Who said anything about removing diversity? That would *never* happen...

[wayne burdick]

I don't know who started this thread, but let me say definitively that we would never remove Diversity mode. The K3 has one of the best diversity implementations in any transceiver, and many operators use it all the time. That is why we wanted to make it easier to use by assigning it as the regular-hold function of the SUB switch.

Wayne
N6KR

______________________________________________________________
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]

[Ken G Kopp]

Great news .... Thank you for the reassurance.

(Even if I only use the second RX for watching 6M for band openings with a
dedicated 6M antenna.)

73

Ken - K0PP
On Feb 16, 2015 4:34 PM, "Wayne Burdick" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't know who started this thread, but let me say definitively that we
> would never remove Diversity mode. The K3 has one of the best diversity
> implementations in any transceiver, and many operators use it all the time.
> That is why we wanted to make it easier to use by assigning it as the
> regular-hold function of the SUB switch.
>
> Wayne
> N6KR
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

I think he was talking about removing the feature that locks both VFOs together rather than diversity.  The writer said that he did not think it was good to lock both VFOs together, but I think is is required for proper diversity operation to have both locked.  I have not used diversity much because I do not have a good receive antenna for 160, but I would not want the VFO tracking feature to go away and I do not see how one could use diversity well without tracking VFOs.  I have a big fear that someday you will listen to one of these suggestions, but so far you have not.  Good work! Willis 'Cookie' Cooke,TDXS Contest Chairman K5EWJ & Trustee N5BPS
      From: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]>
 To: Elecraft Reflector <[hidden email]>
Cc: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
 Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 5:34 PM
 Subject: [Elecraft] Who said anything about removing diversity? That would *never* happen...
   
I don't know who started this thread, but let me say definitively that we would never remove Diversity mode. The K3 has one of the best diversity implementations in any transceiver, and many operators use it all the time. That is why we wanted to make it easier to use by assigning it as the regular-hold function of the SUB switch.

Wayne
N6KR

______________________________________________________________
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]

[Don Wilhelm-4]

Willis,

When in Diversity mode, the VFO that is controlling the frequency is VFO
A only.
There is no need to lock the VFOs in diversity - they are already
'locked' because only one VFO (and synthesizer) is being used.  That
assures that both the main and sub RX have the same frequency and phase
relationship.

I think this is the factor that has confused many.  The locking
(linking) of the VFOs have nothing to do with diversity mode.  LINK is
an altogether different "animal".

73,
Don W3FPR

On 2/16/2015 7:54 PM, WILLIS COOKE via Elecraft wrote:
> I think he was talking about removing the feature that locks both VFOs together rather than diversity.  The writer said that he did not think it was good to lock both VFOs together, but I think is is required for proper diversity operation to have both locked.

______________________________________________________________
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]

[wayne burdick]

In diversity mode, the main and sub RX synthesizers are guaranteed to be phase-locked to each other if the crystal filters selected for main and sub both have exactly the same frequency offset. The offset for all 8-pole filters is 0.00. The offset for 5-pole filters varies, and can be ordered in matched sets for main/sub.

Wayne
N6KR


On Feb 16, 2015, at 6:29 PM, dalej [hidden email] [Elecraft_K3] <[hidden email]> wrote:

> That's what I tried to tell these guys on the 7800 group. There's a lot of confusion out there regarding linking and diversity and the advantage of diversity and the importance of the two receivers to be phase locked and not a hz apart or even a half hz apart. Some think just because the two VFO's show the same readout they are in diversity.
>
> Dale, k9vuj
>
> On 16, Feb 2015, at 19:13, Don Wilhelm [hidden email] [Elecraft_K3] <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Willis,
>
> When in Diversity mode, the VFO that is controlling the frequency is VFO
> A only.
> There is no need to lock the VFOs in diversity - they are already
> 'locked' because only one VFO (and synthesizer) is being used. That
> assures that both the main and sub RX have the same frequency and phase
> relationship.
>
> I think this is the factor that has confused many. The locking
> (linking) of the VFOs have nothing to do with diversity mode. LINK is
> an altogether different "animal".
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 2/16/2015 7:54 PM, WILLIS COOKE via Elecraft wrote:
> > I think he was talking about removing the feature that locks both VFOs together rather than diversity. The writer said that he did not think it was good to lock both VFOs together, but I think is is required for proper diversity operation to have both locked.
>
> ------------------------------------
> Posted by: Don Wilhelm <[hidden email]>
> ------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
>
> __._,_.___
> Posted by: dalej <[hidden email]>
> Reply via web post                       • Reply to sender                       • Reply to group                       • Start a New Topic           • Messages in this topic (7)                      
> VISIT YOUR GROUP
> • New Members 16
>
> • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
> .
>  
>
> __,_._,___

______________________________________________________________
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]

[Terry Posey]

The list "din" over relocating the VFO LINK function off of the SUB RX
button seems to have subsided...  The following comments are about LINK, and
not about the fabulous DIVERSITY function:

I am VERY pleased that Elecraft has relocated the VFO LINK function off of
the SUB button.  Accidental LINK of VFO A/B during at least three major
DXpeditions has been a serious problem, which has probably cost numerous
DXpedition QSOs.  During the heat of DXpedition operations, it is very easy
for even a well-seasoned K3 operator to get the critical hold timing on the
SUB button wrong enough to enable LINK.  Then as the DXpedition operator
tunes his SPLIT QSX frequency looking for callers, his own TX frequency
moves up and down the band in step per the command of VFO LINK.  The pileup
becomes totally confused, the QSO rate goes to ZERO, and the DXpedition op
does not realize what is happening.  Most DXpedition ops are looking at
their QSX pileup frequency, not at their TX frequency, and the little
blinking decimal point is unnoticed.

I have mulled over this K3  LINK function for quite some time.  In my 43
years of ham radio operating, I can only think of one situation where I
wanted to LINK my TX and RX VFOs:  Early AMSAT OSCAR satellites with linear
cross-band transponders.  But, for those who can find a need for LINK, I am
glad that Elecraft has retained that functionality - just not on the SUB
button

73,
Terry K4RX

+++++
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [Elecraft_K3] Who said anything about removing
diversity? That would *never* happen...

In diversity mode, the main and sub RX synthesizers are guaranteed to be
phase-locked to each other if the crystal filters selected for main and sub
both have exactly the same frequency offset. The offset for all 8-pole
filters is 0.00. The offset for 5-pole filters varies, and can be ordered in
matched sets for main/sub.

Wayne
N6KR

______________________________________________________________
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]

> In my 43 years of ham radio operating, I can only think of one
> situation where I wanted to LINK my TX and RX VFOs: Early AMSAT OSCAR
> satellites with linear cross-band transponders.

Except most of the linear transponders are frequency inverting (to
minimize the effect of doppler) and what's needed there is to tune
the two VFOs (rigs) in *opposite* directions <G>.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2015-02-17 4:31 PM, Terry Posey wrote:

> The list "din" over relocating the VFO LINK function off of the SUB RX
> button seems to have subsided...  The following comments are about LINK, and
> not about the fabulous DIVERSITY function:
>
> I am VERY pleased that Elecraft has relocated the VFO LINK function off of
> the SUB button.  Accidental LINK of VFO A/B during at least three major
> DXpeditions has been a serious problem, which has probably cost numerous
> DXpedition QSOs.  During the heat of DXpedition operations, it is very easy
> for even a well-seasoned K3 operator to get the critical hold timing on the
> SUB button wrong enough to enable LINK.  Then as the DXpedition operator
> tunes his SPLIT QSX frequency looking for callers, his own TX frequency
> moves up and down the band in step per the command of VFO LINK.  The pileup
> becomes totally confused, the QSO rate goes to ZERO, and the DXpedition op
> does not realize what is happening.  Most DXpedition ops are looking at
> their QSX pileup frequency, not at their TX frequency, and the little
> blinking decimal point is unnoticed.
>
> I have mulled over this K3  LINK function for quite some time.  In my 43
> years of ham radio operating, I can only think of one situation where I
> wanted to LINK my TX and RX VFOs:  Early AMSAT OSCAR satellites with linear
> cross-band transponders.  But, for those who can find a need for LINK, I am
> glad that Elecraft has retained that functionality - just not on the SUB
> button
>
> 73,
> Terry K4RX
>

______________________________________________________________
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]

[Vic Rosenthal]

I know it's true, but I don't see WHY the receivers need to be phase-locked. After all, the signals are entirely separate until they are combined in your head. There isn't a question of interference/ reinforcement at RF.

Vic 4X6GP/K2VCO

> On Feb 17, 2015, at 9:31 PM, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> In diversity mode, the main and sub RX synthesizers are guaranteed to be phase-locked to each other if the crystal filters selected for main and sub both have exactly the same frequency offset. The offset for all 8-pole filters is 0.00. The offset for 5-pole filters varies, and can be ordered in matched sets for main/sub.
>
> Wayne
> N6KR
______________________________________________________________
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]

[wayne burdick]

Diversity reception is characterized by perceived "phase precessing" between the two receivers' audio streams due to varying phases of the main and sub RF input signals. You don't want additional, unpredictable phase precessing on top of that due to the receivers themselves. Additive phase changes would sometimes make diversity reception less pleasant to listen to. Better to have the receivers locked together, eliminating a variable.

Wayne
N6KR


On Feb 17, 2015, at 10:02 PM, Vic Rosenthal <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I know it's true, but I don't see WHY the receivers need to be phase-locked. After all, the signals are entirely separate until they are combined in your head. There isn't a question of interference/ reinforcement at RF.
>
> Vic 4X6GP/K2VCO
>
>> On Feb 17, 2015, at 9:31 PM, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> In diversity mode, the main and sub RX synthesizers are guaranteed to be phase-locked to each other if the crystal filters selected for main and sub both have exactly the same frequency offset. The offset for all 8-pole filters is 0.00. The offset for 5-pole filters varies, and can be ordered in matched sets for main/sub.
>>
>> Wayne
>> N6KR
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

[Alan Bloom]

If the two receivers' local oscillators were even a fraction of a Hz
different in frequency, the perceived "direction" of the incoming signal
would be constantly changing, which I think would be disconcerting.

Alan N1AL


On 02/17/2015 10:09 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:

> Diversity reception is characterized by perceived "phase precessing" between the two receivers' audio streams due to varying phases of the main and sub RF input signals. You don't want additional, unpredictable phase precessing on top of that due to the receivers themselves. Additive phase changes would sometimes make diversity reception less pleasant to listen to. Better to have the receivers locked together, eliminating a variable.
>
> Wayne
> N6KR
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2015, at 10:02 PM, Vic Rosenthal <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I know it's true, but I don't see WHY the receivers need to be phase-locked. After all, the signals are entirely separate until they are combined in your head. There isn't a question of interference/ reinforcement at RF.
>>
>> Vic 4X6GP/K2VCO
>>
>>> On Feb 17, 2015, at 9:31 PM, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> In diversity mode, the main and sub RX synthesizers are guaranteed to be phase-locked to each other if the crystal filters selected for main and sub both have exactly the same frequency offset. The offset for all 8-pole filters is 0.00. The offset for 5-pole filters varies, and can be ordered in matched sets for main/sub.
>>>
>>> Wayne
>>> N6KR
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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]

>I know it's true, but I don't see WHY the receivers need to be
phase-locked.
>After all, the signals are entirely separate until they are combined in
your
>head. There isn't a question of interference/ reinforcement at RF.
>
>Vic 4X6GP/K2VCO
>

That is correct: the only relevant requirement for Diversity mode is
*frequency* locking between the two separate synthesizers.

The phase locking is an almost-accidental side effect of fully digital
frequency synthesis. When two identical digital synths are given
identical frequency instructions and forced to march in lockstep by a
shared master clock, they will automatically be both frequency-locked
and phase-locked. But as Vic says, that RF phase lock is of no
consequence for Diversity; the only relevant point is the *frequency*
locking.


73 from Ian GM3SEK


______________________________________________________________
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]