Elecraft

QSK and the K3

Classic

List

Threaded

7 messages Options

Elecraft mailing list

QSK and the K3

When I first got my K3 in 2009 I thought the QSK was fabulous and used it every so often. Then for a few years I was working too much and wasa little inactive. I finally retired and heavy into ham radio once again. I got the KXV3B for the preamp and had to jump from version 3 somethingmcu to version 5, and now have version 5.29. Has anybody else thought the QSK to be "slower"? I am performing some tests recommended byElecraft to see if I have a problem but am looking for opinions from other users.
Bill K3WJV
______________________________________________________________
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]

David Bunte

Re: QSK and the K3

Bill -

I have used QSK for thousands of QSOs since I got my K3 4 years ago. I
have seen no changes at all.. but I am not a real QRQ op. I usually run
about 28 wpm... sometimes about 32, and very rarely a bit higher than
that. I did put in the new Synth boards, and have verified that QSK is now
silky smooth up to speeds much higher than I dare try to operate.

Best of luck getting everything to play the way you want it to.

Dave - K9FN

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Bill Stravinsky via Elecraft <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> When I first got my K3 in 2009 I thought the QSK was fabulous and used it
> every so often. Then for a few years I was working too much and wasa
> little inactive. I finally retired and heavy into ham radio once again. I
> got the KXV3B for the preamp and had to jump from version 3 somethingmcu to
> version 5, and now have version 5.29. Has anybody else thought the QSK to
> be "slower"? I am performing some tests recommended byElecraft to see if I
> have a problem but am looking for opinions from other users.
> Bill K3WJV
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Chester Alderman

Re: QSK and the K3

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

Hi Bill,

Not really. I have tested full QSK from about 25 wpm up to about 80 wpm and it certainly seems quick enough to me for those speed ranges.

73,
Tom - W4BQF

-----Original Message-----
From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bill Stravinsky via Elecraft
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 10:01 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Elecraft] QSK and the K3

When I first got my K3 in 2009 I thought the QSK was fabulous and used it every so often. Then for a few years I was working too much and wasa little inactive. I finally retired and heavy into ham radio once again. I got the KXV3B for the preamp and had to jump from version 3 somethingmcu to version 5, and now have version 5.29. Has anybody else thought the QSK to be "slower"? I am performing some tests recommended byElecraft to see if I have a problem but am looking for opinions from other users.
Bill K3WJV
______________________________________________________________
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]

Don Wilhelm-4

Re: QSK and the K3

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

Bill,

There were some firmware changes made when the new synthesizers were
introduced, and as I recall some of those changes involved QSK
operation. Initial reports on the new synthesizers from users indicated
that QSK was better.
I have not seen any reports of QSK changes with the old synthesizers,
but you may have "hit on something" - continue with the tests and tell
us your results.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 7/16/2015 10:00 AM, Bill Stravinsky via Elecraft wrote:
> When I first got my K3 in 2009 I thought the QSK was fabulous and used it every so often. Then for a few years I was working too much and wasa little inactive. I finally retired and heavy into ham radio once again. I got the KXV3B for the preamp and had to jump from version 3 somethingmcu to version 5, and now have version 5.29. Has anybody else thought the QSK to be "slower"? I am performing some tests recommended byElecraft to see if I have a problem but am looking for opinions from other users.
> Bill K3WJV
>

______________________________________________________________
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

Re: QSK and the K3

I’m wondering what tests Electaft is suggesting? Remember the QSK (right side of band-switch) has two settings Full and Simi. Also in the Config menu CW QRQ = ON, seems to help, gives you the + sign on the right bottom of the display. My serial number 00069 seems to work as good as ever with 5.29 installed.
73,
Bill-AK5X

> On Jul 16, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Don Wilhelm <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> There were some firmware changes made when the new synthesizers were introduced, and as I recall some of those changes involved QSK operation. Initial reports on the new synthesizers from users indicated that QSK was better.
> I have not seen any reports of QSK changes with the old synthesizers, but you may have "hit on something" - continue with the tests and tell us your results.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 7/16/2015 10:00 AM, Bill Stravinsky via Elecraft wrote:
>> When I first got my K3 in 2009 I thought the QSK was fabulous and used it every so often. Then for a few years I was working too much and wasa little inactive. I finally retired and heavy into ham radio once again. I got the KXV3B for the preamp and had to jump from version 3 somethingmcu to version 5, and now have version 5.29. Has anybody else thought the QSK to be "slower"? I am performing some tests recommended byElecraft to see if I have a problem but am looking for opinions from other users.
>> Bill K3WJV
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

John Sweeney

Re: QSK and the K3

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

Bill,

Are you using the "new QSK" setting in the menu options? The new QSK setting may seem slightly slower in the monitor audio but without the audio pops in the monitor that the standard qsk setting sometimes is heard. Easy to switch back and forth as needed. Something to check.

John, N3WT

----- Original Message -----From: Bill Stravinsky via Elecraft <[hidden email]>To: [hidden email]: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 14:00:36 -0000 (UTC)Subject: [Elecraft] QSK and the K3

When I first got my K3 in 2009 I thought the QSK was fabulous and used it every so often. Then for a few years I was working too much and wasa little inactive. I finally retired and heavy into ham radio once again. I got the KXV3B for the preamp and had to jump from version 3 somethingmcu to version 5, and now have version 5.29. Has anybody else thought the QSK to be "slower"? I am performing some tests recommended byElecraft to see if I have a problem but am looking for opinions from other users.Bill K3WJV______________________________________________________________Elecraft mailing listHome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.htmlMessage 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]

Guy Olinger K2AV

Re: QSK and the K3

If one is going to upgrade one's K3 to the new synthesizer, then table any
QSK concerns until you have that in place. Just one of the benefits is that
the new synthesizer does state changes way faster than the old syn. RX/TX
state changes are what QSK is all about.

Besides the new syn, there have been a lot of changes to QSK, some number
of varieties of QSK now, since the olden days of firmware version 3.xx.
Way lotsa stuff under the bridge since then. Includes some very significant
improvements to AGC and K3 performance listening to a pile-up. Wayne has
been very busy over the last seven years.

73, Guy K2AV

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:02 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Bill,
>
> Are you using the "new QSK" setting in the menu options? The new QSK
> setting may seem slightly slower in the monitor audio but without the
> audio pops in the monitor that the standard qsk setting sometimes is
> heard. Easy to switch back and forth as needed. Something to check.
>
> John, N3WT
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----From: Bill Stravinsky via Elecraft <
> [hidden email]>To: [hidden email]: Thu, 16 Jul
> 2015 14:00:36 -0000 (UTC)Subject: [Elecraft] QSK and the K3
>
> When I first got my K3 in 2009 I thought the QSK was fabulous and used it
> every so often. Then for a few years I was working too much and wasa
> little inactive. I finally retired and heavy into ham radio once again. I
> got the KXV3B for the preamp and had to jump from version 3 somethingmcu to
> version 5, and now have version 5.29. Has anybody else thought the QSK to
> be "slower"? I am performing some tests recommended byElecraft to see if I
> have a problem but am looking for opinions from other users.Bill
> K3WJV______________________________________________________________Elecraft
> mailing listHome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp:
> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email
> list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.htmlMessage 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]
>