[Elecraft] K4
wb4jfi at knology.net
wb4jfi at knology.net
Sat May 19 14:20:16 EDT 2018
I was thinking along similar lines. If enough hams find the smaller K3
front panel difficult, (and are adverse to present computer-based solutions)
maybe an external box that has LOTs of knobs, etc... that plugs into the K3
DB9, could be made. Using any one of several
microcomputers/microcontrollers, such a box could be designed. It might be
somewhat costly, as buttons, knobs, displays, are all physical devices that
cost $$. But, this might give some hams the best of both worlds. A compact
rig when needed, but lots of buttons, knobs, displays when someone wants
them.
I've done some limited K3/KX3 remote control with Arduinos (and wifi), I
doubt a simple Uno would be sufficient. But some device with more GPIO pins
and memory could certainly interface to the K3/KX3. Such as a Due,
Raspberry Pi, BeagleBone Black, Teensy, or even an Arduino Mega.
Interestingly, I now have three "retro" 8080 CP/M computers that use a Due
(or Mega) to emulate a whole Altair/IMSAI computer box. These devices have
enough I/O pins to support all the switches and LEDs of an original Altair
front panel and serial I/O - without any multiplexing. Using encoders
instead of pots would help reduce analog I/O for a radio interface for
example.
Is there much interest in such a device? If so, maybe a group could discuss
this more, and come up with some specific front panel control/display
requirements.
Note that I am happy with my K3 as-is. Also, several computer control
solutions already exist, so I assume that this would be a very limited
"market".
73, Terry, N4TLF (formally WB4JFI)
-----Original Message-----
From: George Thornton
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2018 1:49 PM
To: Martin Sole ; elecraft at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4
If you are used to working large rigs with lots of buttons, I can see how
the K3/K3s might be an adjustment.
I have found the K3 controls to be natural and appropriate. For most of my
operation the buttons and dials I need to use in action are right at my
fingertips. Once set up correctly, I find little need to venture into the
menu system on a day to day basis.
Sure. It would be nice to have band and mode stacks. But is it that big a
deal, worth spending many thousands of dollars to change?
We will gain nothing in performance with a bigger rig. Already Elecraft
outperforms ALL of the big boxes on the market, per Sherwood Engineering.
Here is an elegant and simple solution for the K4 that will satisfy the big
box demand.
Design a modular big front panel that simply plugs into the K3. Design
should be relatively easy because you don't have to change the K3s itself,
just add a command and control interface for the larger front panel. Can
you use the accessory port or do you need more connections? I don't know I
am not an engineer. Currently computer radio control programs work with a
simple DB9 connection.
Then give an option of mounting the K3s in a larger box. That would have
the added convenience of making it easier for us klutzes to be able to get
into the rig to make changes such as adding filters.
So, you would have options:
1. standard K3s
2. Standalone large front panel. Put your K3s under the table and mount
your front panel wherever.
3. K3s in a larger box with the larger front panel mounted on the front.
You can even add options to the large box such as nicer stereo built in
speakers, even a built in AC to DC power supply.
It will all still be the best HF radio in the world, made right here in the
US.
-----Original Message-----
From: elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Martin Sole
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2018 9:39 AM
To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4
I'll weigh in on this a little before it gets stamped on again as being,
unfortunately, irrelevant and pointless.
I think there is a big gaping hole in the Elecraft product line. Not in
performance terms but more in ergonomics. A K3 has been my primary radio for
a few years now and before that an Orion, before that a TS940,
TS830- etc etc. Performance wise there is no doubt the K3 bests them all, I
recently built a K2 and think that's scarily good in raw performance terms
as well. My K3 is pretty much fully kitted out and I have a P3 as well which
is extremely useful and they're going nowhere.
>From the super small super portable super capable K2 and KX3 to the small
and portable and no less capable K3/K3S their market segments are well
covered but KenYaeCom have surely sold enough
TS990,FT9000,IC7800/50/51 that shows well the market demand for a quality
high end desktop sized radio. If the pictures on QRZ are anything to go by
not everyone operates out of a shoe box with many having dedicated rooms for
their radio hobbies. If the shoe box is your limitation then the K3 is
undoubtedly a superb choice but where space is less restricted a bit more in
the way of panel acreage might well sway a lot more FT9000/TS900/IC78xx
users I feel, not to mention those of us who just feel the K3 package is,
for a desktop radio, just a bit too much of a compromise.
Key requirements on my end after considerable K3 usage. A better more up to
date menu system that either removes or better, handles the myriad
un-intuitive selections. There are a number of menu options which unless you
have significant handbook familiarity lack explanation about additional
keypad presses. There are even some for which software updates need to be
consulted though that is a different matter. Some menu choices could well be
better homed as front panel controls. The keypad is another area I find
seriously lacking for a top end product.
Again, great for the type of product it is but I find it lacking. Band keys,
mode keys, a proper band stacking register, a better way to deal with the
sub receiver settings, more, bigger and wider spaced control knobs, yes all
of this needs panel space but that shouldn't really need to be a problem.
It's possible the entire form factor could use a rethink, do we need a box
12 inches deep. Why not a front panel that is
16 inches by 6 inches on a radio that is just 5 inches deep. Overall it
would likely be a similar volume and contain just as much under the skin.
The Orion was probably overkill with the amount of fresh air in every box,
some careful plug in board stacking could have reduced the box depth by half
whilst retaining the same front panel space. A good display with all info
including the somewhat obligatory scope and waterfall properly integrated
seems a no brainer today I guess, of course with a port for connection of 36
inch full 4k displays, ideally with different screen displays.
I like the PA options today 10 or 100 watts, not sure how many are sold as
just 10 watt radios though. In a bigger box, something like the 7850,
16x17x6, it should be possible to integrate the KPA500 allowing for a
500 watt transceiver in one box.
Where space is a premium the integration of multiple controls carefully
arranged for maximum apparent efficiency is obviously a good thing though I
feel it can be overdone, the poor operability of the sub receiver is a case
in point and I've had heat of the moment run ins with the mic gain
compressor and monitor controls as well. Great when it works as you think of
it, less so when you're acting more by feel and intuition doing 6 other
things at once and get a mis-press.
Much of this is software, packaging and ergonomics/HMI, so far as the pure
RF side is concerned it's clear that things are evolving still and it can't
be long before pure wideband direct digital SDR becomes the mainstream.
It's hard to fault the K3 on so many levels, it's just such a great radio
but it's by no means an unflawed or unlimited radio and there are areas of
the ham radio business Elecraft are yet to tread.
Oh and I'd love them to do a 2-35Mhz 125 watt radio suitable for commercial
use. So many opportunities where the options today are either VK mobiles or
US mil spec but that really is another topic.
Martin, HS0ZED
On 19/05/2018 17:38, Stefan von Baltz, DL1IAO wrote:
> 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
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> hs0zed at gmail.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 Message
delivered to gtlaw at seanet.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
Message delivered to wb4jfi at knology.net
More information about the Elecraft
mailing list