[Elecraft] Elecraft technology

[al_lorona@agilent.com]

Hi, Sverre,


> I could rephrase my question
> differently, why did it take until 1998 for this architecture=20
> to make it
> into ham receivers, why didn't it happen say ten years earlier?
> =20
> =20
> 73
> Sverre
> =20


Hi, Sverre,

I believe it is because single-conversion presumes a low IF, and a low
IF presumes a non-general coverage receiver. Believe it or not, this is
a major stumbling block with many hams nowadays. They simply want a
general coverage receiver no matter what, and shun anything that isn't.
As a result, few other manufacturers have tried it in recent years. The
manufacturers that have are considered "behind the times" by many of
these hams.

(This is not to mention that many hams consider color displays, lots of
knobs, and 1e-09 frequency accuracy as absolutely essential in a radio,
features without which they won't even give the radio a second look.)

As far as basic receiver performance goes, isn't it amazing that two
guys from California out-designed all of the huge engineering staffs of
the Big Three in several critical areas of receiver performance? We are
all sitting here thinking, "Of course. It's so simple. The K2 is better
for all these reasons," but it took the genius of Eric and Wayne to pull
it off so perfectly.

Regards,

Al  W6LX