Elecraft

TS-990

Classic

List

Threaded

51 messages Options

123

tnnyswy

Re: TS-990

Rick I agree with you on this thread being drawn out, and should go quietly to the curb.
However, you have brought up a very valid question about Elecraft simple but effective products.
I think you should start another thread with your question as the heading.
It would be interesting to hear other views and opinions on why such a simple radio stands head and shoulders
with the back breaking behemoths that end up on some desks.

(((73))) Milverton.

>________________________________
> From: Rick Wheeler <[hidden email]>
>To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
>Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 1:18 PM
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] TS-990
>
>
>While this thread is getting a little long in the tooth, Al brings up some very interesting points. Yes, Kenwood, Icom, and Yaesu do make fine transceivers, but it does seem the Elecraft rigs perform as well and better in many cases with simpler schematics. Me, far from being an electronics guru, would like to have someone offer up an explanation as to if Elecraft rigs are indeed simpler generally and if so why they perform as well or better in many cases. Hurry though, I think this thread is due to be shut down soon!
>
>Rick
>K4LX
>K2 #2005
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Al Lorona <[hidden email]>
>To: [hidden email]
>Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 1:16 PM
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] TS-990
>
>
>The weight of rigs from Japan has more to do with the choice of steel for the
>chassis instead of aluminum, and certainly the size of the TS-990 is the right
>size for many people. But another observation is that when you look at the
>schematic diagrams of Japanese rigs they are unbelievably complicated. There
>are easily ten times as many paths, components, connectors, and devices as the
>typical American rig, making it extremely difficult to follow signal flow on
>these enormously dense circuits. When I first obtained an Elecraft K2, I
>couldn't believe how simple it was. The schematic looked pretty much like the
>occasional homebrew transceiver you see in QST, and yet the specs were every bit
>as good as Japanese rigs costing (and weighing) way more. I have always wondered
>whether Japanese transceivers are way over-engineered-- and thus more expensive,
>heavier, and larger-- than they have to be.
>
>Al W6LX
>______________________________________________________________
>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
>
>

Bill W4ZV

Re: TS-990

In reply to this post by Rick Wheeler-2

Rick Wheeler-2 wrote

Me, far from being an electronics guru, would like to have someone offer up an explanation as to if Elecraft rigs are indeed simpler generally and if so why they perform as well or better in many cases.

In my opinion, it's because Elecraft is more tuned in to users. Elecraft's owners and many of their staff are active hams. They also directly monitor lists such as this one for user input (and respond accordingly). Elegant simplicity of design focused on real user needs is always a winning combination (e.g. Apple comes to mind). Kenwood came closest to this with the TS-930S but lost their way with succeeding models (although the TS-590S is a nice step in the right direction).

73, Bill W4ZV

Jim Low man

Re: TS-990

In reply to this post by Rick Wheeler-2

I was very surprised at the fact that the TS-990 didn't place higher in
the Sherwood ratings. I would have thought that it would have been on
par with the FTDX-5000.

However, for those who abhor menus, the 990 may be the answer to your
prayers. With that many front-panel controls, I'd be surprised if there
are any menus involved.

Although the service centers for Yaesu and Kenwood are convenient to my
location, as is Elecraft, I think I'll stay with Elecraft because of
their excellent product support.

73 de Jim - AD6CW

On 6/5/2013 2:18 PM, Rick Wheeler wrote:
> While this thread is getting a little long in the tooth, Al brings up some very interesting points. Yes, Kenwood, Icom, and Yaesu do make fine transceivers, but it does seem the Elecraft rigs perform as well and better in many cases with simpler schematics. Me, far from being an electronics guru, would like to have someone offer up an explanation as to if Elecraft rigs are indeed simpler generally and if so why they perform as well or better in many cases. Hurry though, I think this thread is due to be shut down soon!
>
> Rick
> K4LX
> K2 #2005
>

______________________________________________________________
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

Bill K9YEQ

Re: RES: TS-990

In reply to this post by EricJ-2

Eric,

If one has the money, why not own them all? Then we can get user feedback.
No lab stats. I own other equipment besides Elecraft as does Wayne and
perhaps Eric, too. YaeComWood gave us the need for other manufactures.
They have missed the mark for user needs. They fail miserably in the US for
usability and testing. This is one of the major reasons Elecraft is so
successful, not to mention the super team of designers, real users
themselves.

73,
Bill
K9YEQ

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of EricJ
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 12:23 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] RES: TS-990

My old TS-930S was 40 lbs and dominated the top of an executive desk. I
recently weighed my K2/10 and K2/100, both heavily accessorized.
Together, they are a few ounces short of 10 lbs. Never again.

Eric
KE6US

On 6/5/2013 9:40 AM, Terry Schieler wrote:
> Back in the late 80's I ordered a TS-950 sight-unseen from a catalog. It
was to replace my trusty TS-180SAT. When it arrived I thought they'd
accidently sent me TWO 950's in the same box. I had not paid any attention
to the size and weight specs of the rig when I ordered it. It was so huge,
there was no room for anything on the front of the operating desk once the
950 was in place. I boxed it up and sent it back. I was stronger then but
knew that I would (hopefully) be growing old and would need help moving that
beast.
>
> I recently looked at the specs of the 990 and knew it would be a
back-breaker too.

>
> Terry, W0FM
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 2:09 PM
> To: WILLIS COOKE; Bill; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] RES: TS-990
>
> Anyone remembers the TS 950, then the 950 SD and finally, the TS 950 SDX?
>
> Could it be a repeat of the 950 series? Or, is it that the days of the

Legendary Kenwood TX and RX audio is something of the past?

> Food for thought.
>
> (((( 73 )))) Milverton.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ

Re: RES: TS-990

Administrator

Let's let the TS-990 topic rest for now. End of thread.

73,

Eric
List Moderator from time to time..
elecraft.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

Jim Brown-10

Re: TS-990

In reply to this post by Rick Wheeler-2

On Wed,6/5/2013 11:18 AM, Rick Wheeler wrote:
> Yes, Kenwood, Icom, and Yaesu do make fine transceivers,

I don't agree with that statement at all. Objective measurements by ARRL
Labs and by Rob Sherwood show that these radios are NOT "fine"
transceivers. Most of them don't HEAR as well as a K3 (there are a few
exceptions), and all of them are DIRTIER than a K3, many of them a LOT
dirtier. Caps added for emphasis.

Even the new Flex 6300 and 6700, which ARRL just reviewed and praised
for its low phase noise and "excellent" keying are MUCH dirtier on CW
than a K3.

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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Wes (N7WS)

Re: TS-990

Really? There is more to a "fine" transceiver than one or two numbers.

Has anyone other than me ever noted that Rob Sherwood doesn't own a K3? His #1
operating position has an IC781 and #2 is a TS-990.

Wes N7WS

On 3/8/2015 4:48 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

> I don't agree with that statement at all. Objective measurements by ARRL Labs
> and by Rob Sherwood show that these radios are NOT "fine" transceivers. Most
> of them don't HEAR as well as a K3 (there are a few exceptions), and all of
> them are DIRTIER than a K3, many of them a LOT dirtier. Caps added for emphasis.
>
> Even the new Flex 6300 and 6700, which ARRL just reviewed and praised for its
> low phase noise and "excellent" keying are MUCH dirtier on CW than a K3.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
> ______________________________________________________________
>

Jim Brown-10

Re: TS-990

On Sun,3/8/2015 8:47 PM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:
> Has anyone other than me ever noted that Rob Sherwood doesn't own a
> K3? His #1 operating position has an IC781 and #2 is a TS-990.

Here's part of an exchange re: the "obvious superiority" of the new
generation of Flex radios. The initial comments are from Howard, VE3GFW,
ex-KY6LA, who doesn't operate much, "hates CW," and loves SDRs.

> FYI. here is a comment from one of the most accomplished RF engineers
> I know.. Michelle Easton W5NYV...
>
> Frankly I have to agree with her.. why are you and Dennis so stuck
> back in the 20^th Century trying to keep legacy technology alive when
> SDR's are now the new baseline> I'm just amazed this is even still
being debated.
>
> Thanks for including me in all of these conversations, it's certainly
> illuminating. I must live in a bubble, because my tech circle assumes
> SDRs as a baseline.
>
> -Michelle W5NYV

I responded:

Michelle may be a great engineer, but few of us know everything there is to
know about everything. Does she OPERATE HF? Does she know what HF
operators need? Does she design stuff with Pin One Problems? Does she know
what a Pin One Problem is? Do YOU? What kind of operating do YOU do?

I don't give a rat's ass about "new technologies" and the latest fads.
I am both an engineer and an OPERATOR. I choose a radio that gives me the
performance and the functions I need, and at a price I can afford.
The K3s are my current choice. It is NOT a religious decision. Before that
it was FT1000MPs, before that TS850s, before that a K2. Based on what I see
of the performance and features of the current crop of SDRs, none are even
close to offering what the K3 does. Someday that will change, and when it
does, I may buy one -- if I'm not in hospice by then.

I drive a big Toyota SUV because I need to haul stuff. I convinced my wife
to buy a Prius because she doesn't. I have a modest music listening system,
but a monster library of music on LP, CD, and DVD. As last count, >3,000
LPs, >4,000 CDs, and about 150 DVDs. I worked in pro audio, and for most of
my professional life, people asked me about whatever the latest and greatest
was. My advice, then and now, is to save their money and buy music by Prez,
Billie, Pops, and Desmond.

It is NOT about technologies.

= = = = = = =

And Michelle responded:

K3s are great.

Any solution in ham radio that makes the operator happy, and therefore
leads to them being more efficient and achieving higher scores, is the
optimum solution, for that ham, for that application. There is an
assmption here of an objective ideal in terms of operating in contests.
I don't think this assumption should go unquestioned.

What works for one set of operators is not guaranteed to work for another.

I use SDRs for (non-human-involved) cognitive radio research, and in
experiments with new modulation schemes, for which they are absolutely
necessary. I have a Flex, USRPs, boxes of HPSDRs, a BladeRF, a HackRF,
and about a half dozen other custom boards and implementations in FPGA.
I don't even consider legacy radios, outside of where I must have a
simple cheap solution to radio sensor data back home (such as RFID). I'm
an SDR zealot.

I prefer the K3 for contesting due to a delightful user interface,
portability, and durability.

All of these radios under discussion are so far above what I would
consider to be the performance cutoff for contesting, one should choose
based on the remaining "highest nail" - the UI, or whatever else the
situation demands. The Flex is an undisputed lab queen and is
objectively "the best" in terms of stats. But we took K3s to the Cook
Islands and Raro. If I go on another DXpedition, it probably won't be
with a Flex. Not that I'm generally choosing - I'm a junior member of
the DXpedition teams that invite me.

I contest for fun, but I've put in enough hours with the local club to
know that I'm not rig-limited. I know for a fact that I'd have to
contest a lot more for the rigs I use to start limiting my scores,
instead of my skill level limiting my scores. The Flex doesn't make me
any better of an operator than the K3 or the 756Pro2. They all can have
the killer app of panoramic display, which I depend upon. They are all
easy enough to switch bands on. Above that, I'd need to put in so much
more seat time in order for the Flex to start making a difference, and I
just don't have that much time to devote to contesting.

I have raced cars. If the objective measurements of transceiver
performance can be likened to horsepower, then you obviously need a car
with enough horsepower to compete. But if you pick a car based solely on
this one axis, then you may end up backing a Corvette that fails to
negotiate the twisty road, while the half-your-horsepower Porsche eats
your lunch. Conversely, the Porshe will lose in the straightaway to the
Corvette. Suspension, gearing, steering, track type, race format - etc.
are are equivalent in importance to horsepower.

So, If you want to talk about what the best contesting rig is, then I
think you have to consider radios in a more multidimensional manner than
by just comparing the equivalent of horsepower. Of which, Flex clearly
seems to win.
-Michelle W5NYV

______________________________________________________________
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]

Joe Harris

Re: TS-990

This is a thread from June 2013 that was closed by Eric -- in 2013. What
gives?

Joe N1QD

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Jim Brown <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Sun,3/8/2015 8:47 PM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:
>
>> Has anyone other than me ever noted that Rob Sherwood doesn't own a K3?
>> His #1 operating position has an IC781 and #2 is a TS-990.
>>
>
> Here's part of an exchange re: the "obvious superiority" of the new
> generation of Flex radios. The initial comments are from Howard, VE3GFW,
> ex-KY6LA, who doesn't operate much, "hates CW," and loves SDRs.
>
> > FYI. here is a comment from one of the most accomplished RF engineers
> > I know.. Michelle Easton W5NYV...
> >
> > Frankly I have to agree with her.. why are you and Dennis so stuck
> > back in the 20^th Century trying to keep legacy technology alive when
> > SDR's are now the new baseline> I'm just amazed this is even still being
> debated.
> >
> > Thanks for including me in all of these conversations, it's certainly
> > illuminating. I must live in a bubble, because my tech circle assumes
> > SDRs as a baseline.
> >
> > -Michelle W5NYV
>
> I responded:
>
> Michelle may be a great engineer, but few of us know everything there is to
> know about everything. Does she OPERATE HF? Does she know what HF
> operators need? Does she design stuff with Pin One Problems? Does she
> know
> what a Pin One Problem is? Do YOU? What kind of operating do YOU do?
>
> I don't give a rat's ass about "new technologies" and the latest fads.
> I am both an engineer and an OPERATOR. I choose a radio that gives me the
> performance and the functions I need, and at a price I can afford.
> The K3s are my current choice. It is NOT a religious decision. Before that
> it was FT1000MPs, before that TS850s, before that a K2. Based on what I
> see
> of the performance and features of the current crop of SDRs, none are even
> close to offering what the K3 does. Someday that will change, and when it
> does, I may buy one -- if I'm not in hospice by then.
>
> I drive a big Toyota SUV because I need to haul stuff. I convinced my wife
> to buy a Prius because she doesn't. I have a modest music listening
> system,
> but a monster library of music on LP, CD, and DVD. As last count, >3,000
> LPs, >4,000 CDs, and about 150 DVDs. I worked in pro audio, and for most of
> my professional life, people asked me about whatever the latest and
> greatest
> was. My advice, then and now, is to save their money and buy music by
> Prez,
> Billie, Pops, and Desmond.
>
> It is NOT about technologies.
>
> = = = = = = =
>
> And Michelle responded:
>
> K3s are great.
>
> Any solution in ham radio that makes the operator happy, and therefore
> leads to them being more efficient and achieving higher scores, is the
> optimum solution, for that ham, for that application. There is an assmption
> here of an objective ideal in terms of operating in contests. I don't think
> this assumption should go unquestioned.
>
> What works for one set of operators is not guaranteed to work for another.
>
> I use SDRs for (non-human-involved) cognitive radio research, and in
> experiments with new modulation schemes, for which they are absolutely
> necessary. I have a Flex, USRPs, boxes of HPSDRs, a BladeRF, a HackRF, and
> about a half dozen other custom boards and implementations in FPGA. I don't
> even consider legacy radios, outside of where I must have a simple cheap
> solution to radio sensor data back home (such as RFID). I'm an SDR zealot.
>
> I prefer the K3 for contesting due to a delightful user interface,
> portability, and durability.
>
> All of these radios under discussion are so far above what I would
> consider to be the performance cutoff for contesting, one should choose
> based on the remaining "highest nail" - the UI, or whatever else the
> situation demands. The Flex is an undisputed lab queen and is objectively
> "the best" in terms of stats. But we took K3s to the Cook Islands and Raro.
> If I go on another DXpedition, it probably won't be with a Flex. Not that
> I'm generally choosing - I'm a junior member of the DXpedition teams that
> invite me.
>
> I contest for fun, but I've put in enough hours with the local club to
> know that I'm not rig-limited. I know for a fact that I'd have to contest a
> lot more for the rigs I use to start limiting my scores, instead of my
> skill level limiting my scores. The Flex doesn't make me any better of an
> operator than the K3 or the 756Pro2. They all can have the killer app of
> panoramic display, which I depend upon. They are all easy enough to switch
> bands on. Above that, I'd need to put in so much more seat time in order
> for the Flex to start making a difference, and I just don't have that much
> time to devote to contesting.
>
> I have raced cars. If the objective measurements of transceiver
> performance can be likened to horsepower, then you obviously need a car
> with enough horsepower to compete. But if you pick a car based solely on
> this one axis, then you may end up backing a Corvette that fails to
> negotiate the twisty road, while the half-your-horsepower Porsche eats your
> lunch. Conversely, the Porshe will lose in the straightaway to the
> Corvette. Suspension, gearing, steering, track type, race format - etc. are
> are equivalent in importance to horsepower.
>
> So, If you want to talk about what the best contesting rig is, then I
> think you have to consider radios in a more multidimensional manner than by
> just comparing the equivalent of horsepower. Of which, Flex clearly seems
> to win.
> -Michelle W5NYV
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]
>

--
Joe Harris, N1QD
______________________________________________________________
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]

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: TS-990

In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10

On 2015-03-09 12:23 PM, Jim Brown posted from Michelle, W5NYV:
> So, If you want to talk about what the best contesting rig is, then
> I think you have to consider radios in a more multidimensional manner
> than by just comparing the equivalent of horsepower. Of which, Flex
> clearly seems to win.

That claim hides a major blind spot. Sherwood's test numbers show
that the K3 with the new synthesizer is every bit equivalent to the
Flex-6000 series when one considers noise floor (MDS) (weak signal
performance) and realizes that the Flex can not handle multiple very
strong signals without serious blocking and compromised dynamic range
due to A/D limiting.

With the new synthesizer the K3 has a better MDS without a preamp than
the Flex with its preamp enabled. The measured difference without a
preamp on either unit is 18 dB! Even with a 20 dB preamp for the Flex
(which reduces the strong signal handling capability by 20 dB and could
be fatal with multiple strong signals), the Flex still has a 4 dB
higher MDS (less sensitive receiver) that the updated K3 with its
10 dB preamp.

So long as direct conversion SDRs have A/D limiting issues that occur
at real world signal levels (e.g. on 160 meters within a few miles of
50 KW AM broadcast stations, on 40 meters in Europe with multiple
strong broadcast signals in the band, etc.) the Flex SDRs simply can
not be said to "win" any comparison of "horsepower" (and their user
interface sucks!).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

______________________________________________________________
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]

Jim Brown-10

Re: TS-990

In reply to this post by Joe Harris

On Mon,3/9/2015 11:09 AM, Joe Harris wrote:
> This is a thread from June 2013 that was closed by Eric -- in 2013.
> What gives?

Sorry -- after posting, I realized that Thunderbird had somehow kicked
me back a couple of years. I must have fat-fingered something. :)

That said, I think my post was pretty relevant to the current discussion
about "numbers."

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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Kevin Stover

Re: TS-990

In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4

The plain and simple fact is that if you have a Flex you are dependent
on the computer you are running.
Computer breaks, and of course they do, your off the air. SIMPLE.
I read the minimum requirements to run the 6000 series. Half of the PC's
in use by Hams won't cut it.

Minimum, Windows Vista SP2, Dual Core 64 bit processor, Video card 256
MB memory, Direct X 10 or higher ,Net 4.0 or higher. Those are minimums.
You can probably run SmartSDR with that but if it's like most software
it will run like crap on it's minimum requirements.

SDR's like the K3 aren't dependent on any other piece of hardware or
software.
You can run it and it will perform well without ever being hooked up to
a PC.

On 3/9/2015 1:20 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

>
> On 2015-03-09 12:23 PM, Jim Brown posted from Michelle, W5NYV:
>> So, If you want to talk about what the best contesting rig is, then
>> I think you have to consider radios in a more multidimensional manner
>> than by just comparing the equivalent of horsepower. Of which, Flex
>> clearly seems to win.
>
> That claim hides a major blind spot. Sherwood's test numbers show
> that the K3 with the new synthesizer is every bit equivalent to the
> Flex-6000 series when one considers noise floor (MDS) (weak signal
> performance) and realizes that the Flex can not handle multiple very
> strong signals without serious blocking and compromised dynamic range
> due to A/D limiting.
>
> With the new synthesizer the K3 has a better MDS without a preamp than
> the Flex with its preamp enabled. The measured difference without a
> preamp on either unit is 18 dB! Even with a 20 dB preamp for the Flex
> (which reduces the strong signal handling capability by 20 dB and could
> be fatal with multiple strong signals), the Flex still has a 4 dB
> higher MDS (less sensitive receiver) that the updated K3 with its
> 10 dB preamp.
>
> So long as direct conversion SDRs have A/D limiting issues that occur
> at real world signal levels (e.g. on 160 meters within a few miles of
> 50 KW AM broadcast stations, on 40 meters in Europe with multiple
> strong broadcast signals in the band, etc.) the Flex SDRs simply can
> not be said to "win" any comparison of "horsepower" (and their user
> interface sucks!).
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

Re: TS-990

I've had a Flex-1500, the Flex may be nice for some, but being tied to a PC is a huge shortcoming. It's so much easier (and quicker) to just grab a knob instead of having to use a mouse and keyboard.

As for performance, The K3 is the First radio I would ever consider rating a 10.
The real beauty of the K3 is the Company behind it; Flex makes a radio, Elecraft makes a Product Line. Being able to have all the various pieces work seamlessly is very slick.

From: Kevin Stover <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] TS-990

The plain and simple fact is that if you have a Flex you are dependent
on the computer you are running.
Computer breaks, and of course they do, your off the air. SIMPLE.
I read the minimum requirements to run the 6000 series. Half of the PC's
in use by Hams won't cut it.

Minimum, Windows Vista SP2, Dual Core 64 bit processor, Video card 256
MB memory, Direct X 10 or higher ,Net 4.0 or higher. Those are minimums.
You can probably run SmartSDR with that but if it's like most software
it will run like crap on it's minimum requirements.

SDR's like the K3 aren't dependent on any other piece of hardware or
software.
You can run it and it will perform well without ever being hooked up to
a PC.

On 3/9/2015 1:20 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

--
R. Kevin Stover
AC0H
ARRL
FISTS #11993
SKCC #215
NAQCC #3441

______________________________________________________________
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]

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: TS-990

> Flex makes a radio,

Correction - Flex makes a complex analog to digital and digital
to analog converter. The ADC/DAC is *not a radio* without all
the external computer hardware/software to control the ADC/DAC,
process the digital data and handle conversion back to audio for
the user. The computer hardware comes from any number of vendors
and much of the software (PowerSDR) has been public domain.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 2015-03-10 9:50 AM, Harry Yingst via Elecraft wrote:

> I've had a Flex-1500, the Flex may be nice for some, but being tied to a PC is a huge shortcoming. It's so much easier (and quicker) to just grab a knob instead of having to use a mouse and keyboard.
>
> As for performance, The K3 is the First radio I would ever consider rating a 10.
> The real beauty of the K3 is the Company behind it; Flex makes a radio, Elecraft makes a Product Line. Being able to have all the various pieces work seamlessly is very slick.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Kevin Stover <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 9:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] TS-990
>
> The plain and simple fact is that if you have a Flex you are dependent
> on the computer you are running.
> Computer breaks, and of course they do, your off the air. SIMPLE.
> I read the minimum requirements to run the 6000 series. Half of the PC's
> in use by Hams won't cut it.
>
> Minimum, Windows Vista SP2, Dual Core 64 bit processor, Video card 256
> MB memory, Direct X 10 or higher ,Net 4.0 or higher. Those are minimums.
> You can probably run SmartSDR with that but if it's like most software
> it will run like crap on it's minimum requirements.
>
> SDR's like the K3 aren't dependent on any other piece of hardware or
> software.
> You can run it and it will perform well without ever being hooked up to
> a PC.
>
> On 3/9/2015 1:20 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>
>> On 2015-03-09 12:23 PM, Jim Brown posted from Michelle, W5NYV:
>>> So, If you want to talk about what the best contesting rig is, then
>>> I think you have to consider radios in a more multidimensional manner
>>> than by just comparing the equivalent of horsepower. Of which, Flex
>>> clearly seems to win.
>>
>> That claim hides a major blind spot. Sherwood's test numbers show
>> that the K3 with the new synthesizer is every bit equivalent to the
>> Flex-6000 series when one considers noise floor (MDS) (weak signal
>> performance) and realizes that the Flex can not handle multiple very
>> strong signals without serious blocking and compromised dynamic range
>> due to A/D limiting.
>>
>> With the new synthesizer the K3 has a better MDS without a preamp than
>> the Flex with its preamp enabled. The measured difference without a
>> preamp on either unit is 18 dB! Even with a 20 dB preamp for the Flex
>> (which reduces the strong signal handling capability by 20 dB and could
>> be fatal with multiple strong signals), the Flex still has a 4 dB
>> higher MDS (less sensitive receiver) that the updated K3 with its
>> 10 dB preamp.
>>
>> So long as direct conversion SDRs have A/D limiting issues that occur
>> at real world signal levels (e.g. on 160 meters within a few miles of
>> 50 KW AM broadcast stations, on 40 meters in Europe with multiple
>> strong broadcast signals in the band, etc.) the Flex SDRs simply can
>> not be said to "win" any comparison of "horsepower" (and their user
>> interface sucks!).
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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]
>>
>
>

Wes (N7WS)

Re: TS-990

In reply to this post by Kevin Stover

First a disclaimer: I don't own a Flex radio (and it is a radio) The closest
I've come is using an LP Pan on the i-f output of a K3, which I do own.

But this argument is simply nonsense. If the radio breaks---they actually do
you know---you're (note spelling) off the air too.

And try as I might, I can't see Internet spots on my K3, nor can I use it to
keep my banking records, write email, do antenna modeling, etc. For this I
still need a computer. And believe it or not, that same computer is connected
to my K3 and I would be lost without it. I don't want to go back to my BC-342
and crystal-controlled 6L6, which some still think are the only "real" radios.
Time marches on...try to keep up.

Wes N7WS

3/10/2015 6:04 AM, Kevin Stover wrote:

> The plain and simple fact is that if you have a Flex you are dependent on the
> computer you are running.
> Computer breaks, and of course they do, your (sic) off the air. SIMPLE.
> I read the minimum requirements to run the 6000 series. Half of the PC's in
> use by Hams won't cut it.
>
> Minimum, Windows Vista SP2, Dual Core 64 bit processor, Video card 256 MB
> memory, Direct X 10 or higher ,Net 4.0 or higher. Those are minimums. You can
> probably run SmartSDR with that but if it's like most software it will run
> like crap on it's minimum requirements.
>
> SDR's like the K3 aren't dependent on any other piece of hardware or software.
> You can run it and it will perform well without ever being hooked up to a PC.

Scott Manthe-2

Re: TS-990

The difference, of course, is that a computer is not REQUIRED to use a
K3. The Flex will not function at all without the computer, so the
comments about the Flex being dependent on computer hardware are hardly
"nonsense."

73,
Scott, N9AA

On 3/10/15 10:45 AM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:

> First a disclaimer: I don't own a Flex radio (and it is a radio) The
> closest I've come is using an LP Pan on the i-f output of a K3, which
> I do own.
>
> But this argument is simply nonsense. If the radio breaks---they
> actually do you know---you're (note spelling) off the air too.
>
> And try as I might, I can't see Internet spots on my K3, nor can I use
> it to keep my banking records, write email, do antenna modeling, etc.
> For this I still need a computer. And believe it or not, that same
> computer is connected to my K3 and I would be lost without it. I
> don't want to go back to my BC-342 and crystal-controlled 6L6, which
> some still think are the only "real" radios. Time marches on...try to
> keep up.
>
> Wes N7WS
>
>

Elecraft mailing list

Re: TS-990

I'm an IT (computer) and have been one for nearly 30 years.

There was a time I was hot on the whole FlexRadio game, but after a year of running one the novelty wore off.
By The Way, in that year of running one I longed for conventional filters (roofing filters)

From: Scott Manthe <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] TS-990

The difference, of course, is that a computer is not REQUIRED to use a
K3. The Flex will not function at all without the computer, so the
comments about the Flex being dependent on computer hardware are hardly
"nonsense."

73,
Scott, N9AA

On 3/10/15 10:45 AM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:

______________________________________________________________
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]

Wes (N7WS)

Re: TS-990

In reply to this post by Scott Manthe-2

The nonsense part is the argument that a computer can fail and leave you without
a radio and a K3 never fails so you always have a radio. I wish that were the
case but my K3 has failed before and my BC-342N after only sixty years of
service has developed a B+ short. On the other hand, except for replacing a
noisy fan, I've never had a computer hardware failure.

On 3/10/2015 7:56 AM, Scott Manthe wrote:

> The difference, of course, is that a computer is not REQUIRED to use a K3. The
> Flex will not function at all without the computer, so the comments about the
> Flex being dependent on computer hardware are hardly "nonsense."
>
> 73,
> Scott, N9AA
>
>
> On 3/10/15 10:45 AM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:
>> First a disclaimer: I don't own a Flex radio (and it is a radio) The
>> closest I've come is using an LP Pan on the i-f output of a K3, which I do own.
>>
>> But this argument is simply nonsense. If the radio breaks---they actually do
>> you know---you're (note spelling) off the air too.
>>
>> And try as I might, I can't see Internet spots on my K3, nor can I use it to
>> keep my banking records, write email, do antenna modeling, etc. For this I
>> still need a computer. And believe it or not, that same computer is
>> connected to my K3 and I would be lost without it. I don't want to go back
>> to my BC-342 and crystal-controlled 6L6, which some still think are the only
>> "real" radios. Time marches on...try to keep up.
>>
>> Wes N7WS
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]
>

Guy Olinger K2AV

Re: TS-990

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Wes (N7WS) <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On the other hand, except for replacing a noisy fan, I've never had a
> computer hardware failure.

Well, you are as rare as hen's teeth. And not only that, you announced it
in public, thus notifying the world AND MURPHY that you are WAY on the
undeserved side of normal experience. Prepare for an onslaught. You have
wakened Smaug with your brag :>)

At SAS institute, where I worked for 20 years before retirement, there were
> some 20,000 PC's on campus. They had a PC service department of thirty-some
> techs, not counting supervisors, who were always busy 16 hours a day
> fixing/replacing some busted PC or peripheral, or upgrading one so it could
> keep up with more and more resource-thirsty applications. I had a 21 inch
> IBM branded Sony Trinitron monitor that made it until drivers for it could
> no longer be found for the latest version of OS. It was the ONLY PC device
> I had at SAS in 20 years that did not fail in some manner at some point.

There is a point to the idea of not needing a PC for some operations,
particularly portable ones.

73, Guy K2AV
______________________________________________________________
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]

GOBrien

Re: TS-990

This is my first reflector post in the three years that I have been a member. As one of the early adopters of the KX3 and later the PX3, I have a high regard for the excellent Elecraft customer service and quality of engineering. Whenever I am doing portable operations, I carry the KX3 along with a spare LiPO battery (e.g. Field Day or hikes). I am also the owner of a FlexRadio 6700. It is my home station rig along with the Alpha 9500. I have had the Flex for 6 months and am very pleased with it. It replaced my TenTec Orion II and functions well on many, many modes.
I operate CW 98% of the time.

I am delighted to be able to choose knob radios (SDR nonetheless) from Elecraft AND software HMI radios from FlexRadio. Both are excellent American ham radio firms.
George, AB4FH

> On Mar 10, 2015, at 12:39 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Wes (N7WS) <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On the other hand, except for replacing a noisy fan, I've never had a
>> computer hardware failure.
>
>
> Well, you are as rare as hen's teeth. And not only that, you announced it
> in public, thus notifying the world AND MURPHY that you are WAY on the
> undeserved side of normal experience. Prepare for an onslaught. You have
> wakened Smaug with your brag :>)
>
> At SAS institute, where I worked for 20 years before retirement, there were
>> some 20,000 PC's on campus. They had a PC service department of thirty-some
>> techs, not counting supervisors, who were always busy 16 hours a day
>> fixing/replacing some busted PC or peripheral, or upgrading one so it could
>> keep up with more and more resource-thirsty applications. I had a 21 inch
>> IBM branded Sony Trinitron monitor that made it until drivers for it could
>> no longer be found for the latest version of OS. It was the ONLY PC device
>> I had at SAS in 20 years that did not fail in some manner at some point.
>
>
> There is a point to the idea of not needing a PC for some operations,
> particularly portable ones.
>
> 73, Guy K2AV
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

123