Re: Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter
Locked
Re: Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter
 
|
At the recent Santa Barbara Hamfest, Eric addressed a problem with the early
filters in the K3. The frequency would change unexpectedly. Eventually the problem was solved by cleaning. It was found that particles left over from the crystal manufacturing were modifying the freq. Inrad is just down the street from Elecraft and together they resolved the issue. I use the 1.8 in my K3 (#2241) with great results. 73, Fred AE6IC ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
Re: Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009
|
|
In general K3 owners bought for the high performance "numbers"
The ARRL numbers on the dynamic range for 1.8 filter in the QST review provide "great results" but that is subjective - subjective. Far below expected numbers even if it is better then Brand x The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no reposted test results To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting test results is questionable I doubt the story below was in response to the ARRL article It's doubtful anyone will perform a retest - (ARRL certainly NOT) a Retest by someone outside the firm like Sherwood, etc. would be good ( although we maybe too busy reading about firmware updates.....hi) The ARRL QST article as minimum indicates that not all xtal filters of same model are equal back to RF, Robert w5aj ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Atchley" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:14 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter At the recent Santa Barbara Hamfest, Eric addressed a problem with the early filters in the K3. The frequency would change unexpectedly. Eventually the problem was solved by cleaning. It was found that particles left over from the crystal manufacturing were modifying the freq. Inrad is just down the street from Elecraft and together they resolved the issue. I use the 1.8 in my K3 (#2241) with great results. 73, Fred AE6IC ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
On Oct 19, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Robert Wood wrote: The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no reposted test results To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting test results is questionable _____________ If Elecraft is guilty of anything, it's complete transparency. 73 - Steve WB6RSE ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
I agree! Yaesu, Icom, Kenwood, and even Ten-Tec, often get completely
closed mouthed about flaws/problems. Once you buy one of those radios, it's pretty much a done deal until the "new and improved version comes out with some subtle feature additions, but also a bunch of glitch fixes! Elecraft tends to "lay it all out" on the table when things like this happen. Sometimes they may drag their feet a bit, but that's usually to allow themselves time to really verify that the problem does exist. Nobody is perfect, but you have to look long and hard to find a company that has been more forthright about issues, or more active in resolving them. Some might think they are overly aggressive about it, as when they focus on issues that, at least some of us, don't think are issues at all! I guess that's good though! It makes you better realize just how versatile the radio is. Dave W7AQK ----- Original Message ----- From: <[hidden email]> To: "Elecraft List" <[hidden email]> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 11:44 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009 > > On Oct 19, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Robert Wood wrote: > > The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no > reposted test results > To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results > or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting > test > results is questionable > > _____________ > > If Elecraft is guilty of anything, it's complete transparency. > > 73 - Steve WB6RSE > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 |
Re: Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009
|
|
In reply to this post by Robert Wood
Personally, I find it easier to believe that Inrad fixed the problem based upon Elecraft's subjective confirmation of such than I do your totally subjective implication that they might be collectively and intentionally lying to us. Dave AB7E Robert Wood wrote: > In general K3 owners bought for the high performance "numbers" > > The ARRL numbers on the dynamic range for 1.8 filter in the QST review > provide "great results" but that is subjective - subjective. Far below > expected numbers even if it is better then Brand x > > The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no > reposted test results > To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results > or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting test > results is questionable > I doubt the story below was in response to the ARRL article > > It's doubtful anyone will perform a retest - (ARRL certainly NOT) > a Retest by someone outside the firm like Sherwood, etc. would be good > ( although we maybe too busy reading about firmware updates.....hi) > > The ARRL QST article as minimum indicates that not all xtal filters of same > model are equal > > back to RF, Robert w5aj > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Fred Atchley" <[hidden email]> > To: <[hidden email]> > Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:14 AM > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter > > > At the recent Santa Barbara Hamfest, Eric addressed a problem with the > early > filters in the K3. > > The frequency would change unexpectedly. Eventually the problem was solved > by cleaning. > > It was found that particles left over from the crystal manufacturing were > modifying the freq. > > Inrad is just down the street from Elecraft and together they resolved the > issue. > > > > I use the 1.8 in my K3 (#2241) with great results. > > > > 73, Fred AE6IC > > 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 |
Re: Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009
|
|
Dave,
Before I list a couple of home truths, may I say that I agree with your comment. 1) The IMDDR3 data from ARRL and others is a report of the receiver's IMDDR3 performance, not that of the filter's IMDDR3 performance. The data does provide some indication that the IMDDR3 performance of filter "A" might be "worse" than that of filter "B", "C" or "D", but filter "A" itself might not be the cause of the problem. The filters should be tested as stand-alone items before putting blame on any particular filter. The designer of a receiver should know the IIP3 of the filters to be used, otherwise he is flying blind. 2) The effects of SLC (Surface Layer Contamination) on the performance of crystals have been known for many years, and methods used during the manufacture of crystals to avoid SLC have also been used for many years. SLC is usually caused by dirt or particles of quartz which has / have not been cleaned out during the manufacture of the crystal. So called "computer grade" crystals, which are cheap, can be expected to be contaminated, because most are produced for non-critical oscillator applications. "Dirty" crystals if used in a filter will have a bad effect on the filter's IMD performance and its loss. 73, Geoff GM4ESD David Gilbert wrote on Monday, October 19, 2009 at 8:13 PM > Personally, I find it easier to believe that Inrad fixed the problem > based upon Elecraft's subjective confirmation of such than I do your > totally subjective implication that they might be collectively and > intentionally lying to us. > > Dave AB7E ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by w7aqk
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
Re: Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter - Final for 2009
|
|
In reply to this post by David Gilbert
Inrad selects the best filters for the K3, the others which do not meet
K3 specs are sold as Yaesu filters. And thats the truth.. Merv KH7C > Personally, I find it easier to believe that Inrad fixed the problem > based upon Elecraft's subjective confirmation of such than I do your > totally subjective implication that they might be collectively and > intentionally lying to us. > > Dave AB7E > > > > Robert Wood wrote: > >> In general K3 owners bought for the high performance "numbers" >> >> The ARRL numbers on the dynamic range for 1.8 filter in the QST review >> provide "great results" but that is subjective - subjective. Far below >> expected numbers even if it is better then Brand x >> >> The hamfest story below is great salesman hand waving - no numbers, no >> reposted test results >> To claim the problem is fixed implies that there are test results >> or to state another way, to claim the problem is fixed without posting test >> results is questionable >> I doubt the story below was in response to the ARRL article >> >> It's doubtful anyone will perform a retest - (ARRL certainly NOT) >> a Retest by someone outside the firm like Sherwood, etc. would be good >> ( although we maybe too busy reading about firmware updates.....hi) >> >> The ARRL QST article as minimum indicates that not all xtal filters of same >> model are equal >> >> back to RF, Robert w5aj >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Fred Atchley" <[hidden email]> >> To: <[hidden email]> >> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:14 AM >> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Flaw in the 1.8 kHz roofing filter >> >> >> At the recent Santa Barbara Hamfest, Eric addressed a problem with the >> early >> filters in the K3. >> >> The frequency would change unexpectedly. Eventually the problem was solved >> by cleaning. >> >> It was found that particles left over from the crystal manufacturing were >> modifying the freq. >> >> Inrad is just down the street from Elecraft and together they resolved the >> issue. >> >> >> >> I use the 1.8 in my K3 (#2241) with great results. >> >> >> >> 73, Fred AE6IC >> >> >> > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 |
«
Return to [K3]
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |