Elecraft

Re: Pileup Mush (was:audio board)

Classic

List

Threaded

6 messages Options

N1EU

Re: Pileup Mush (was:audio board)

It's not a question of whether "your ears can handle the increased range of
audio levels."

I've been in the trenches battling against pileup mush since the K3's
release. This is only one guy's opinion, but there's another important
prerequisite that's been missing from this discussion. And that's to use
highly isolating headphones. That is the ONLY effective way of presenting
the required wide audio dynamic range to your ears. Unless that's in the
picture, you're significantly handicapped from vanquishing pileup mush.

The use of highly isolating headphones is what allows you to use lower
levels of RF Gain and still clearly hear the weakest signals. And only
then will the strongest signal levels be below the ear's attenuation reflex
level

K3NA wrote the book on this 8 or so years ago.

73, Barry N1EU

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Ian White <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Don wrote:
>
> >Gene (and all),
> >
> >Yes, the AGC settings do help a lot. The K3/K3S has enough gain that
> >often the AGC is activated on the atmospheric noise in the band.
>
> It isn't so much that the K3/K3S has "gain", but that the factory
> default AGC THReshold is so very, very low. Measurements by KE7X [1]
> have shown that the default setting of THR=5 corresponds to an AGC onset
> at less than S3, whereas competing rigs have a threshold of S7 or even
> higher. This very low AGC threshold is what allows the AGC to be
> activated by band noise.
>
> Elecraft's factory defaults of THR=5 and SLP=12 compress all signals
> above the AGC threshold into a very narrow range of audio output levels
> [see the measurements by KE7X]. This makes for comfortable
> broadcast-style listening - but there is price to be paid. The default
> settings greatly reduce the differences in the *true* strengths of
> incoming signals - important differences that DXers and contesters
> *need* to hear, in order to pick individual signals out of a pileup.
>
> Following complaints from DXers, DXpeditioners and contesters about this
> so-called "pileup mush", and following further series of measurements by
> KE7X, Elecraft eventually did increase the available range of AGC
> THReshold settings (the v4.51 firmware upgrade).
>
> Following the release of FW v4.51, consensus within the [K3-contesting]
> Yahoo group about the most important settings for DXing and contesting
> has been as follows.
>
> * AGC THR: increase to at least 8 (from default = 5) and preferably to
> 12 or even 14 if your ears can handle the increased range of audio
> levels [2].
>
> * AGC SLP: decrease to 8 or even less (from default = 12). Lower SLP
> settings allow stronger signals to sound somewhat louder, and thus more
> realistic, but the range of variation will be partly determined by the
> THR setting already made; so always experiment with THR first, and with
> SLP afterwards.
>
> * AGC DCY = SOFT (not default=NOR). The User Manual claims that "The
> SOFT setting can reduce IMD caused by traditional AGC, and is especially
> useful in 'pileup' conditions, in some cases making it unnecessary to
> turn AGC off."
>
> The settings recommended above have essentially solved the problem of
> "pileup mush" for those who have tried them... but regrettably, Elecraft
> has done almost nothing to make DXers and contesters aware that such
> changes are possible.
>
> More than 3 years after the firmware release notes boasted that v4.51
> "greatly improves signal clarity in pile-ups and other high-noise or
> dense-signal situations, especially with threshold set to 12 or higher",
> that information is *still* missing from the User Manual. There is also
> no information on how to create different 'profiles' of AGC settings for
> different types of users.
>
> Meanwhile, Elecraft's factory AGC defaults remain exactly as they were,
> still optimized apparently for comfortable 'listening', while many DXers
> and contesters remain unaware that their K3/K3S could actually be *so*
> much better.
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.ke7x.com/home/miscellaneous-k3-information
>
> [2] It is important to give any increased AGC THReshold setting an
> extended trial. To anyone accustomed to an artificially restricted range
> of audio signal levels, a higher setting will initially sound quite
> 'aggressive' -even though the new setting is much closer to real life.
>
>
> 73 from Ian GM3SEK
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >
> >On 3/22/2016 6:32 PM, Gene Gabry wrote:
> >> This has been an interesting thread to which I have experimented a
> bit
> >more
> >> and found the AGC setting recommendations from a couple of posters to
> >be
> >> very valuable, and Eric's suggestions on BW settings to be a nice
> >compliment
> >> to play with. Although, my ears still like a little HF, I like the
> sound of
> >> a BW from 100hz to 2.7khz for SSB and usually the 500hz filter set to
> >300hz
> >> with DSP. I now have AGC THR set to max and AGC SLP set to 0. I also
> set
> >RX
> >> EQ to flat and use hi/lo cut when needed. Really cuts down on the
> high
> >> frequency hash I get from this qth. I leave the AGC settings the same
> for
> >> SSB and CW and play with BW and cut between the two modes, depending
> >on
> >> conditions.
> >>
> >
> >______________________________________________________________
> >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]
>

______________________________________________________________
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]

gm3sek

Re: Pileup Mush (was:audio board)

I don't dispute what Barry says below, except that IMO it is a question
of *both* re-profiling the AGC settings within the K3/K3S *and then*
doing whatever else is necessary to present that enhanced range of audio
levels to one's ears.

Neither of those actions can deliver its full benefit without attention
to the other one as well.

73 from Ian GM3SEK

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>Barry N1EU
>Sent: 23 March 2016 15:24
>To: Elecraft Reflector
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Pileup Mush (was:audio board)
>
>It's not a question of whether "your ears can handle the increased
range of
>audio levels."
>
>I've been in the trenches battling against pileup mush since the K3's
>release. This is only one guy's opinion, but there's another important
>prerequisite that's been missing from this discussion. And that's to
use
>highly isolating headphones. That is the ONLY effective way of
presenting
>the required wide audio dynamic range to your ears. Unless that's in
the
>picture, you're significantly handicapped from vanquishing pileup mush.
>
>The use of highly isolating headphones is what allows you to use lower
>levels of RF Gain and still clearly hear the weakest signals. And only
>then will the strongest signal levels be below the ear's attenuation
reflex

>level
>
>K3NA wrote the book on this 8 or so years ago.
>
>73, Barry N1EU
>
>On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Ian White <[hidden email]>
>wrote:
>
>> Don wrote:
>>
>> >Gene (and all),
>> >
>> >Yes, the AGC settings do help a lot. The K3/K3S has enough gain

that
>> >often the AGC is activated on the atmospheric noise in the band.
>>
>> It isn't so much that the K3/K3S has "gain", but that the factory
>> default AGC THReshold is so very, very low. Measurements by KE7X [1]
>> have shown that the default setting of THR=5 corresponds to an AGC
>onset
>> at less than S3, whereas competing rigs have a threshold of S7 or
even
>> higher. This very low AGC threshold is what allows the AGC to be
>> activated by band noise.
>>
>> Elecraft's factory defaults of THR=5 and SLP=12 compress all signals
>> above the AGC threshold into a very narrow range of audio output
levels
>> [see the measurements by KE7X]. This makes for comfortable
>> broadcast-style listening - but there is price to be paid. The
default
>> settings greatly reduce the differences in the *true* strengths of
>> incoming signals - important differences that DXers and contesters
>> *need* to hear, in order to pick individual signals out of a pileup.
>>
>> Following complaints from DXers, DXpeditioners and contesters about
this
>> so-called "pileup mush", and following further series of measurements
by
>> KE7X, Elecraft eventually did increase the available range of AGC
>> THReshold settings (the v4.51 firmware upgrade).
>>
>> Following the release of FW v4.51, consensus within the
[K3-contesting]
>> Yahoo group about the most important settings for DXing and
contesting
>> has been as follows.
>>
>> * AGC THR: increase to at least 8 (from default = 5) and preferably
to
>> 12 or even 14 if your ears can handle the increased range of audio
>> levels [2].
>>
>> * AGC SLP: decrease to 8 or even less (from default = 12). Lower SLP
>> settings allow stronger signals to sound somewhat louder, and thus
more
>> realistic, but the range of variation will be partly determined by
the
>> THR setting already made; so always experiment with THR first, and
with
>> SLP afterwards.
>>
>> * AGC DCY = SOFT (not default=NOR). The User Manual claims that "The
>> SOFT setting can reduce IMD caused by traditional AGC, and is
especially
>> useful in 'pileup' conditions, in some cases making it unnecessary to
>> turn AGC off."
>>
>> The settings recommended above have essentially solved the problem of
>> "pileup mush" for those who have tried them... but regrettably,
Elecraft
>> has done almost nothing to make DXers and contesters aware that such
>> changes are possible.
>>
>> More than 3 years after the firmware release notes boasted that v4.51
>> "greatly improves signal clarity in pile-ups and other high-noise or
>> dense-signal situations, especially with threshold set to 12 or
higher",
>> that information is *still* missing from the User Manual. There is
also
>> no information on how to create different 'profiles' of AGC settings
for
>> different types of users.
>>
>> Meanwhile, Elecraft's factory AGC defaults remain exactly as they
were,
>> still optimized apparently for comfortable 'listening', while many
DXers
>> and contesters remain unaware that their K3/K3S could actually be
*so*
>> much better.
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.ke7x.com/home/miscellaneous-k3-information
>>
>> [2] It is important to give any increased AGC THReshold setting an
>> extended trial. To anyone accustomed to an artificially restricted
range
>> of audio signal levels, a higher setting will initially sound quite
>> 'aggressive' -even though the new setting is much closer to real
life.

>>
>>
>> 73 from Ian GM3SEK
>>
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >
>> >On 3/22/2016 6:32 PM, Gene Gabry wrote:
>> >> This has been an interesting thread to which I have experimented a
>> bit
>> >more
>> >> and found the AGC setting recommendations from a couple of posters
>to
>> >be
>> >> very valuable, and Eric's suggestions on BW settings to be a nice
>> >compliment
>> >> to play with. Although, my ears still like a little HF, I like the
>> sound of
>> >> a BW from 100hz to 2.7khz for SSB and usually the 500hz filter set

to
>> >300hz
>> >> with DSP. I now have AGC THR set to max and AGC SLP set to 0. I
also
>> set
>> >RX
>> >> EQ to flat and use hi/lo cut when needed. Really cuts down on the
>> high
>> >> frequency hash I get from this qth. I leave the AGC settings the
same

>> for
>> >> SSB and CW and play with BW and cut between the two modes,
>depending
>> >on
>> >> conditions.
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>______________________________________________________________
>> >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]
>>
>______________________________________________________________
>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]

lstavenhagen

Re: Pileup Mush (was:audio board)

In reply to this post by N1EU

Regarding headphones/speakers, the way I learnt it many years ago was that hi-fidelity transducers were generally a no-no in communications, primarily because frequency response and other distortions (if done correctly) aided in hearing desired signals.
Of course, back then our receivers weren't even in the same ballpark as today's, with their audio processing/filtering capabilities and so forth, so I suppose it was more common to seek help by introducing distortions in the transducers themselves, like peaks in the frequency response that helped shape the signals.

That said, I do use my "hifi" headphones with my K's; I haven't tried my aviation headset yet though. I'm tempted to give that a go soon as I can retrieve it from the hangar.

But I wonder if hi-fi speakers and headphones aren't still being too faithful to what's actually going into them electrically? Even on top-of-the-line rigs like ours?

73,
LS
W5QD

briancom

Re: Pileup Mush (was:audio board)

Won't argue with the experts.

However, I really wonder why one would not want a "brick wall" type
earphone/speaker which greatly rejected anything outside the audio range
of interest. There is the issue of dynamics (e.g. 100 wpm CW) which
probably needs some higher frequency response.

In the early 60's I had a set of high impedance earphones that had a
mechanical resonance at about 400 Hz. It was great for CW. Zero
beating was easy too.

The selectivity of RX's in those days wasn't much-- except if you were
lucky to have a Q-multiplier. The resonant earphones were welcome.

73 de Brian/K3KO

On 3/23/2016 16:18 PM, lstavenhagen wrote:

> Regarding headphones/speakers, the way I learnt it many years ago was that
> hi-fidelity transducers were generally a no-no in communications, primarily
> because frequency response and other distortions (if done correctly) aided
> in hearing desired signals.
> Of course, back then our receivers weren't even in the same ballpark as
> today's, with their audio processing/filtering capabilities and so forth, so
> I suppose it was more common to seek help by introducing distortions in the
> transducers themselves, like peaks in the frequency response that helped
> shape the signals.
>
> That said, I do use my "hifi" headphones with my K's; I haven't tried my
> aviation headset yet though. I'm tempted to give that a go soon as I can
> retrieve it from the hangar.
>
> But I wonder if hi-fi speakers and headphones aren't still being too
> faithful to what's actually going into them electrically? Even on
> top-of-the-line rigs like ours?
>
> 73,
> LS
> W5QD
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Re-Pileup-Mush-was-audio-board-tp7615473p7615477.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]
>

lstavenhagen

Re: Pileup Mush (was:audio board)

Yes, my first RX when I was a child in the 70's was a Realistic from Radio Shack. I can't remember the model but it was as wide as the Red Sea, especially with the built-in speaker. At one point I got a set of comm headphones with a hefty peak in 400hz or so range and it really worked well as a "poor man's" audio filter. That was back in the days when novices could only use CW so it didn't have to sound good on AM sigs (and it didn't), just good on CW tones. It really helped a bunch - I wish I still had them!

73,
LS
W5QD

k6dgw

Re: Pileup Mush

An obscure Novice in SoCal did that ... he had no wallet. PVC pipe
hadn't been invented, he used a mailing tube, same tube he made a
telescope out of with a shaving mirror. He actually had to study some
of the simpler math associated with acoustic resonance which was of some
assistance starting college later in life.

Don't ever think Amateur Radio isn't a great training ground for teenagers.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the Cal QSO Party 1-2 Oct 2016
- www.cqp.org

On 3/23/2016 2:52 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:

> Back in the 50's and 60's there were many articles in the mags of hams
> mounting a headphone in one end of a tube. The length of the tube was cut to
> provide resonance at the desired audio frequency. Such filters actually
> provided pretty sharp responses for CW operation for Hams with slender
> wallets (like mine).
>
> 73, Ron AC7AC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> lstavenhagen
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 12:33 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Pileup Mush (was:audio board)
>
> Yes, my first RX when I was a child in the 70's was a Realistic from Radio
> Shack. I can't remember the model but it was as wide as the Red Sea,
> especially with the built-in speaker. At one point I got a set of comm
> headphones with a hefty peak in 400hz or so range and it really worked well
> as a "poor man's" audio filter. That was back in the days when novices could
> only use CW so it didn't have to sound good on AM sigs (and it didn't), just
> good on CW tones. It really helped a bunch - I wish I still had them!
>
> 73,
> LS
> W5QD
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Re-Pileup-Mush-was-audio-board-tp761547
> 3p7615489.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11867 - Release Date: 03/23/16
>
>