[Elecraft] Re: k3 sound

[Tom Hammond]

Hi Fred:

N0SS wrote:
> >In general, I've received just the very OPPOSITE reports. Most say that
> >the K3 has some of the very BEST sounding keying that they've heard! And
> >this from a number of folks whose opinions I value quite highly.
>
> >Elecraft (Wayne) had bent over backwards to ensure that there are NO
> >clicks or artifacts on the K3's keying!  I think he's accomplished this
> >very admirably.
>
>Tom, I think the question was about how CW sounds when received, rather
>than the transmitted keying.  how does it sound?  the best sounding rcvr
>I ever heard was the National NC183D.  Mellow is the only word i can come
>up with for it.

I'd not say that the CW sound FROM the K3 was 'mellow'... of course with
the NC-183D, that was also somewhat a function of the speaker itself, if
I recall... large, and tending to emphasize bass, while rolling off some
of the treble.

To me, the K3's 'sound' is very clean and distinct and not harsh at all.
CW notes are very comfortable to copy with the ear. I'd place them at least
equal to my venerable old TS-930S, which I always thought was one of the
best CW rigs I'd ever used... and still do, for that matter.

I have not gotten into playing with the 8-band equalizer for reception, bit
I suspect that I'd be able to tailor the frequency response to yield just
about whatever 'personality' I wanted from the rig, if I set my mind to it.

>Another thing I wonder is about the CW monitor which has never been good
>on my K2.  Acceptable, but not good.

The CW monitor is very enjoyable(!) to listen to. My ears tell me is a
sine wave, and if it's not, it's a close cousin... close to the 'mellow'
description you mentioned above, yet easy to copy in the presence of
received signals in QSK mode.

>Also, how is the QSk speed?  Would be nice to have true QSK to at least
>35 wpm, instead of 20 wpm like on the K2.

I'm not certain that I'd be able to "COPY" CW through my 35 WPM sending, BUT
I do know from experience that I can be 'broken' at 35 WPM when I'm sending.
In other words, when I'm sending at 35 WPM, if you were to hit several DITs,
I'd be able to tell that you were attempting to get my attention THROUGH the
individual ELEMENTS of a character, rather than having to wait for a word space
to occur for the received signal to get my attention.

>Waiting impatiently ;-)

Quite understandable... again, all I can say right now, it that it'll be worth
the patience...

73,

Tom   N0SS