 518-1389

______________________________________________________________
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]

Clay Autery-2

Re: K4

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

Mmmmm..... ESSB can transmit with right at 4 kHz bandwidth...

I can't imagine that something can't be done in firmware to make it
possible in a digital mode....

WHY are they allowing digital modes to have such a huge bandwidth?
Seems counter-intuitive to me, but I am not a digital guy.

73,

______________________
Clay Autery, KY5G
(318) 518-1389

On 05/19/18 07:07, Ed W0YK wrote:
> That's fine for decode, but transmit uses the 2.8 kHz filter.
> 73,Ed W0YK
> -------- Original message --------From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <[hidden email]> Date: 5/19/18 8:01 AM (GMT-05:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4
> Ed,
>
>

______________________________________________________________
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]

Dave Fugleberg

Re: K4

Clay, the individual signal with many of these digital modes modes is
actually quite narrow, on the order of tens of hertz. It's just that by
convention, everybody uses one SSB frequency for a given mode (such as FT-8
on 14.074). That means there may be dozens of QSOs going on in the
equivalent bandwidth of one SSB conversation. The computer decodes all the
signals in the receiver passband all at once, but you need to pick a spot
within that bandwidth to place your transmit signal.
Obviously if you pick a spot outside the transmitter's audio band pass,
things won't work too well.
That's not really an issue with FT8 if the software is properly configured,
as it will automatically shift the VFO slightly on transmit to keep your
chosen transmit audio frequency in the sweet spot of the transmitter audio
bandpass.
Fortunately, this tends to keep all that FT8 activity within about a 4 kHz
slice of the band, so the rest of us can easily avoid it if we choose to.
On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 10:00 PM Clay Autery <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Mmmmm..... ESSB can transmit with right at 4 kHz bandwidth...
>
> I can't imagine that something can't be done in firmware to make it
> possible in a digital mode....
>
> WHY are they allowing digital modes to have such a huge bandwidth?
> Seems counter-intuitive to me, but I am not a digital guy.
>
> 73,
>
> ______________________
> Clay Autery, KY5G
> (318) 518-1389
>
> On 05/19/18 07:07, Ed W0YK wrote:
> > That's fine for decode, but transmit uses the 2.8 kHz filter.
> > 73,Ed W0YK
> > -------- Original message --------From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <
> [hidden email]> Date: 5/19/18 8:01 AM (GMT-05:00) To:
> [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4
> > Ed,
> >
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Clay Autery-2

Re: K4

In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10

Yup... RTFM....

I read the Op manual 4 times from cover to cover before the radio even
arrives (assembly manual 3 times). Then, after it was built I went
through it page by page and used EVERY single function and looked at
EVERY single menu location. I have binders with every manual with
changes posted as a manual backup in case the power fails. I go through
and check for docs updates monthly on every piece of equipment I own. I
read the K3s Op manual cover to cover minimum twice a year.... and of
course every time I do something obscure like build a custom K3s, P3,
3rd Party Amplifier interface cable harness.

RTFM.... When I was a young guy, I could read it once and basically
have it stored like a photo. Not so much anymore.... age or experiences
(I don't know which) somehow broke that feature.

73, Jim....

______________________
Clay Autery, KY5G
(318) 518-1389

On 05/19/18 13:51, Jim Brown wrote:

> On 5/19/2018 9:38 AM, Martin Sole wrote:
>> A better more up to date menu system that either removes or better,
>> handles the myriad un-intuitive selections. There are a number of
>> menu options which unless you have significant handbook familiarity
>> lack explanation about additional keypad presses. There are even some
>> for which software updates need to be consulted though that is a
>> different matter. Some menu choices could well be better homed as
>> front panel controls.
>
> My experience is quite different. From the beginning (in 2008), I
> found the user interface very well thought out. Maybe that's because I
> started by RTFM. Everything I need while operating is on the front
> panel. The menus are organized so that they are almost never needed
> during operation except to fix a setting that was wrong in the first
> place. I can't remember the last time I needed to go into menus for
> anything but setup with new outboard equipment.
>
> My K3s replaced a pair of FT1000MPs. Everything about the K3
> performance and user interface is far superior. AND the change freed
> up a LOT of space on my operating desk!
>
> 73, Jim K9YC

Dan Baker

Re: K4

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

Precisely Dan. I don’t use boat anchors out of the 60s, for the same
reason I don’t own a 60’s TV. I don’t listen to stereos from the 70s, and I
tossed out my 2002 plasma. I am always happy to move forward and forget
living in the past. And as someone commented earlier. If they are working
on a K4 you might see a teaser from Wayne about 2 seconds before they
announce it. Having said that. I think I have had more fun with the KX2
then the KX3. Wayne is on to something rewarding with the minimalist
approach. It’s very satisfying.

73, Dan KM6CQ

Message: 7
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 09:22:36 -0400
From: Dan Atchison <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Elecraft] My weigh-in, K4
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

I have to agree with the posts noting with disappointment that Elecraft
has not, nor seems to show little interest, in producing a new
competitive desktop radio.? That said, I'm sure they are working on one,
but when produced, the market may be saturated with other manufacturers
radios who have felt the need to get to market quickly.

It doesn't matter that the K3(S) is a truly fine and competitive radio.?
It isn't a matter that the performance ratings of the newer radios are
significantly better (they are not).? It comes down to we who love
technology and wish to be on the cutting edge; to have a unit with the
latest bells and whistles.? The K3(S) for the most part, is technology
over a dozen years old.? To wit, I have grown tired of looking at the
same radio for over 10 years, from my early S/N K3 to a second and newer
radio, a K3S.? Ho, hum.

At the price of newer, competitive radios, trading newer for older or
one radio for another becomes less attractive.? I have already seen in
abundance those who have already discarded the K3(S) in favor of Icom's
or Flex's newer offerings, not only contesters but DXers as well. I have
not yet, but may soon.? Should Elecraft come out with a K4 or whatever,
regardless of it's feature set, they've already lost advantage and way
behind the market.? Of course, we who drink the Elecraft cool-aid will
no doubt purchase.

To those that say "moving on" is unnecessary, I ask how old their
vehicles are?? I buy a new vehicle, not often, but every 5 to 7 years
not because the older car doesn't get me from point A to point B in fine
fashion, but because I just want something more recent with newer or
upgraded options.? How about your cellphone? How many are using one 10
years old?? It's personal preference just like it is for radios.

73,
Dan
--
Sent from my iPhone X
______________________________________________________________
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]

Petr, OK1RP/M0SIS

Re: K4

In reply to this post by k2ud

Hi,

definitely less birdies (impossible by tech) and less misbehavior ...it is
enough for me.

73 - Petr, OK1RP

-----
http://ok1rp.blogspot.com
--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.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]

73 - Petr, OK1RP
"Apple & Elecraft freak"
B:http://ok1rp.blogspot.com
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2HGPoDx
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2FmwvDt