Posted by
w7aqk on
Dec 26, 2007; 4:23pm
URL: http://elecraft.85.s1.nabble.com/K3-Filter-advice-tp457507p457513.html
Drew and All,
I'll take a stab at giving you an answer. For AM reception (and shortwave)
you would want the 6 khz filter. For CW, you need to make a choice, but I
suspect that in order to limit the number of filters you would be best
advised to select either the 400 hz or 500 hz filter. You can look at the
graphs to see which has the characteristics you prefer. I have the 400 hz
and the 200 hz filters. Most of the time I use the 400 hz, and only invoke
the 200 hz filter when things get really tough. But I'm glad I have the
narrower filter. However, if I only had one CW filter I would probably opt
for the 400 hz. I am very pleased with how the 400 hz filter works and
sounds. I think I saw someone suggest the 500 hz would be a better choice,
but I'm not sure I remember why. Personally, I want the narrower filter for
those occasions when you need just a little tighter bandpass. Besides, I
don't find using the 400 hz filter to be unpleasant at all, so I don't think
I would necessarily be better served with a 500 hz in the alternative. I
suppose you might find the 500 hz filter to be sufficient, when combined
with the K3's DSP capabilities, but I think you would actually have to do
some "hands on" to be sure you like the result.
O.K. That's my answer. I bet you get several others.
Dave W7AQK
----- Original Message -----
From: <
[hidden email]>
To: <
[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 8:36 AM
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Filter advice...
> I'm wondering what minimum complement of filters would work for me in
> a K3. I am only interested in general coverage reception of SWBC
> stations, plus operating CW. I am a little unlclear about what filter
> would be required for AM (reception only), with the KBPF3 option.
>
> For CW I generally prefer a wide filter (my K2 is set at 2.0 kHz most
> of the time). I suppose I would want a narrower filter as well but
> can't decide whether 500/400 or 250/200.
>
> Does a 2.1 kHz + 200 Hz filter pair seem like a useful combo for CW?
>
> Finally, I don't have a clue what noticeable difference there would be
> between a 200/5-pole and a 250/8-pole. If the difference is really
> subtle or limited to very occasional use I suppose I'd go for the
> cheaper one.
>
> 73,
> Drew
> AF2Z
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.htmElecraft web page:
http://www.elecraft.com