Elecraft › [K3]

OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

Classic

List

Threaded

22 messages Options

Bill Hammond

OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

Many will enjoy the video and photograph in the attached link to my Flickr page. It features a photograph of a beautifully crafted 1930's designed single tube transmitter and how it sounds on a state of the art crafted K3 :) Click on the K3 to hear VE7SL/QRP.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ak5x/

Steve, VE7SL is the craftsman of this beautiful transmitter and has just posted details on his web page (link below).

Steve's construction, circuit and historical details:
http://members.shaw.ca/ve7sl/tritet.html

73,
Bill

Bill Hammond
[hidden email]
Bill Hammond-AK5X
[hidden email]
[hidden email]
K3 #69
P3 #817
KPA500 # 149
K2/100 #4637
K1 #2033
KX1 #1023
T1

______________________________________________________________
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

John Ragle

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

The 6L6 keyed oscillator shown in the Flickr page is certainly a
lovingly-crafted piece of artwork, but I am a bit skeptical about the
implication that a techno-adept ham of the late '30's would have been
pleased by the chirp. After all, the 6L6 first appeared in 1936, and by
then the 'x' and 'c' of the RST/x/c reporting scheme was probably
already in use. Keying an oscillator working directly into an antenna
was understood to be a poor idea. The MOPA idea was around long before
the 6L6. There is a QST article in 1934 illustrating the general idea of
a 2-stage transmitter, and the idea was known long before that.

John Ragle -- W1ZI

=====

On 3/21/2012 8:46 AM, Bill Hammond wrote:

> Many will enjoy the video and photograph in the attached link to my Flickr page. It features a photograph of a beautifully crafted 1930's designed single tube transmitter and how it sounds on a state of the art crafted K3 :) Click on the K3 to hear VE7SL/QRP.
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ak5x/
>
> Steve, VE7SL is the craftsman of this beautiful transmitter and has just posted details on his web page (link below).
>
> Steve's construction, circuit and historical details:
> http://members.shaw.ca/ve7sl/tritet.html
>
> 73,
> Bill
>
> Bill Hammond
> [hidden email]
> Bill Hammond-AK5X
> [hidden email]
> [hidden email]
> K3 #69
> P3 #817
> KPA500 # 149
> K2/100 #4637
> K1 #2033
> KX1 #1023
> T1
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>

--
Sent from my lovely old Dell XPS 420

______________________________________________________________
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

Rick Stealey

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

But you are hearing it on 10 meters. Down on the fundamental (I didn't check the
schematic - sorry) it probably sounded much better.
Myself, I would have tuned the other side of zero beat so the chirp went the
other direction. Pure music!
Open up that K3 all the way, sit back and relax, and listen to the music.

Rick K2XT

______________________________________________________________
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

riese-k3djc

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by Bill Hammond

Your right John

but remember many hams were kids saving dimes from collecting old
newspapers,, 34 was in the middle
of the depression and MOPA used a lot of parts and over all considering
he is keying the xtal not a bad sounding signal
for real fun check the Antique Wireless Association OT contest,, should
be a pre 30 rig design
and using a 45 was High Power,, a 27 worked almost as good,, the power
isset to be under 10 watts
for the contest and my 80 meter Harley will chirp out of a modern rcv
bandwidth
although that really is excessive

HAR

many guys have surprisingly stable rigs with just a handful of parts
real fun is listening to guys trying to get them on frequency

Bob K3DJC

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:24:07 -0400 John Ragle <[hidden email]>
writes:

> The 6L6 keyed oscillator shown in the Flickr page is certainly a
> lovingly-crafted piece of artwork, but I am a bit skeptical about
> the
> implication that a techno-adept ham of the late '30's would have
> been
> pleased by the chirp. After all, the 6L6 first appeared in 1936, and
> by
> then the 'x' and 'c' of the RST/x/c reporting scheme was probably
> already in use. Keying an oscillator working directly into an
> antenna
> was understood to be a poor idea. The MOPA idea was around long
> before
> the 6L6. There is a QST article in 1934 illustrating the general
> idea of
> a 2-stage transmitter, and the idea was known long before that.
>
> John Ragle -- W1ZI
>
> =====
>
> On 3/21/2012 8:46 AM, Bill Hammond wrote:
> > Many will enjoy the video and photograph in the attached link to
> my Flickr page. It features a photograph of a beautifully crafted
> 1930's designed single tube transmitter and how it sounds on a state
> of the art crafted K3 :) Click on the K3 to hear VE7SL/QRP.
> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/ak5x/
> >
> > Steve, VE7SL is the craftsman of this beautiful transmitter and
> has just posted details on his web page (link below).
> >
> > Steve's construction, circuit and historical details:
> > http://members.shaw.ca/ve7sl/tritet.html
> >
> > 73,
> > Bill
> >
> > Bill Hammond
> > [hidden email]
> > Bill Hammond-AK5X
> > [hidden email]
> > [hidden email]
> > K3 #69
> > P3 #817
> > KPA500 # 149
> > K2/100 #4637
> > K1 #2033
> > KX1 #1023
> > T1
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my lovely old Dell XPS 420
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>

______________________________________________________________
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

Donehrlich@q.com

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by John Ragle

This is one oldtimer who actually used such a design. After more than
58 years I finally understand how it worked .. actually, not very well
for me. Chirps and whoops were very common in those days and I can say
with confidence that they were definitely acceptable and, in fact, were
a characteristic of stations such as mine without the operator even
knowing about the whoop. Remember, like many other novices I was using
a simple regenerative receiver that could not be used for a monitor and
never knew how my signal actually sounded in the other guys receiver.
Even the more sophisticated superhets overloaded so easily that they did
not provide a faithful reproduction of the outgoing rf.

Don K7FJ

> The 6L6 keyed oscillator shown in the Flickr page is certainly a
> lovingly-crafted piece of artwork, but I am a bit skeptical about the
> implication that a techno-adept ham of the late '30's would have been
> pleased by the chirp. After all, the 6L6 first appeared in 1936, and by
> then the 'x' and 'c' of the RST/x/c reporting scheme was probably
> already in use. Keying an oscillator working directly into an antenna
> was understood to be a poor idea. The MOPA idea was around long before
> the 6L6. There is a QST article in 1934 illustrating the general idea of
> a 2-stage transmitter, and the idea was known long before that.
>
> John Ragle -- W1ZI
>
>

Andrew Siegel

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive. Nowadays, I
actually seek out QSOs with hams with chirpy or hummy CW notes, since
it often means unusual DX, or someone with a good story to tell. It
would be interesting if we had the option in modern rigs to "dirty up"
our transmitted CW note.

73,
Andy, N2CN

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire <[hidden email]> wrote:

> We can cram a lot more signals into the bands these days. Putting more
> signals in less spectrum has been a challenge for Hams since the 1920's. But
> us OT's are often a bit nostalgic for CW bands where one could recognize a
> station by the sound of his (or her) signal and "fist". Back then a CW band
> sounded like a room full of people, each with a distinctive voice that could
> be picked out easily even without listening to the words. Nowadays the same
> CW bands sound like a room full of computer-generated voices, all identical
> except for the words. And, with the digital modes, there aren't even any
> words to hear. The world moves on. Our challenge is to move on with it and
> keep looking over the horizon ahead.

Vic Rosenthal

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

Has anyone else noticed that the cw elements produced by the K3 are distinctive? They are
sharp and distinct, without any mushiness. The signal has presence, and yet not a trace of
clickiness, on or off frequency. There is the highest degree of purity of tone, as well.

OK, back to my day job as a wine taster.

On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:

> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive. Nowadays, I
> actually seek out QSOs with hams with chirpy or hummy CW notes, since
> it often means unusual DX, or someone with a good story to tell. It
> would be interesting if we had the option in modern rigs to "dirty up"
> our transmitted CW note.
>
> 73,
> Andy, N2CN
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire<[hidden email]> wrote:
>> We can cram a lot more signals into the bands these days. Putting more
>> signals in less spectrum has been a challenge for Hams since the 1920's. But
>> us OT's are often a bit nostalgic for CW bands where one could recognize a
>> station by the sound of his (or her) signal and "fist". Back then a CW band
>> sounded like a room full of people, each with a distinctive voice that could
>> be picked out easily even without listening to the words. Nowadays the same
>> CW bands sound like a room full of computer-generated voices, all identical
>> except for the words. And, with the digital modes, there aren't even any
>> words to hear. The world moves on. Our challenge is to move on with it and
>> keep looking over the horizon ahead.

--
Vic, K2VCO
Fresno CA
http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/
______________________________________________________________
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

Alan Bloom

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by Andrew Siegel

On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 17:03 -0400, Andrew Siegel wrote:
> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive. Nowadays, I
> actually seek out QSOs with hams with chirpy or hummy CW notes, since
> it often means unusual DX, or someone with a good story to tell. It
> would be interesting if we had the option in modern rigs to "dirty up"
> our transmitted CW note.

Kind of like "antiquing" an old chair: intentionally marring the finish
to make it look old.

Alan N1AL

______________________________________________________________
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

Bill Hammond

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by Andrew Siegel

How many of us have had that thought in a pile-up with a modest antenna and 100 watts or less? I have adjusted a few rise times in the past.
73,
Bill AK5X

On Mar 21, 2012, at 4:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:

> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive. Nowadays, I
> actually seek out QSOs with hams with chirpy or hummy CW notes, since
> it often means unusual DX, or someone with a good story to tell. It
> would be interesting if we had the option in modern rigs to "dirty up"
> our transmitted CW note.
>
> 73,
> Andy, N2CN
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> We can cram a lot more signals into the bands these days. Putting more
>> signals in less spectrum has been a challenge for Hams since the 1920's. But
>> us OT's are often a bit nostalgic for CW bands where one could recognize a
>> station by the sound of his (or her) signal and "fist". Back then a CW band
>> sounded like a room full of people, each with a distinctive voice that could
>> be picked out easily even without listening to the words. Nowadays the same
>> CW bands sound like a room full of computer-generated voices, all identical
>> except for the words. And, with the digital modes, there aren't even any
>> words to hear. The world moves on. Our challenge is to move on with it and
>> keep looking over the horizon ahead.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

Bill Hammond
[hidden email]
Bill Hammond-AK5X
[hidden email]
[hidden email]
K3 #69
P3 #817
KPA500 # 149
K2/100 #4637
K1 #2033
KX1 #1023
T1

______________________________________________________________
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

Rick Dettinger-3

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by Andrew Siegel

I think that Lyle, KK7P, will probably want to get to work on that
right away!:-)

73,
Rick K7MW

> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive. Nowadays, I
> actually seek out QSOs with hams with chirpy or hummy CW notes, since
> it often means unusual DX, or someone with a good story to tell. It
> would be interesting if we had the option in modern rigs to "dirty up"
> our transmitted CW note.
>
> 73,
> Andy, N2CN

______________________________________________________________
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

Joe K2UF

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by Andrew Siegel

Along with the chirps and squeals (especially from Cuba!) I remember in the
mid 50's as a novice I had a couple of xtals for 80 and 40. You would call
CQ and tune up and down the novice band for several minutes listening for
some one answering you. I also had 'variable xtals' that you could move
several hundred cycles ( or hertz) to move away from an existing QSO. Then
the Heathkit VFO became available WOW! Now I could answer a CQ right on his
frequency (of course that was after I upgraded from novice ;o] ).

73 Joe K2UF

No trees were harmed in the sending of this e-mail; however, many electrons
were inconvenienced.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Andrew Siegel
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 5:04 PM
To: Ron D'Eau Claire
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive. Nowadays, I
actually seek out QSOs with hams with chirpy or hummy CW notes, since
it often means unusual DX, or someone with a good story to tell. It
would be interesting if we had the option in modern rigs to "dirty up"
our transmitted CW note.

73,
Andy, N2CN

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We can cram a lot more signals into the bands these days. Putting more
> signals in less spectrum has been a challenge for Hams since the 1920's.
But
> us OT's are often a bit nostalgic for CW bands where one could recognize a
> station by the sound of his (or her) signal and "fist". Back then a CW
band
> sounded like a room full of people, each with a distinctive voice that
could
> be picked out easily even without listening to the words. Nowadays the
same
> CW bands sound like a room full of computer-generated voices, all
identical
> except for the words. And, with the digital modes, there aren't even any
> words to hear. The world moves on. Our challenge is to move on with it and
> keep looking over the horizon ahead.
______________________________________________________________
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

______________________________________________________________
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

David Gilbert

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by Andrew Siegel

Usually it just means that someone has a crummy rig, or doesn't know how
to use it properly, or has a crummy power source.

Dave AB7E

On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:
> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive. Nowadays, I
> actually seek out QSOs with hams with chirpy or hummy CW notes, since
> it often means unusual DX, or someone with a good story to tell.
______________________________________________________________
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

stan levandowski

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by Bill Hammond

You want to stand out then ditch the paddle and use an properly adjusted
and accurately operated "bug". Bug code is remarkably like
fingerprinting - similarities but never an exact dupe!

Stan WB2LQF

> On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:
>> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive.
______________________________________________________________
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

wayne burdick

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

Administrator

In reply to this post by Vic Rosenthal

Vic K2VCO wrote:

> Has anyone else noticed that the cw elements produced by the K3 are
> distinctive? They are
> sharp and distinct, without any mushiness. The signal has presence,
> and yet not a trace of
> clickiness, on or off frequency. There is the highest degree of
> purity of tone, as well.

We investigated several rise/fall shapes (raised cosine, sigmoidal,
and variations) and selected one that gave us both a narrow CW keying
modulation bandwidth and reasonably fast rise/fall times.

We've have a few requests to make the transmit clickier, but have
refused :)

>
> OK, back to my day job as a wine taster.

Oh, sure :)

Wayne
N6KR

______________________________________________________________
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

Guy, K2AV

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by stan levandowski

When I got my first Knight-kit VFO, I got a lot of guffaws from my local
crowd because my signal had a chirp. I worked with my elmer (first class
commercial license and chief engineer at WCTT) to solve the problem with
keying the VFO, and was so proud of the clean signal when I was done. No
clicks, no chirps, no mush. That was 1958 and all the hams I knew, were
well informed about what a clean signal was. Mushy, clicky, youpy, chirpy
signals got ridiculed, no less then than now. But maybe things were
different in Kentucky??

73, Guy.

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 6:43 PM, stan levandowski <[hidden email]>wrote:

>
> You want to stand out then ditch the paddle and use an properly adjusted
> and accurately operated "bug". Bug code is remarkably like
> fingerprinting - similarities but never an exact dupe!
>
> Stan WB2LQF
>
>
> > On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:
> >> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>

k6dgw

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by Andrew Siegel

On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:

> It
> would be interesting if we had the option in modern rigs to "dirty up"
> our transmitted CW note.

Perhaps we could call it, "personalize our transmitted CW note?" Sounds
better than "dirty up." And, this is NOT a request for a K3 firmware
change to allow personalization of CW notes!

Rotary spark operators sometimes had a foot pedal similar to a sewing
machine pedal with which they could "personalize" the note [such as a
"note" was with a rotary spark gap TX] by speeding it up and slowing it
down while sending.

What truly intrigues me is how they built receivers pre-De Forest.
Spark gap TX is easy, before LORAN-C met it's death, several of the
stations had reverted to the 21st Century equivalent of spark. I really
do not understand what the Titanic's receiver looked like.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
- www.cqp.org

______________________________________________________________
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

David Gilbert

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

It might sound better to call it that but it's still the same thing ...
intentionally putting a trashy signal on the band. Want to be
distinctive on the bands? Say something clever, useful, informative,
interesting, funny ... whatever. Leave the junk signals in the past
where they belong. I own a K3 in large part because it puts out a clean
signal, and I'm eternally grateful to Wayne for his decision not to give
folks the option to screw it up for the sake of misguided nostalgia.

Dave AB7E

On 3/21/2012 5:15 PM, Fred Jensen wrote:

> On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:
>
>> It
>> would be interesting if we had the option in modern rigs to "dirty up"
>> our transmitted CW note.
> Perhaps we could call it, "personalize our transmitted CW note?" Sounds
> better than "dirty up."
> 73,
>
> Fred K6DGW
> - Northern California Contest Club
> - CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
> - www.cqp.org
>

Mike Furrey

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

In reply to this post by stan levandowski

Anyone remember CO2BB? One always knew who that was without hearing the call
sign due his distinct manner on CW.

Mike WA%POK

-----Original Message-----
From: stan levandowski
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 5:43 PM
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

You want to stand out then ditch the paddle and use an properly adjusted
and accurately operated "bug". Bug code is remarkably like
fingerprinting - similarities but never an exact dupe!

Stan WB2LQF

> On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:
>> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive.
______________________________________________________________
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

______________________________________________________________
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

Pete Smith N4ZR

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

Or W4KFC for that matter.

73, Pete N4ZR
The World Contest Station Database, updated daily at www.conteststations.com
The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com,
spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000 and
arcluster.reversebeacon.net, port 7000

On 3/21/2012 9:54 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Anyone remember CO2BB? One always knew who that was without hearing the call
> sign due his distinct manner on CW.
>
> Mike WA%POK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: stan levandowski
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 5:43 PM
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3
>
>
> You want to stand out then ditch the paddle and use an properly adjusted
> and accurately operated "bug". Bug code is remarkably like
> fingerprinting - similarities but never an exact dupe!
>
> Stan WB2LQF
>
>
>> On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:
>>> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>

Guy, K2AV

Re: OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3

Yeah, but Vic never had a chirp, or click, or mushy CW, just a
southern drawl fist on a bug that you would never forget, and would
recognize instantly as you tuned by his run frequency in the
sweepstakes. http://pvrc.org/wav/W4KFC1971.mp3

73, Guy.

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 5:48 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Or W4KFC for that matter.
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> The World Contest Station Database, updated daily at www.conteststations.com
> The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com,
> spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000 and
> arcluster.reversebeacon.net, port 7000
>
>
> On 3/21/2012 9:54 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> Anyone remember CO2BB? One always knew who that was without hearing the call
>> sign due his distinct manner on CW.
>>
>> Mike WA%POK
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: stan levandowski
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 5:43 PM
>> Cc: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT-old vs. new 6L6 to K3
>>
>>
>> You want to stand out then ditch the paddle and use an properly adjusted
>> and accurately operated "bug". Bug code is remarkably like
>> fingerprinting - similarities but never an exact dupe!
>>
>> Stan WB2LQF
>>
>>
>>> On 3/21/2012 2:03 PM, Andrew Siegel wrote:
>>>> I also miss the days when CW signals were distinctive.
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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