Re: filter selection

[Bill W4ZV]

Hi Wayne,

N6KR:
 >The key point here is that these are all filters
*are* offered by other manufacturers -- but at
their 2nd or 3rd IFs.

 >We offer them at our first I.F.

         Of course most of those filters are
going into rigs without an infinitely variableDSP filter following
them.  My point is that
you introduce unnecessary complexity with the
vast number of roofing filters.  400 vs 500,
250 vs 200, etc.

         As one example here are Elecraft's
own specs for the 400 8-pole versus 250 8-pole:

Filter          6 dB BW 60 dB BW

KFL3-400K               435 Hz  935 Hz
KFL3-250K       370 Hz  785 Hz

In my opinion these filters are redundant
and unnecessarily complicate the ordering
process.  65 Hz difference in 6 dB BW is
hardly worth bothering with, especially
since both are 8-pole and their IMD/BDR
performance is likely to be identical.

         It's your decision of course but I'm
a believer in "keep it simple".  I would
offer only the best filter for a given BW,
predetermined by Elecraft and based upon
actual IMD/BDR measurements inside the K3.

                                 73,  Bill  W4ZV



_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[wayne burdick]

Bill Tippett wrote:

> My point is that you introduce unnecessary complexity with the vast
> number of roofing filters.  400 vs 500, 250 vs 200, etc.

We're providing a range of options so the customer can decide which
they want. We may add supplemental information to the order form to
make decisions easier, but we're not likely to reduce the number of
filters offered.


> As one example here are Elecraft's own specs for the 400 8-pole versus
> 250 8-pole:
>
> Filter          6 dB BW 60 dB BW
>
> KFL3-400K       435 Hz  935 Hz
> KFL3-250K       370 Hz  785 Hz

The reason we offer both of these INRAD filters is that they're both,
historically speaking, very popular. I agree that the frequency spacing
of these filters could be clarified in their literature, but again, we
offer them because our customers asked for them, and we're passing
along the model numbers used by INRAD.

We offer our own narrow filter (200 Hz) for those who really want to
maximize rejection of unwanted signals in CW and data modes. Such
narrow bandwidths have been very popular over the years, including in
the K2.


> In my opinion these filters are redundant and unnecessarily complicate
> the ordering process.  65 Hz difference in 6 dB BW is hardly worth
> bothering with, especially since both are 8-pole and their IMD/BDR
> performance is likely to be identical.

As I explained above, this is a somewhat anomalous historical
situation. If INRAD would like to create alternative filters with
different specs, we're open to offering them.


> It's your decision of course but I'm a believer in "keep it simple".  
> I would offer only the best filter for a given BW, predetermined by
> Elecraft and based upon actual IMD/BDR measurements inside the K3.

Eventually we'll have such measurements. For now, we're not about to
limit anyone's personal choice.

We'll also provide great leeway in letting customers change their order
if new information causes them to rethink their filter complement.

73,
Wayne
N6KR


---

http://www.elecraft.com

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[srife]

I'd like to add that, I personally, was initially confused by all of the filter selections and was totally ignorant on the subject of "roofing" filters. But after reading a lot of the posts and asking some questions, I think I have a handle on it enough to make an informed decision for myself on what I might need as far as these filters go.
   
  Like Wayne stated, these various selections are an end result of what different people like, and have requested in the past. So now these options are available. One person might like 200hz, and another 250hz. It may be somewhat intimidating to the un-initiated (me for sure), but this list and Elecraft have always been here to clarify and answer our questions. I hardly believe that it will intimidate anyone to the point that they will not buy a K3.
   
  And if anyone thinks that it is unecessarily complicated, that is their opinion, but in the end I doubt that it will affect your paycheck any.
   
  Stan Rife
  W5EWA
  Houston, TX
  K2 S/N 4216
 

wayne burdick <[hidden email]> wrote:
  Bill Tippett wrote:

> My point is that you introduce unnecessary complexity with the vast
> number of roofing filters. 400 vs 500, 250 vs 200, etc.

We're providing a range of options so the customer can decide which
they want. We may add supplemental information to the order form to
make decisions easier, but we're not likely to reduce the number of
filters offered.


> As one example here are Elecraft's own specs for the 400 8-pole versus
> 250 8-pole:
>
> Filter 6 dB BW 60 dB BW
>
> KFL3-400K 435 Hz 935 Hz
> KFL3-250K 370 Hz 785 Hz

The reason we offer both of these INRAD filters is that they're both,
historically speaking, very popular. I agree that the frequency spacing
of these filters could be clarified in their literature, but again, we
offer them because our customers asked for them, and we're passing
along the model numbers used by INRAD.

We offer our own narrow filter (200 Hz) for those who really want to
maximize rejection of unwanted signals in CW and data modes. Such
narrow bandwidths have been very popular over the years, including in
the K2.


> In my opinion these filters are redundant and unnecessarily complicate
> the ordering process. 65 Hz difference in 6 dB BW is hardly worth
> bothering with, especially since both are 8-pole and their IMD/BDR
> performance is likely to be identical.

As I explained above, this is a somewhat anomalous historical
situation. If INRAD would like to create alternative filters with
different specs, we're open to offering them.


> It's your decision of course but I'm a believer in "keep it simple".
> I would offer only the best filter for a given BW, predetermined by
> Elecraft and based upon actual IMD/BDR measurements inside the K3.

Eventually we'll have such measurements. For now, we're not about to
limit anyone's personal choice.

We'll also provide great leeway in letting customers change their order
if new information causes them to rethink their filter complement.

73,
Wayne
N6KR


---

http://www.elecraft.com

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft 

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com