[Elecraft] KAF2 v. KDSP2

[Ron D'Eau Claire]

I operate 99.99% CW (Haven't even fired up PSK in a year and it's been
longer than that since I plugged in the mic) and, not saying anything
negative about either the DSP or the audio filter, I don't have either and
don't feel motivated to add either to my K2/100. 

I really like the "sound" of the K2 I.F. filters. Their fairly soft sides
avoid lots of artifacts that add harshness to the sound of the bands. Yet
they have all the selectivity that I need with their excellent stop band
characteristics.  

Ron AC7AC

-----Original Message-----

Howard,

I can't speak for anyone else, but I just don't like the sound of any audio
DSP processor, particularly for CW use.  They are good for digging signals
out very close to the noise level, but my ears find the KAF2 far less
irritating for extended operating periods....

73,
Don W3FPR

----- Original Message ----- 

I am planning on purchasing a K2 for general use (SSB and CW) with a current
preference for CW.  (I enjoy working on CW although I'm not very good.)  My
preferences may change as my experience grows, so flexibility is important.
The question is, why would you want to have the KAF2 instead of the KDSP2?
>From querying the archives, it seems that the KAF2 is primarily used 
>for CW
and is effective for that use.  Is the KDSP2 less effective for reducing
unwanted noise on CW, or is it equally effective but more costly.  I assume
that Elecraft continues to sell the KAF2 because it either has a performance
advantage in some niche or is less costly and works for certain uses (such
as CW).



_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
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