[Elecraft] K4

Sat May 19 06:38:14 EDT 2018

Now that Eric is at the Hamvention we can not annoy him too much with mail overflow on this list ;-)

- I would like to see Elecraft revising the NR-function. While you can achieve nearly infinite noise attenuation with the K3’s NR it comes at the cost of signal intelligibility. At least I have failed to hit a setting for CW which works for me. The NR also seems to be dependent on AGC settings. With the IC7851’s NR at ca. 9 o’clock the band noise is cut about in half without affecting signals, even when they are weak. I do not miss this much in everyday operation. But the additional band noise really hurts in my ears when doing SO2R causing fatigue and ultimately increased error rate.

- I continue to be impressed by ICOM’s APF function. Combined with a few dB of additional amplification in the APF level menu this sort of has become a great „panic button“ for me when a weak station calls or QRM shows up. Elecrafts APF is way too sharp for this purpose. Maybe another APF with wider bandwidth could be added?

- It might also be helpful to add a simplified NB-menu which selects among some of your favourite settings. If you are forced to dig into the NB-menu in the middle of the heat the DX will long be gone until you have found the right setting to get rid of noise.

- Elecraft should consider adding mouse support for the panadapter.

- Coming from ICOM rigs I noticed that the knob resolution seems slow. This sticks out with the filter, RIT and power knobs. Too much knob spinning required for my taste. However, this may be subjective and there are work-arounds.

- I would also like to see Elecraft using higher quality buttons which are more responsive. When the K3 came out one of the reasons I never got one was the wobbling feel of the A/B (and other) knobs. It simply was not compatible with my style of operation which involves constantly switching VFOs when S&P. Yes, there are work-arounds, too.

I just realize that most of it may be another software upgrade. No K4 required! 

73,

Stefan DL1IAO, SA3CWW/SM9A

--
Stefan v. Baltz
DL1IAO at contesting.com
http://www.dl1iao.com

> Am 19.05.2018 um 06:59 schrieb Jim Brown <jim at audiosystemsgroup.com>:
> 
> On 5/18/2018 7:43 PM, Ed W0YK wrote:
>> There are ham reasons for this request,  which I made to Wayne 2 years ago.  We need a bit more RX/TX bandwidth for the combined JT65/9 modes.
>> 
>> With WSJT, the upper end of the JT9 audio range is not available on the K3.
> 
> Hi Ed,
> 
> FWIW, I regularly copied JT9 signals up to at least 3 kHz; remember that, in those days, JT9 typically started around 2 kHz baseband, and it is possible to open up the RX IF bandwidth wider than that 2.8 kHz roofing filter.
> 
> And although the worm will hopefully turn back in favor of JT65/JT9 on 160M, those modes have virtually disappeared since FT8 was introduced. Last season, you, W6GJB, and I all worked SM6 on JT65, and WSJT-X decoder logged several dozen EU stations. This year, I hear east coast stations working (or at least calling) EU, but I've decoded ZERO EU using FT8. (For those reading the mail, all three of us are within about 20 miles of each other, 70 miles S of San Francisco. What I'd love to see is JT9 take over on 160M. If I'm not mistaken, it's good about 10 dB deeper into the noise than FT8.
> 
> And while it's true that any of the slow WSJT modes would benefit from greater IF and audio bandwidth by providing space for more stations, few other rigs offer that.
> 
> 73, Jim K9YC
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> Message delivered to dl1iao at contesting.com