[Elecraft] 2.7 vs 2.8

David Ferrington, M0XDF M0XDF at Alphadene.co.uk
Mon Apr 12 11:03:07 EDT 2010


I didn't say in all this not to get a narrower filter too - I think Bob said he was buying other filters too.
73 de M0XDF, K3 #174
-- 
Don‘t complain. Nobody will understand. Or care. And certainly don‘t try
to fix the situation yourself. It‘s dangerous. Leave it to a highly
untrained, unqualified, expendable professional.

On 12 Apr 2010, at 15:56, lstavenhagen wrote:

> 
> I also vote no on the 2.8 8 pole and instead investing in a seperate narrower
> 8 pole. SSB is always like trying to hold a conversation in a drunken bar
> during Mardi Gras anyway (the main reason I've never used voice modes in my
> amateur career), so you need something really stiff at narrower setting if
> you want to block heavy QRM.
> 
> The DSP does a pretty good job but adding in the crystal filter makes it
> absolutely like a brick wall. I have the 5 pole 2.7 and the 8 pole 400hz.
> The difference between say 450hz with the DSP and 400 with the filter also
> engaged is pretty dramatic when the sigs are really strong. Nothing outside
> that filter can get through, but with just the DSP, you can start to get
> artifacts from sigs that are still within the 2.7khz filter passband.
> 
> I'm probably going to get the 250hz 8 pole as well for CW and PSK as a
> result hi hi...



More information about the Elecraft mailing list