[Elecraft] K3 Beta 5r10 and LINK

[Ian White]

It is probably true that Elecraft can never remove any  existing feature
without upsetting some existing users... so the way forward would be to
add the new alternatives as *options*.

The point about options is: nobody is compelled to choose them! The
factory defaults would usually need to stay as they are, because of the
existing labels on the buttons and the front panel. So anyone who
doesn't want those new options would be able to carry on exactly as
before.

Those who do want to select new options would have to accept that the
existing 'tap' and 'hold' labels would no longer be quite accurate. For
me, that would be no big deal - my first priority is always what the
K3's controls *do*. But others will have different priorities, and that
is precisely why new features need to be offered as *options*. 


But having said that...

>> Question: does anybody really use XFIL?

Why does the K3 have an XFIL control at all? It seems like a carry-over
from the K2, where the selectivity came from the crystal filters and the
XFIL button was the primary bandwidth control. But the bandwidth of the
K3 has always been defined primarily by the DSP so XFIL has never made
sense to me. 

However, AB9CA makes a very valid point that the WIDTH control requires
excessive cranking at larger bandwidths. If the WIDTH, HIGH and LOW
functions could be improved by making their rates of change proportional
to the bandwidth, then there would be even less need or justification
for using XFIL.


>> Perhaps relocation of diversity there makes more sense.
W4TV replied:
>
>No, retaining the dual context CW filter and assigning APF to XFIL
>and Dual PB to the current DUAL PB function makes more sense.
>
Agreed, that definitely isn't the right place to relocate the Diversity
function. There are already three existing functions competing for that
button, without adding another. I would support an option to replace
XFIL with APF as the main ('tap') function - which would then correspond
more closely to the KX3 - and to bring back DUAL PB for 'hold'. 

>Leave DIV as SUB Hold as it is in 5.10 and make LINK available
>as a programmable function (LN0;/LN1;).   Having LINK as SUB
>HOLD and DIV as an extra long hold is/was very difficult from
>an ergonomic perspective.

Agreed in every detail. 
 

Finally, on the subject of an external button-box, I don't ever want to
see external boxes and macros being used as band-aids for existing
controls that don't function as effectively as they could. Much more can
still be done to improve the ergonomic 'rough edges' of the existing
front panel.


73 from Ian GM3SEK