[Elecraft] K3 APF Effectiveness

[N2TK, Tony]

APF worked great this morning. Was hunting for the KH2 on 160m and couldn't
hear him. Turned on the APF and used 3-digit resolution on the VFO (10HZ
steps) and he popped out as I tuned across him. Worked him with two calls.
New one on topband.

I installed 4.17 on #311 and have 4.22 on #1435. So far I can't hear a
difference when using the APF on very weak signals on topband.
73,
N2TK, Tony
 

-----Original Message-----
From: elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Wayne Burdick
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 12:45 AM
To: Dave Perry N4QS
Cc: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 APF Effectiveness

5-Hz steps simply make it easier to tune the APF. This has absolutely no
effect on the filter passband, Q, etc. Going back to 10-Hz steps would just
make it harder to center signals when using SHIFT, as was the case with
4.17. Many operators requested the finer step size. 

73,
Wayne

----
http://www.elecraft.com

On Nov 20, 2010, at 6:54 PM, "Dave Perry N4QS" <n4qs at comcast.net> wrote:

> 
> I agree that the signal doesn't pop out anymore with 4.22, but I think it
is 
> due to the change to 5 Hz tuning.  It is harder to hear the peak in the 
> signal with the 5 Hz steps in the Shift tuning.  I think we should go back

> to 10 Hz per click.  Just my opinion.
> 
> Dave, N4QS
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Seney" <john.seney at gmail.com>
> To: "Igor Kosvin" <k.igor at comcast.net>
> Cc: "'Elecraft Reflector'" <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 2:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 APF Effectiveness
> 
> 
>> Hi All:
>> 
>> I have the same experience as Igor. There is an APF sweet spot that
either 
>> moved or
>> disappeared.
>> 
>> Would it be helpful if there was a GUI that let us save, load, share, and

>> see all of
>> the various K3 parameter settings that we are adjusting?
>> 
>> On Nov 17, 2010, at 11:53 PM, Igor Kosvin wrote:
>> 
>>> Sure, you are right, but you would not deny that using same set of
>>> parameters (NR/NB, WIDTH, PITCH, RF, etc) the APF circa 4.17 and 4.22 
>>> should
>>> give very similar results since the code of APF remains the same. After
>>> playing few days with 4.22 I find myself having to turn off APF to
better
>>> receive weak CW stations. I don't have explanation for this. With APF on

>>> I
>>> find it difficult to distinguish dits and dahs of weak signals. With
4.17 
>>> it
>>> was much better for me. That should be apples-to apples comparison, I 
>>> think.
>>> I don't claim to be expert though, listening is very subjective IMHO.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Igor, N1YX
>> 
>> 
>> 73,
>> 
>> John Seney
>> ARS WD1V (fn42gw)
>> 603 785-2413
>> 
>> 
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>> 
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html