Re: K3 choppy CW
Locked
12
12
 
|
At ZM1A (multi-two) during the ARRL DX CW contest we received some reports of "choppy" CW when CT was keying via the 'Key' socket.
Monitoring the signal with a K2 (dummy load in antenna socket) confirmed the reports. CW sent using the paddle was normal. Both 'station one' K3 and 'station two' K3 had the same problem - substituting a spare K3 made no difference. BTW, it's not RF getting into the computer - the keying is just as bad at 5 watts out. We continued operating, using the K3 memories for CQing and the exchange - luckily it wasn't a serial number.<G> I don't know when this "choppy" keying problem started because the K3s are only keyed by CT during contests, but today we tried a spare 746Pro which eliminated the problem. So the problem is specific to our K3s, all of which had MCU 2.67 installed plus the 'CW rise time' and RS-232 RF immunity mods in early February... Anyone else had this problem? 73, Ken ZL1AIH (ZM1A in contests) ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Set the TX DLY menu item to a lower setting....I found that anything below 10
worked OK. ------------------------- 73, Greg - AB7R Whidbey Island WA NA-065 On Wed Feb 25 15:41 , Robert Mccormack sent: >At ZM1A (multi-two) during the ARRL DX CW contest we received some reports of "choppy" CW when CT was keying via the 'Key' socket. >Monitoring the signal with a K2 (dummy load in antenna socket) confirmed the reports. CW sent using the paddle was normal. >Both 'station one' K3 and 'station two' K3 had the same problem - substituting a spare K3 made no difference. BTW, it's not RF getting into the computer - the keying is just as bad at 5 watts out. > >We continued operating, using the K3 memories for CQing and the exchange - luckily it wasn't a serial number. > >I don't know when this "choppy" keying problem started because the K3s are only keyed by CT during contests, but today we tried a spare 746Pro which eliminated the problem. > >So the problem is specific to our K3s, all of which had MCU 2.67 installed plus the 'CW rise time' and RS-232 RF immunity mods in early February... > >Anyone else had this problem? > >73, >Ken ZL1AIH (ZM1A in contests) > > > > > > >______________________________________________________________ >Elecraft mailing list >Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >Post: [hidden email]','','','')">[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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Robert Mccormack
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:41:43 +1100 (EST), Robert Mccormack wrote:
>So the problem is specific to our K3s I suggest that you try the K9YC serial cable. http://audiosystemsgroup.com/HamInterfacing.pdf http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf The first reference consists of Power Point slides, and the serial cable is near the end. The second reference is a tutorial, and the serial cable is in Chapter 8 -- Solving Problems in the Shack. 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Robert Mccormack
N1MM users have had similar issues. I don't know if AB7R's fix works but
many have just gone to a Winkey keyer as a solution. I have one built into my SO2R MK2R+ Microham devices so I have never seen this issue. "A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over." Ben Franklin -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Robert Mccormack Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 4:42 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 choppy CW At ZM1A (multi-two) during the ARRL DX CW contest we received some reports of "choppy" CW when CT was keying via the 'Key' socket. Monitoring the signal with a K2 (dummy load in antenna socket) confirmed the reports. CW sent using the paddle was normal. Both 'station one' K3 and 'station two' K3 had the same problem - substituting a spare K3 made no difference. BTW, it's not RF getting into the computer - the keying is just as bad at 5 watts out. We continued operating, using the K3 memories for CQing and the exchange - luckily it wasn't a serial number.<G> I don't know when this "choppy" keying problem started because the K3s are only keyed by CT during contests, but today we tried a spare 746Pro which eliminated the problem. So the problem is specific to our K3s, all of which had MCU 2.67 installed plus the 'CW rise time' and RS-232 RF immunity mods in early February... Anyone else had this problem? 73, Ken ZL1AIH (ZM1A in contests) ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Greg - AB7R
Hi Greg,
Many thanks indeed - setting the TX DLY to 10 restored the CW to normal operation. I had set TX DLY to 20 to protect the amp antenna relays (open-frame), of which we have lost three in two amps during 2008. I'll install vacuum relays before ARRL SSB. Thanks again. 73, Ken ZL1AIH --- On Thu, 26/2/09, Greg - AB7R <[hidden email]> wrote: From: Greg - AB7R <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 choppy CW To: [hidden email], "Robert Mccormack" <[hidden email]> Received: Thursday, 26 February, 2009, 12:49 PM Set the TX DLY menu item to a lower setting....I found that anything below 10 worked OK. ------------------------- 73, Greg - AB7R Whidbey Island WA NA-065 On Wed Feb 25 15:41 , Robert Mccormack sent: >At ZM1A (multi-two) during the ARRL DX CW contest we received some reports of "choppy" CW when CT was keying via the 'Key' socket. >Monitoring the signal with a K2 (dummy load in antenna socket) ______________________________________________________________ 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 w0mu
Everybody should be using a Winkey to key CW.
Some people will deny that keying directly from an serial port controlled by windows causes keying errors. When we ran DOS, the applications could have unfettered access to the ports. You could also easily harness the system clock and use it rather than the OS to supply the timing for CW. It was easy to background a process like sending CW knowing you had control of the port when you needed it. Not so with Windows98 and up. XP is especially bad. Ever had an application or the OS grab a hold of a USB, serial or parallel port and not let go when the application or process terminated? It never happened in DOS. One question for the doubters. If a winkey like device isn't necessary to send properly timed CW, why do several hardware manufacturers, Micro Ham, US Interface, Rig Expert, and nearly all general and contest logging applications support it? Just to make K1EL rich? W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote: > N1MM users have had similar issues. I don't know if AB7R's fix works but > many have just gone to a Winkey keyer as a solution. I have one built into > my SO2R MK2R+ Microham devices so I have never seen this issue. > > > "A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may > never get over." Ben Franklin -- R. Kevin Stover, ACØH ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
At 2/26/2009 08:05 AM, R. Kevin Stover wrote:
>Everybody should be using a Winkey to key CW. Why? >Some people will deny that keying directly from an serial port >controlled by windows causes keying errors. When we ran DOS, the >applications could have unfettered access to the ports. You could also >easily harness the system clock and use it rather than the OS to supply >the timing for CW. It was easy to background a process like sending CW >knowing you had control of the port when you needed it. Not so with >Windows98 and up. XP is especially bad. > >Ever had an application or the OS grab a hold of a USB, serial or >parallel port and not let go when the application or process terminated? >It never happened in DOS. > >One question for the doubters. If a winkey like device isn't necessary >to send properly timed CW, why do several hardware manufacturers, Micro >Ham, US Interface, Rig Expert, and nearly all general and contest >logging applications support it? Just to make K1EL rich? Because many hams today like to buy neat gadgets, many times without understanding what they do. I key my K3 direct from my XP PC using the serial line. I run speeds in the 30+ wpm. I can achieve rates of over 200+ Q/hour, and I have a very good UBN record. Applications support it because the interfaces are out there. There are situations in which you may actually need such a device, but a properly outfitted PC can support direct keying. I use N1MM, CT, DxBase and other programs with no problems. Just because something exists, doesn't make it necessary. Existence is not proof of necessity, and I don't even play a lawyer on TV. Everyone is free to decide for themselves what is necessary for their particular situation. ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
>One question for the doubters. If a winkey like device isn't necessary
>to send properly timed CW, why do several hardware manufacturers, Micro >Ham, US Interface, Rig Expert, and nearly all general and contest >logging applications support it? Just to make K1EL rich? In addition to correct CW timing irrespective of the PC interface, the Winkey chip allows the user to fine-tune keying compensation to offset the effect of the so-called "dit shortening" in QSK mode, an anomaly that exists on nearly all high-end transceivers today. Much of my operating is conducted over the Internet where timing latencies can be bad enough that CW will oftentimes "stutter" without some means of synchronizing the path. With Winkey, CW is perfectly timed over the Internet when using a pair Winkey devices -- and they don't even need to be matched across manufacturers. For example, I am using a microHam interface at the host end and it synchronizes perfectly with a WinkeyerUSB device at the client end. For what it does, Winkey is an exceptional value for contesters, Internet users, and even folks whose operating is limited to casual CW QSOs. Paul, W9AC ______________________________________________________________ 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 ac0h
Elecrafters:
About a year ago, I finally hooked up my K2 to a computer. Following the advice of several list members, I got a WinKey keyer instead of trying to run CW keying through the serial port. The WinKey is inexpensive, easy to set up with the N1MM contest program, and provides flawless keying. (I have no financial interest in WinKey; I'm merely a happy customer.) In the interest of full disclosure, I have not attempted to key my K2 directly through the serial port. At the time we were discussing this on the list, there was a minority opinion that the WinKey was not really necessary. The argument was that with modern high speed computers the serial port can handle everything. Nevertheless, if you're keying a computer controlled Elecraft rig via the serial port and you get "choppy" CW, and you install a WinKey and the problem vanishes, it looks like the result speaks for itself. 73, Steve Kercel AA4AK R. Kevin Stover wrote: > Everybody should be using a Winkey to key CW. > > Some people will deny that keying directly from an serial port > controlled by windows causes keying errors. When we ran DOS, the > applications could have unfettered access to the ports. You could also > easily harness the system clock and use it rather than the OS to supply > the timing for CW. It was easy to background a process like sending CW > knowing you had control of the port when you needed it. Not so with > Windows98 and up. XP is especially bad. > > Ever had an application or the OS grab a hold of a USB, serial or > parallel port and not let go when the application or process terminated? > It never happened in DOS. > > One question for the doubters. If a winkey like device isn't necessary > to send properly timed CW, why do several hardware manufacturers, Micro > Ham, US Interface, Rig Expert, and nearly all general and contest > logging applications support it? Just to make K1EL rich? > > W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote: > >> N1MM users have had similar issues. I don't know if AB7R's fix works but >> many have just gone to a Winkey keyer as a solution. I have one built into >> my SO2R MK2R+ Microham devices so I have never seen this issue. >> >> >> "A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may >> never get over." Ben Franklin >> > > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Ed K1EP
Agree with Ed. If you need WINKEY do it, if you don't why add to
complication? Many of us don't. KIS. I think it is a bit ironic that for RTTY, external TNC's have become passe in favor of direct computer decode/encode. However, for CW the direction is to the equivalent of a CW TNC-- at least for the transmit side. So today we have to go via keyboard, computer, computer program, PC port, PIC, PIC program and transistor to emulate closing a J-38 key or bug. 73 de Brian/K3KO Hi tech still uses 4 billion year old quartz and silicon to get their performance..... The K3 is made up of pre Sol stardust. Ed K1EP wrote: >At 2/26/2009 08:05 AM, R. Kevin Stover wrote: > > >>Everybody should be using a Winkey to key CW. >> >> > >Why? > > > >>Some people will deny that keying directly from an serial port >>controlled by windows causes keying errors. When we ran DOS, the >>applications could have unfettered access to the ports. You could also >>easily harness the system clock and use it rather than the OS to supply >>the timing for CW. It was easy to background a process like sending CW >>knowing you had control of the port when you needed it. Not so with >>Windows98 and up. XP is especially bad. >> >>Ever had an application or the OS grab a hold of a USB, serial or >>parallel port and not let go when the application or process terminated? >>It never happened in DOS. >> >>One question for the doubters. If a winkey like device isn't necessary >>to send properly timed CW, why do several hardware manufacturers, Micro >>Ham, US Interface, Rig Expert, and nearly all general and contest >>logging applications support it? Just to make K1EL rich? >> >> > >Because many hams today like to buy neat gadgets, many times without >understanding what they do. I key my K3 direct from my XP PC using >the serial line. I run speeds in the 30+ wpm. I can achieve rates >of over 200+ Q/hour, and I have a very good UBN record. Applications >support it because the interfaces are out there. There are >situations in which you may actually need such a device, but a >properly outfitted PC can support direct keying. I use N1MM, CT, >DxBase and other programs with no problems. Just because something >exists, doesn't make it necessary. Existence is not proof of >necessity, and I don't even play a lawyer on TV. Everyone is free to >decide for themselves what is necessary for their particular situation. > > >______________________________________________________________ >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 |
|
|
> I think it is a bit ironic that for RTTY, external TNC's have > become passe in favor of direct computer decode/encode. However, > for CW the direction is to the equivalent of a CW TNC-- at least > for the transmit side. Ah, but you are mixing apples and oranges. Even in PC RTTY, bit timing has always been done in hardware. It is handled in the UART (typically an 8250 compatible UART) and not done using a software timing loop that can be effected by operating system loading. Before you point to EXTFSK ... EXTFSK uses a hardware timer in the motherboard chipset - it does not rely on a software timing loop like all of the CW software. > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brian Alsop > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:02 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 choppy CW > > > Agree with Ed. If you need WINKEY do it, if you don't why add to > complication? > Many of us don't. KIS. > > I think it is a bit ironic that for RTTY, external TNC's have become > passe in favor of direct computer decode/encode. > However, for CW the direction is to the equivalent of a CW TNC-- at > least for the transmit side. So today we have to go via keyboard, > computer, computer program, PC port, PIC, PIC program and > transistor to > emulate closing a J-38 key or bug. > > 73 de Brian/K3KO > > Hi tech still uses 4 billion year old quartz and silicon to > get their > performance..... > The K3 is made up of pre Sol stardust. > > Ed K1EP wrote: > > >At 2/26/2009 08:05 AM, R. Kevin Stover wrote: > > > > > >>Everybody should be using a Winkey to key CW. > >> > >> > > > >Why? > > > > > > > >>Some people will deny that keying directly from an serial port > >>controlled by windows causes keying errors. When we ran DOS, the > >>applications could have unfettered access to the ports. You > could also > >>easily harness the system clock and use it rather than the OS to > >>supply the timing for CW. It was easy to background a process like > >>sending CW knowing you had control of the port when you > needed it. Not > >>so with Windows98 and up. XP is especially bad. > >> > >>Ever had an application or the OS grab a hold of a USB, serial or > >>parallel port and not let go when the application or process > >>terminated? It never happened in DOS. > >> > >>One question for the doubters. If a winkey like device > isn't necessary > >>to send properly timed CW, why do several hardware manufacturers, > >>Micro Ham, US Interface, Rig Expert, and nearly all general and > >>contest logging applications support it? Just to make K1EL rich? > >> > >> > > > >Because many hams today like to buy neat gadgets, many times without > >understanding what they do. I key my K3 direct from my XP PC using > >the serial line. I run speeds in the 30+ wpm. I can achieve rates > >of over 200+ Q/hour, and I have a very good UBN record. > Applications > >support it because the interfaces are out there. There are > >situations in which you may actually need such a device, but a > >properly outfitted PC can support direct keying. I use N1MM, CT, > >DxBase and other programs with no problems. Just because something > >exists, doesn't make it necessary. Existence is not proof of > >necessity, and I don't even play a lawyer on TV. Everyone > is free to > >decide for themselves what is necessary for their particular > situation. > > > > > >______________________________________________________________ > >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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by alsopb
On Feb 26, 2009, at 7:01 AM, Brian Alsop wrote: > I think it is a bit ironic that for RTTY, external TNC's have become > passe in favor of direct computer decode/encode. Just a property of how computers handle audio. USB Sound Cards go through what are called Isochronous Transfer of USB. These are handled by very high priority tasks, with sufficient audio buffering in the kernel ensure that there are no audio drop outs. Ditto FireWire sound cards, and on-board codecs. This is one reason why I had implemented CW in cocoaModem by using J2A emission (i.e., audio generated CW) instead of A1A emission. It is the only way, short of using WinKey for A1A keying, to ensure that kernel swaps do no interfere with inter-element Morse spacings. (J2A also allows one to implement arbitrary waveshaping of the "keying" waveform. cocoaModem uses a Blackman window to waveshape the CW pulses.) Now, the ironic part is that older operating systems such as MS-DOS and Mac OS 9 work fine with A1A "bit banging" up to very high CW speeds. With today's computers, assuming you can still run those operating system, you can probably run 1000 wpm and still achieve close to perfect Morse inter-element timing. The problem with modern operating systems is that whatever that is running in "user space" can be preempted by the kernel. A key-up or key-down could therefore be delayed just slightly -- but often perceptible by an ear listening to the CW. One way to get around modern operating systems is to write a Morse "device" to run in the kernel (for example, running a WinKey emulator in the kernel). For Mac OS X, this would be a "kernel extension" (kext). Running as a kernel process comes with the associated complexity and dangers (a bug can cause the entire computer to crash). The µH Router, which I wrote for Mac OS X to allow different programs to share a microHAM keyer, actually has a built in "WinKey" emulator, for use with the digiKEYER that does not have a built-in WinKey chip. However, this emulator runs in user space, and now and then you can hear a Morse element being stretched so the rhythm is not perfectly right all the time when running CW even at a slow 25 wpm, even on a dual core computer and even when the emulator is running on a separate high priority (user) thread. 73 Chen, W7AY ______________________________________________________________ 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 Ed K1EP
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 08:24:30 -0500, Ed K1EP wrote:
>Because many hams today like to buy neat gadgets, many times without >understanding what they do. I key my K3 direct from my XP PC using >the serial line. I run speeds in the 30+ wpm. I can achieve rates >of over 200+ Q/hour, and I have a very good UBN record. Applications >support it because the interfaces are out there. There are >situations in which you may actually need such a device, but a >properly outfitted PC can support direct keying. I use N1MM, CT, >DxBase and other programs with no problems. Just because something >exists, doesn't make it necessary. Existence is not proof of >necessity, and I don't even play a lawyer on TV. Everyone is free to >decide for themselves what is necessary for their particular YES! I'm a very active contester, and I've never used anything but serial port keying when using a single radio from a single computer. CW sounds just fine at any reasonable contesting speed. The ONLY time I've ever had choppy CW is running TWO radios from the same laptop computer on two ports. It worked, but it was choppy in the way, and to about the same degree, that ZM1A was choppy last weekend. That's a limitation of how the logging programs send CW. So I broke down and bought a WinKey -- ONLY so that I could run SO2R. There is NO GOOD REASON to buy a WinKey to run one K3. There is also no good reason to use expensive interfaces (or transformers) to connect your computer to your radio. All you need are properly wired cables and simple bonding between the chassis of the computer and the chassis of the radio. See http://audiosystemsgroup.com/HamInterfacing.pdf (Power Point) and http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf (text to go with it) 73, Jim Brown 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 |
|
|
The key is a decent computer. There are many people using very old
computers with minimal ram and cpu speed and they wonder why they have issues. Some people do not have days and hours to figure out why something won't work especially leading up to a contest, for them a WinKeyer might be a great solution. To each their own. Just because it works for one does not mean it works for all. Shall we talk about slopers? :) "A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over." Ben Franklin -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jim Brown Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:17 AM To: Elecraft List Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 choppy CW On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 08:24:30 -0500, Ed K1EP wrote: >Because many hams today like to buy neat gadgets, many times without >understanding what they do. I key my K3 direct from my XP PC using the >serial line. I run speeds in the 30+ wpm. I can achieve rates of over >200+ Q/hour, and I have a very good UBN record. Applications support >it because the interfaces are out there. There are situations in which >you may actually need such a device, but a properly outfitted PC can >support direct keying. I use N1MM, CT, DxBase and other programs with >no problems. Just because something exists, doesn't make it necessary. >Existence is not proof of necessity, and I don't even play a lawyer on >TV. Everyone is free to decide for themselves what is necessary for >their particular YES! I'm a very active contester, and I've never used anything but serial port keying when using a single radio from a single computer. CW sounds just fine at any reasonable contesting speed. The ONLY time I've ever had choppy CW is running TWO radios from the same laptop computer on two ports. It worked, but it was choppy in the way, and to about the same degree, that ZM1A was choppy last weekend. That's a limitation of how the logging programs send CW. So I broke down and bought a WinKey -- ONLY so that I could run SO2R. There is NO GOOD REASON to buy a WinKey to run one K3. There is also no good reason to use expensive interfaces (or transformers) to connect your computer to your radio. All you need are properly wired cables and simple bonding between the chassis of the computer and the chassis of the radio. See http://audiosystemsgroup.com/HamInterfacing.pdf (Power Point) and http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf (text to go with it) 73, Jim Brown 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 ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
> The key is a decent computer. There are many people using very old > computers with minimal ram and cpu speed and they wonder why they have > issues. > > Some people do not have days and hours to figure out why something won't > work especially leading up to a contest, for them a WinKeyer might be a > great solution. To each their own. It's an interesting problem. I have an old Windows 2000 800 MHz laptop which sends perfect CW on my K3 from N1MM at 30 wpm. I did have to set the weight parameter in N1MM to 55. Interestingly, I once had a problem of horrible CW with variable-length elements, etc. I discovered that it was because my wireless network was *not* connected -- and therefore was continuously scanning. Probably the driver was disabling interrupts for long periods. I simply turned the wireless back on and solved the problem. This is just one possible issue. Anti-malware programs can also interfere with CW generation. Since I don't do email on my shack computer and only minimally access the web, I've removed the anti-virus software and kept only a firewall. If you use packet while contesting (I don't), the load on the computer will be increased. And as someone mentioned, SO2R is another factor. Personally, I am suffering from gadget overload in my shack, and the more gadgets there are, the wider you open the door to Murphy. So I don't use Winkey or similar devices. What I suggest is that you a) use a reasonably powerful computer, b) remove unnecessary software running in the background (MSCONFIG will show you much of it), and turn off unneeded Windows services, and c) look for problems like a wireless adapter scanning. If you still have a problem, then maybe Winkey is the solution for you. -- 73, 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 |
|
|
Hi Vic,
In my opinion, Kok Chen and you have said it best so far. The bottom line is that someone could get perfect CW (without using audio) from older as well as newer computers, and could repeat the feat over and over on different machines, while another person has the opposite experience, and, as you point out, the difference has a *lot* to do with what else is running on the computer. It is very easy to assume that just because something is working repeatedly for one person, it would for another person. The computer industry has in effect promoted the belief that you just have to have a program and a computer that are compatible, and you do the installation correctly, you can forget about what else you have on the computer. Not so. Even in the absence of unrelated software and hardware, small changes in the basic hardware configuration can make a big difference in outcome; a faster processor or larger memory is likely to work for you, but *can* work against you in some cases. What is the best approach depends a lot on personal circumstances. You mention gadget overload in the shack, and I have that too. You are apparently willing to strip your shack computer of all non-ham activities, and the computer then is a ham gadget, great! I assume you have another computer for email etc. In my case, my main computer is quite fast (quad 6600 processor) and it is located right next to my radios. It has 4 GB of memory, more than Vista 32 can use. All the time I run several resource-heavy programs on it. Most of the time I get on the radio without any PC use at all, but I do use that same computer when once in a while I get on the digital modes. If I were to shut down a bunch of software before doing running ham software, I would be too lazy to bother doing it at all. I could add another computer for hamming, but that computer would then be a ham gadget, and a much bulkier one than a WinKeyer. Now it so happens, maybe because of the many contesters on this list, I am beginning to get the itch to try contesting with software. The other day I downloaded and installed N1MM. The same day I placed an order for a WinKeyer. While my software and hardware today might allow me to be one of the lucky users who don't need the WinKeyer, the odds are against it, and I don't want to waste the time trying it, expecially since I frequently change the software I run, and I don't want to revisit the issue. 73, Erik K7TV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vic K2VCO" <[hidden email]> To: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <[hidden email]> Cc: <[hidden email]> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:25 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 choppy CW > W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote: >> The key is a decent computer. There are many people using very old >> computers with minimal ram and cpu speed and they wonder why they have >> issues. >> >> Some people do not have days and hours to figure out why something won't >> work especially leading up to a contest, for them a WinKeyer might be a >> great solution. To each their own. > > It's an interesting problem. I have an old Windows 2000 800 MHz laptop > which sends perfect > CW on my K3 from N1MM at 30 wpm. I did have to set the weight parameter in > N1MM to 55. > > Interestingly, I once had a problem of horrible CW with variable-length > elements, etc. I > discovered that it was because my wireless network was *not* connected -- > and therefore > was continuously scanning. Probably the driver was disabling interrupts > for long periods. > I simply turned the wireless back on and solved the problem. > > This is just one possible issue. Anti-malware programs can also interfere > with CW > generation. Since I don't do email on my shack computer and only minimally > access the web, > I've removed the anti-virus software and kept only a firewall. If you use > packet while > contesting (I don't), the load on the computer will be increased. And as > someone > mentioned, SO2R is another factor. > > Personally, I am suffering from gadget overload in my shack, and the more > gadgets there > are, the wider you open the door to Murphy. So I don't use Winkey or > similar devices. > > What I suggest is that you a) use a reasonably powerful computer, b) > remove unnecessary > software running in the background (MSCONFIG will show you much of it), > and turn off > unneeded Windows services, and c) look for problems like a wireless > adapter scanning. > > If you still have a problem, then maybe Winkey is the solution for you. > -- > 73, > 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 > ______________________________________________________________ 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 ac0h
I am a doubter and avid contester. I've had zero negative comments about my keying using simply a serial cable from a COM port direct to the K3 RS232 port.
That's 8000 plus CW QSOs and who knows how many unanswered CQs and wing and a prayer repeats over the past year. Win2K and N1MM mostly, some XP with a laptop (yes one blessed with a real serial port). Yes, I have three K1EL keyers, but only use the USB keyer with the K2. YMMV, but I'm a happy camper on CW with a very simple no interface setup with my K3. 73, Julius n2wn
Julius Fazekas
N2WN Tennessee Contest Group http://www.k4ro.net/tcg/index.html Tennessee QSO Party http://www.tnqp.org/ Elecraft K2 #4455 Elecraft K3/100 #366 Elecraft K3/100 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K7TV
Eric,
Something to keep in mind with the WKUSB keyer, at least the one I installed two years ago, is that the driver installation can be very unforgiving. I, and others, had a heck of a time with them IF one doesn't EXACTLY follow the installation instructions. Read, read and read again before doing anything... Once installed the unit seems bulletproof. This may not hold true with the latest models. I just bought a new one, for mobile use with my K2. Hope to catch you in the contests.. soon to be RTTY enabled here (FSK of course) ;o) 73, Julius
Julius Fazekas
N2WN Tennessee Contest Group http://www.k4ro.net/tcg/index.html Tennessee QSO Party http://www.tnqp.org/ Elecraft K2 #4455 Elecraft K3/100 #366 Elecraft K3/100 |
|
|
Julius,
Thanks for the heads-up. I did order the USB version, and just assumed that it would not be a problem since so many people have said good things about them. Did you install successfully on Vista 32? 73, Erik K7TV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julius Fazekas n2wn" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:42 PM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 choppy CW > > Eric, > > Something to keep in mind with the WKUSB keyer, at least the one I > installed > two years ago, is that the driver installation can be very unforgiving. I, > and others, had a heck of a time with them IF one doesn't EXACTLY follow > the > installation instructions. Read, read and read again before doing > anything... Once installed the unit seems bulletproof. > > This may not hold true with the latest models. I just bought a new one, > for > mobile use with my K2. > > Hope to catch you in the contests.. soon to be RTTY enabled here (FSK of > course) ;o) > > 73, > Julius > > ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Julius,
Though we're now drifting off topic from Elecraft, WinKey USB works fine on my Vista laptop keying my K3. It also has the advantage of not tying up any serial ports, since it runs off the USB port (the driver creates a "virtual" serial port). You can also use it for PTT, thus avoiding using another serial port for that function. 73,andy, ae6y ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik N Basilier" <[hidden email]> To: "Julius Fazekas n2wn" <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 choppy CW > Julius, > > Thanks for the heads-up. I did order the USB version, and just assumed > that > it would not be a problem since so many people have said good things about > them. Did you install successfully on Vista 32? > > 73, > Erik K7TV > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Julius Fazekas n2wn" <[hidden email]> > To: <[hidden email]> > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:42 PM > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 choppy CW > > >> >> Eric, >> >> Something to keep in mind with the WKUSB keyer, at least the one I >> installed >> two years ago, is that the driver installation can be very unforgiving. >> I, >> and others, had a heck of a time with them IF one doesn't EXACTLY follow >> the >> installation instructions. Read, read and read again before doing >> anything... Once installed the unit seems bulletproof. >> >> This may not hold true with the latest models. I just bought a new one, >> for >> mobile use with my K2. >> >> Hope to catch you in the contests.. soon to be RTTY enabled here (FSK of >> course) ;o) >> >> 73, >> Julius >> >> > > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |