Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ???
Locked
Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ???
 
|
With all the comments about the upgraded or improved AGC is their a
consensus as to starting values? I realize that these can be tailored for specific situations but a default starting set would be helpful. Thank you in advance, 73, Jack, W3TMZ ______________________________________________________________ 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: Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ???
|
|
I have not had a sufficiently large or loud pile up to test the AGC mods
under "battle conditions". Perhaps this weekend... I have my AGC values all set at the default levels except AGC THR which is 13. I'll be interested to hear what others are doing. Pete, W1RM -----Original Message----- From: Jack Colson [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 5:19 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: [Elecraft] Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ??? With all the comments about the upgraded or improved AGC is their a consensus as to starting values? I realize that these can be tailored for specific situations but a default starting set would be helpful. Thank you in advance, 73, Jack, W3TMZ ______________________________________________________________ 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 moved my AGC values around some to check it out, and then finally put
them back where they were, because I STILL like them there. My intercept value was worked out when I first got my K3, which was not at the extreme. 4.51 has not changed the AGC behavior if your previously picked AGC was within range to start with. For some they were at the extreme of the old value limits and wanted more numbers. Those folks now have something to play with. What I got out of 4.51 is a remarkable change in clarity and a coincident improvement in DSP NB (no change in IF NB). This has been explained as using numbers with more places after the decimal in logarithm functions, which would have removed a kind of "distortion" at AGC threshold. This "distortion" had already been reported as being eliminated by moving the threshold higher, or by adding attenuation to the RF, which effectively raises the threshold. Many of us for other reasons had made these changes ourselves some time ago, and simply were not affected by the complaints from others, making this problem perversely one of those A hears it, B does not, kind of things I note that for a long time, it was being blamed on the hardware AGC. If there WAS something still left there, I don't know what it would be. Maybe all of us need to apologize to the hardware AGC genie in our K3. False accusations may have cause hard feelings and reduced mojo. At some point after I got the K3, I quit using fast AGC at all, and set the slow AGC to its fastest value, used that all the time just because I "liked it better" (lack of technical specificity noted :>)). Also I "like" the fast AGC again (lack of technical specificity still noted). I'm sure it's obvious to all, the slow AGC punches high, and takes its fat time coming back down, which puts the majority of signals under what is a rolling threshold where only a yet stronger signal would push it higher. So the combination of slow AGC and managing the RF input had the effect of minimizing transaction in the area fixed by the log function improvements, and the statement "Guy just is not having this problem" was both true AND covering up the problem. It also explains why I could never come up with anything to ID problems reported on the reflector using steady state signals :>) If ever there was one, this was one of those "self-disguising" problems that confounds solution. The clarity improvements in 4.51 occur for me because, even with my coping adjustments to AGC and RF attenuation, the **slice of time where the AGC was moving from not invoked to set-at-value-by-signal** produced a distortion on the signal that happens only on the edge of signals. This also explains why the NB DSP t1-7 and t2-7 are better than before on key clicks (turn off IF blanking). Way to go, guys. This one's really a winner. 73, Guy. On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Peter Chamalian <[hidden email]> wrote: > I have not had a sufficiently large or loud pile up to test the AGC mods > under "battle conditions". Perhaps this weekend... > > I have my AGC values all set at the default levels except AGC THR which is > 13. > > I'll be interested to hear what others are doing. > > Pete, W1RM > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jack Colson [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 5:19 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: [Elecraft] Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ??? > > With all the comments about the upgraded or improved AGC is their a > consensus as to starting values? I realize that these can be tailored for > specific situations but a default starting set would be helpful. > > Thank you in advance, > 73, > Jack, W3TMZ > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 |
Re: Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ???
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Jack Colson
Try 10 for threshold and 10-12 for slope.
73, Eric --- www.elecraft.com On 5/22/2012 2:18 PM, Jack Colson wrote: > With all the comments about the upgraded or improved AGC is their a > consensus as to starting values? I realize that these can be tailored > for specific situations but a default starting set would be helpful. > > Thank you in advance, > 73, > Jack, W3TMZ ______________________________________________________________ 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: Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ???
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Chamalian
I'll be in the WPX CW this weekend, using the rare prefix call
sign KZ7X. I'm hoping for some good pileups to test things out! I'll be using these settings: agc dcy soft hld 0.2 pls nor slp 0 thr 20 f 200 s 020 af lim nor 030 front panel agc fast Use min preamp, max attenuator, and min rf gain to keep weak signals just clearly readable. My idea behind those settings is to keep dynamic range as high as possible before agc even begins to actuate. If agc compression becomes a big issue, I will try turning agc off, and setting rf and af gain to keep signals in the range where they need to be (weak signals readable, and loud signals below the AF Limiter). I have a new sensitive headphone setup, and new sound deadening in the amplifier that may help in this regard. Thanks to K3NA for this idea: http://wiki.contesting.com/index.php/Setting_receiver_gain_controls That's my plan, and I'm stickin' to it! Dave Hachadorian, K6LL Yuma, Arizona -----Original Message----- From: Peter Chamalian Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 2:48 PM To: 'Jack Colson' ; [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ??? I have not had a sufficiently large or loud pile up to test the AGC mods under "battle conditions". Perhaps this weekend... I have my AGC values all set at the default levels except AGC THR which is 13. I'll be interested to hear what others are doing. Pete, W1RM -----Original Message----- From: Jack Colson [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 5:19 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: [Elecraft] Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ??? With all the comments about the upgraded or improved AGC is their a consensus as to starting values? I realize that these can be tailored for specific situations but a default starting set would be helpful. Thank you in advance, 73, Jack, W3TMZ ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Have you tried these settings? It's easy to do with a signal generator.
You might not like them. From what I can tell your settings kick in the AGC at S9. At that point you have about 54db of audio change from weakest to strongest. It then goes up from there. How much depends upon how Elecraft has warped the slope so your ears don't get blown up. The AF limiter will probably kick in often and produce a horrible sounding signal to save your ears. The strategy to fiddle with AF/RF controls to keep AF levels acceptable always seemed an added chore that the radio should be doing. 73 de Brian/K3KO On 5/23/2012 00:31, Dave Hachadorian wrote: > I'll be in the WPX CW this weekend, using the rare prefix call > sign KZ7X. I'm hoping for some good pileups to test things out! > > I'll be using these settings: > agc dcy soft > hld 0.2 > pls nor > slp 0 > thr 20 > f 200 > s 020 > af lim nor 030 > front panel agc fast > Use min preamp, max attenuator, and min rf gain to keep weak > signals just clearly readable. > > My idea behind those settings is to keep dynamic range as high as > possible before agc even begins to actuate. > > If agc compression becomes a big issue, I will try turning agc > off, and setting rf and af gain to keep signals in the range > where they need to be (weak signals readable, and loud signals > below the AF Limiter). I have a new sensitive headphone setup, > and new sound deadening in the amplifier that may help in this > regard. Thanks to K3NA for this idea: > http://wiki.contesting.com/index.php/Setting_receiver_gain_controls > > That's my plan, and I'm stickin' to it! > > Dave Hachadorian, K6LL > Yuma, Arizona > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Chamalian > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 2:48 PM > To: 'Jack Colson' ; [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ??? > > I have not had a sufficiently large or loud pile up to test the > AGC mods > under "battle conditions". Perhaps this weekend... > > I have my AGC values all set at the default levels except AGC THR > which is > 13. > > I'll be interested to hear what others are doing. > > Pete, W1RM > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jack Colson [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 5:19 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: [Elecraft] Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ??? > > With all the comments about the upgraded or improved AGC is their > a > consensus as to starting values? I realize that these can be > tailored for > specific situations but a default starting set would be helpful. > > Thank you in advance, > 73, > Jack, W3TMZ > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virus Database: 2425/5015 - Release Date: 05/22/12 > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virus Database: 2425/5017 - Release Date: 05/23/12 ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Dave has eardrums made of neoprene. He does an audio headset version of
bungee jumping off a bridge. But I should talk. For some time at NY4A, I would operate an MP with the AGC off, using the limiting of its rather limited DSP to limit the pain, so I could hear the 40m DL/OK QRP basement wet noodle antenna crowd down amongst all the IMD generated stuff that we thought was band noise until the K3 came out. Then AGC worked again. Now AGC works even better. I've gotten so spoiled... I may never run a contest with AGC off again. I may lose my charter membership in the I-can-listen-to-anything-at-any-volume-and-show-no-sign-of-pain Club I earned in the '50's handling traffic on 80 meters in the summer time using an old National that only had AGC for AM signals. 73, Guy. On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Brian Alsop <[hidden email]> wrote: > Have you tried these settings? It's easy to do with a signal generator. > You might not like them. > > From what I can tell your settings kick in the AGC at S9. At that > point you have about 54db of audio change from weakest to strongest. > It then goes up from there. How much depends upon how Elecraft has > warped the slope so your ears don't get blown up. > > The AF limiter will probably kick in often and produce a horrible > sounding signal to save your ears. > > The strategy to fiddle with AF/RF controls to keep AF levels acceptable > always seemed an added chore that the radio should be doing. > > 73 de Brian/K3KO > > > On 5/23/2012 00:31, Dave Hachadorian wrote: > > I'll be in the WPX CW this weekend, using the rare prefix call > > sign KZ7X. I'm hoping for some good pileups to test things out! > > > > I'll be using these settings: > > agc dcy soft > > hld 0.2 > > pls nor > > slp 0 > > thr 20 > > f 200 > > s 020 > > af lim nor 030 > > front panel agc fast > > Use min preamp, max attenuator, and min rf gain to keep weak > > signals just clearly readable. > > > > My idea behind those settings is to keep dynamic range as high as > > possible before agc even begins to actuate. > > > > If agc compression becomes a big issue, I will try turning agc > > off, and setting rf and af gain to keep signals in the range > > where they need to be (weak signals readable, and loud signals > > below the AF Limiter). I have a new sensitive headphone setup, > > and new sound deadening in the amplifier that may help in this > > regard. Thanks to K3NA for this idea: > > http://wiki.contesting.com/index.php/Setting_receiver_gain_controls > > > > That's my plan, and I'm stickin' to it! > > > > Dave Hachadorian, K6LL > > Yuma, Arizona > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Peter Chamalian > > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 2:48 PM > > To: 'Jack Colson' ; [hidden email] > > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ??? > > > > I have not had a sufficiently large or loud pile up to test the > > AGC mods > > under "battle conditions". Perhaps this weekend... > > > > I have my AGC values all set at the default levels except AGC THR > > which is > > 13. > > > > I'll be interested to hear what others are doing. > > > > Pete, W1RM > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jack Colson [mailto:[hidden email]] > > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 5:19 PM > > To: [hidden email] > > Subject: [Elecraft] Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ??? > > > > With all the comments about the upgraded or improved AGC is their > > a > > consensus as to starting values? I realize that these can be > > tailored for > > specific situations but a default starting set would be helpful. > > > > Thank you in advance, > > 73, > > Jack, W3TMZ > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virus Database: 2425/5015 - Release Date: 05/22/12 > > > > > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virus Database: 2425/5017 - Release Date: 05/23/12 > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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
Mine is currently set at AGC THR 15 and SLP 15 (for CW). I'm still
playing with SLP, tending to set it higher. The reason for these settings is I want to be able to hear variation in signal level up to about s-8/9, but not much above that. These settings do require occasional adjustment of the AF GAIN between the strongest and weakest signals, but not much. It depends on one's own comfortable hearing range (plus headphones, speaker acoustics, resonances, perceived amplitude of different CW tones, etc.) But I don't get the point of THR 20 SLP 0. I assume that is pretty much the same as just turning off the AGC. Prior to the recent extension of the THL adjustment I would often turn the AGC off and live with distortion at AF LIM = 20. (I also worried about the AF amplifier stages which someone claimed could be subject to damage when the AGC was off.) I think the K3 sounds a lot better since the latest improvements. But that may be a subjective judgement on my part, or due to propagation, etc. But it sure sounds great to me... 73, Drew AF2Z On Wed, 23 May 2012 12:40:01 +0000, Brian/K3KO wrote: >Have you tried these settings? It's easy to do with a signal generator. >You might not like them. > > From what I can tell your settings kick in the AGC at S9. At that >point you have about 54db of audio change from weakest to strongest. >It then goes up from there. How much depends upon how Elecraft has >warped the slope so your ears don't get blown up. > >The AF limiter will probably kick in often and produce a horrible >sounding signal to save your ears. > >The strategy to fiddle with AF/RF controls to keep AF levels acceptable >always seemed an added chore that the radio should be doing. > >73 de Brian/K3KO > > >On 5/23/2012 00:31, Dave Hachadorian wrote: >> I'll be in the WPX CW this weekend, using the rare prefix call >> sign KZ7X. I'm hoping for some good pileups to test things out! >> >> I'll be using these settings: >> agc dcy soft >> hld 0.2 >> pls nor >> slp 0 >> thr 20 >> f 200 >> s 020 >> af lim nor 030 >> front panel agc fast >> Use min preamp, max attenuator, and min rf gain to keep weak >> signals just clearly readable. >> >> My idea behind those settings is to keep dynamic range as high as >> possible before agc even begins to actuate. >> >> If agc compression becomes a big issue, I will try turning agc >> off, and setting rf and af gain to keep signals in the range >> where they need to be (weak signals readable, and loud signals >> below the AF Limiter). I have a new sensitive headphone setup, >> and new sound deadening in the amplifier that may help in this >> regard. Thanks to K3NA for this idea: >> http://wiki.contesting.com/index.php/Setting_receiver_gain_controls >> >> That's my plan, and I'm stickin' to it! >> >> Dave Hachadorian, K6LL >> Yuma, Arizona >> ______________________________________________________________ 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: Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ???
|
|
>I don't get the point of THR 20 SLP 0. I assume that is pretty
>much the same as just turning off the AGC. That is correct for low to moderate signal levels. At high signal levels, a pretty aggressive agc flattening kicks in, even at slp=0. This flattening is more comfortable to deal with than the raucous-sounding AF Limiter, which operates only with AGC turned off. Dave Hachadorian, K6LL Yuma, Arizona . ______________________________________________________________ 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: Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ???
|
|
In reply to this post by Dave Hachadorian
At THR=20, the SLP is irrelevant. All SLP values result in the same effect,
approximately SLP=15. At higher THR settings, the SLP is flattened to protect your ears, and at the maximum THR=20 the SLP is horizontal, i.e., SLP=15, regardless of what value used for SLP. Only by turning off AGC will the K3 AGC function go as high as the hardware AGC. Ed W0YK Dave, K6LL, wrote: > I'll be in the WPX CW this weekend, using the rare prefix > call sign KZ7X. I'm hoping for some good pileups to test things out! > > I'll be using these settings: > agc dcy soft > hld 0.2 > pls nor > slp 0 > thr 20 > f 200 > s 020 > af lim nor 030 > front panel agc fast > Use min preamp, max attenuator, and min rf gain to keep weak > signals just clearly readable. > > My idea behind those settings is to keep dynamic range as > high as possible before agc even begins to actuate. > > If agc compression becomes a big issue, I will try turning > agc off, and setting rf and af gain to keep signals in the > range where they need to be (weak signals readable, and loud > signals below the AF Limiter). I have a new sensitive > headphone setup, and new sound deadening in the amplifier > that may help in this regard. Thanks to K3NA for this idea: > http://wiki.contesting.com/index.php/Setting_receiver_gain_controls ______________________________________________________________ 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: Starting values for AGC with MCU 4.51 ???
|
|
In reply to this post by Dave Hachadorian
The full range of SLP values only applies at the lower THR values. With
THR>8, the lower SLP values are not effective. That is, for THR>8 there is a SLP value below which the AGC curve does not change (become steeper). At THR=15, SLP values 0-7 all result in about the same effect as SLP=7. At THR=20, the AGC curve is essentially the SLP=15 curve for all values of SLP from 0-15. The SLP=0 curve is only 1-2 dB higher than SLP=15 at S9+40dB. THR=20 is very different than AGC=OFF. With AGC=OFF, the always-on hardware AGC allows audio levels 20+ dB higher than the least aggressive DSP AGC (THR=20, SLP=0). That's why the AF LIMiter function is available ... to protect the user's ears. Ed W0YK Drew AF2Z wrote: > >I don't get the point of THR 20 SLP 0. I assume that is > pretty much the > >same as just turning off the AGC. Dave K6LL wrote: > > That is correct for low to moderate signal levels. At high > signal levels, a pretty aggressive agc flattening kicks in, > even at slp=0. This flattening is more comfortable to deal > with than the raucous-sounding AF Limiter, which operates > only with AGC turned off. ______________________________________________________________ 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 |