[Elecraft] I thought Elecraft was a household name!

[Phil Hystad]

> I like simple radios I can build and fix, with a soldering iron, not switching boards.


I thought this (quoted above) was an interesting comment from Gil's message below.  I think I like that too but I am not sure if that world of simplicity can continue very much longer.  In fact, in some ways, it is already history.

When I got started in this hobby everything was absolutely discrete.  Every affect on the electrons in circuits was controlled by individual passive or active (?) devices.  Resistors, capacitors, inductors, transformers, and electron tubes.  Even the electron tube although at times complicated was simple enough that I could understand the basic principles and operations as a 10 year old.  I liked that idea of understanding and maybe even of control.

Today, surface mount is not the issue -- that is just a refined way of making physical contact of conductors.  The issue is that devices, many of them, are no longer discrete.  ICs and Op Amps are everywhere even if you don't include processors like PIC or DSP or whatever.  Building a radio today, even if it is directly soldered (as opposed to SMT) is made a lot easier because of various ICs (from the simple like a voltage regulator to something more complex) and use of Op Amps instead of simple discrete based amplifiers and so on.

The notion of build and fix has changed too.  A friend of mine repairs radios (Yaesu's, Icoms, etc.) and I have heard him several times failing to repair a particular radio because some application specific IC used in the radio is no longer available.  That kills it right there.  No way to repair that unless you build your own version of the function (or functions) performed by the IC.

Therefore, I think kit building has evolved and I think that the way Elecraft has pushed kit building is a good thing because you get a lot of features and functionalities in a "kit" without having to wire up zillions of discrete components.  But, I like the kits like the KX1, K1, and K2 as well and they too have a place but the "kit" idea is different for sure.  The K3 as a kit is useful because adding options is useful and valuable or maybe changing out a re-engineered board.  Having built the kit gives you experience in digging into the guts of a K3.  Having a kit because I can repair it though is not of much value to me and I think that is mainly because in all my years of building kits, I have never had to re-open it up to repair a failed part.  It just never happened (although, I admit to not owning such radios for decades).

peh



On Jul 15, 2012, at 11:46 AM, Gil G. wrote:

> I found Elecraft very easily, looking for kits online. Anyone doing a Google search on transceiver kits will find Elecraft immediately. Not to mention online forums or reviews such as on Eham. So, if they don't know about it, they either have no interest in kits, or are not very internet oriented.. With the introduction of the KX3, that might change, and Elecraft might become more of a Ham household name, which I also thought it was...
> 
> Now, I hope Elecraft doesn't discontinue the K2 before I can save up enough money to buy one.. I also wish they would come up with other small kits, like a single band cw/ssb transceiver that fits in a K1 box.. It would be a great competitor to the MFJ-94xx series. The K3 seems like a great radio, but I would never buy one. Why? Because it gets too complicated, and it is surface-mount. I like simple radios I can build and fix, with a soldering iron, not switching boards. The K2 still qualifies.
> 
> Gil.
> --
> http://radiopreppers.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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