KAF2 v. KDSP2
Locked
 
|
I am planning on purchasing a K2 for general use (SSB and CW) with a current preference for CW. (I enjoy working on CW although I'm not very good.) My preferences may change as my experience grows, so flexibility is important. The question is, why would you want to have the KAF2 instead of the KDSP2? From querying the archives, it seems that the KAF2 is primarily used for CW and is effective for that use. Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing unwanted noise on CW, or is it equally effective but more costly. I assume that Elecraft continues to sell the KAF2 because it either has a performance advantage in some niche or is less costly and works for certain uses (such as CW).
Thanks for the advice, Howard Ashcraft W1WF _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
I primarily use my K2 for CW and I sold my KAF2 about 3 months after I got
the KDSP2....I love it...I'll put this rig up against anything else...when using the Crystal filters and KDSP2 all I hear is the CW station...I have no noise or ringing or anything...I'd shoot for the KDSP2 if I were you. Gregg R. Lengling, W9DHI, Retired Administrator http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org K2/100 S#3075 KX1 S# 57 Member: ARRL, RSGB, RCA, WERA and ORC -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Howard W. Ashcraft Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 3:19 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: [Elecraft] KAF2 v. KDSP2 I am planning on purchasing a K2 for general use (SSB and CW) with a current preference for CW. (I enjoy working on CW although I'm not very good.) My preferences may change as my experience grows, so flexibility is important. The question is, why would you want to have the KAF2 instead of the KDSP2? >From querying the archives, it seems that the KAF2 is primarily used for CW and is effective for that use. Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing unwanted noise on CW, or is it equally effective but more costly. I assume that Elecraft continues to sell the KAF2 because it either has a performance advantage in some niche or is less costly and works for certain uses (such as CW). Thanks for the advice, Howard Ashcraft W1WF _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Howard W. Ashcraft
Howard W. Ashcraft wrote:
> Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing unwanted noise on > CW, or is it equally effective but more costly. I assume that > Elecraft continues to sell the KAF2 because it either has a > performance advantage in some niche or is less costly and works for > certain uses (such as CW). I have had both, and I'm primarily a CW operator. I live in a relatively noisy environment. My experience has been that the KDSP2 is much more helpful, because it provides noise reduction in addition to a narrow filter. It is also much more flexible, providing many more bandwidth options. Although I haven't tried it, I understand that the automatic notch filter works well on SSB. I think the reason they still sell it is that it is much less costly than the DSP. -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Howard W. Ashcraft
Howard,
I can't speak for anyone else, but I just don't like the sound of any audio DSP processor, particularly for CW use. They are good for digging signals out very close to the noise level, but my ears find the KAF2 far less irritating for extended operating periods. It is more a matter of personal preference - the KDSP2 users seem to be quite happy with it, and I have built several for other hams, so I have had opportunity to listen to both on a bit more than a casual basis. For mostly SSB operation I can recommend the KDSP2 for no other reason than the noise reduction, but I personally find I can do without it. Each to his own - if you could listen to both before making up your mind you can make a better decision. With the KDSP2 you can adjust the parameters to alter the sound, but chosing the 'correct' ones for your ears may take a while and a lot of trial and error. 73, Don W3FPR ----- Original Message ----- I am planning on purchasing a K2 for general use (SSB and CW) with a current preference for CW. (I enjoy working on CW although I'm not very good.) My preferences may change as my experience grows, so flexibility is important. The question is, why would you want to have the KAF2 instead of the KDSP2? >From querying the archives, it seems that the KAF2 is primarily used for CW and is effective for that use. Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing unwanted noise on CW, or is it equally effective but more costly. I assume that Elecraft continues to sell the KAF2 because it either has a performance advantage in some niche or is less costly and works for certain uses (such as CW). _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Howard W. Ashcraft
I bought my KAF2 before the KDSP2 was available. I have not upgraded to the
KDSP2 for the following reasons: - it costs more - it uses more current - the KAF2 does a great job on CW If you are a SSB op, and are going with a KPA100... then it would be a natural progression to have a KDSP2 so that the radio is on par with other radios that have IF notch filtering and IF passband shift capabilities (although the KDSP is not IF... it is AF in design). - Daniel / AA0NI K2 #3421 --- "Howard W. Ashcraft" <[hidden email]> wrote: > I am planning on purchasing a K2 for general use (SSB and CW) with a current > preference for CW. (I enjoy working on CW although I'm not very good.) My > preferences may change as my experience grows, so flexibility is important. > The question is, why would you want to have the KAF2 instead of the KDSP2? > From querying the archives, it seems that the KAF2 is primarily used for CW > and is effective for that use. Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing > unwanted noise on CW, or is it equally effective but more costly. I assume > that Elecraft continues to sell the KAF2 because it either has a performance > advantage in some niche or is less costly and works for certain uses (such as > CW). > > Thanks for the advice, > > Howard Ashcraft > W1WF > > _______________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: [hidden email] > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Don Wilhelm-2
I operate 99.99% CW (Haven't even fired up PSK in a year and it's been
longer than that since I plugged in the mic) and, not saying anything negative about either the DSP or the audio filter, I don't have either and don't feel motivated to add either to my K2/100. I really like the "sound" of the K2 I.F. filters. Their fairly soft sides avoid lots of artifacts that add harshness to the sound of the bands. Yet they have all the selectivity that I need with their excellent stop band characteristics. Ron AC7AC -----Original Message----- Howard, I can't speak for anyone else, but I just don't like the sound of any audio DSP processor, particularly for CW use. They are good for digging signals out very close to the noise level, but my ears find the KAF2 far less irritating for extended operating periods.... 73, Don W3FPR ----- Original Message ----- I am planning on purchasing a K2 for general use (SSB and CW) with a current preference for CW. (I enjoy working on CW although I'm not very good.) My preferences may change as my experience grows, so flexibility is important. The question is, why would you want to have the KAF2 instead of the KDSP2? >From querying the archives, it seems that the KAF2 is primarily used >for CW and is effective for that use. Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing unwanted noise on CW, or is it equally effective but more costly. I assume that Elecraft continues to sell the KAF2 because it either has a performance advantage in some niche or is less costly and works for certain uses (such as CW). _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Howard W. Ashcraft
Hi Howard,
I built both KAF2 and KDSP2 for a number of hams. Having the chances of comparing both of them, my views are as follows: 1. There is a substantial price difference between KAF2 and KDSP2. 2. For CW reception, KAF2 performs not much worse than KDSP2 BUT the noise reduction in KDSP2 will lessen the listening fatigue. Of course, there are always individuals who do not like the digital sound. However, I find the noise reduction of KDSP2 is in line with my IC756pro2. 3. For SSB reception, KDSP2 is well more useful than KAF2. I understand you may not be interested in SSB BUT the inclusion of SSB in K2 makes the rig complete. For example, when you drive a Mercedes, you may wish to have alloy wheels or even AMG accessories as a completion. In this respect, KDSP2 is a good choice. Therefore, you choices may depend on: 1. cost concern; 2. the chance of using SSB in your operation 73 Johnny Siu VR2XMC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Howard W. Ashcraft" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 4:18 AM Subject: [Elecraft] KAF2 v. KDSP2 I am planning on purchasing a K2 for general use (SSB and CW) with a current preference for CW. (I enjoy working on CW although I'm not very good.) My preferences may change as my experience grows, so flexibility is important. The question is, why would you want to have the KAF2 instead of the KDSP2? >From querying the archives, it seems that the KAF2 is primarily used for CW and is effective for that use. Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing unwanted noise on CW, or is it equally effective but more costly. I assume that Elecraft continues to sell the KAF2 because it either has a performance advantage in some niche or is less costly and works for certain uses (such as CW). Thanks for the advice, Howard Ashcraft W1WF _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Howard W. Ashcraft
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:18:37 -0700, Howard W. Ashcraft wrote:
>Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing unwanted noise on CW No, the KDSP2 provides both a very effective variable bandwidth audio filter (wonderful for both CW and SSB), and a very effective dynamic noise reducer (also very effective on both CW and SSB). If you are starting from scratch, you definitely want the KDSP2. I'm mainly a CW guy, but occasionally work SSB contests. I find the KDSP2 to be a real asset for both modes. Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |