[Elecraft] Elecraft K4 and Accessibility

WILLIE BABER wlbaber at bellsouth.net
Tue May 28 16:48:47 EDT 2019


K4 should succeed in that it appears to build upon K3/P3/KRX3 (highly successful) with added color screen, direct-sampling SDR, and increased I/O.  The same K3 "upgradeable approach" applies to K4.  If you are not into contesting then K4 SDR may be all you wish (especially if you already have a K3 for contesting). You do have to pay for the upgradeable approach 
 even if you are not interested in upgrading. 

This is the advantage of Elecraft IMHO.  I purchased my first k3 in 2008, and it is as good in 2019 as my K3s.  An upgradeable radio also helps with radio repair cost, in addition to NOT purchasing a new model radio just to obtain improved performance. 

Before I ended up with K3/P3 so2r in 2015, I went through a new board to improve K3 audio, the replacement of the pins affecting the KPA3 module, and new synthesizers (plus a few minor mods). My K3 eventually  replaced ft1000mp, Omni VI, and (finally) Orion.

I'm satisfied using K3 so2r more so than at any point in the past.  Based on my past experience I suspect K4 has a bright future!

73, Will, wj9b
PS: This is not the same as saying that I do not like other radios.  I still have Orion and a broken Omni VI that I hope to repair.



CWops #1085
CWA Advisor levels II and II,:
http://cwops.org

--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 5/26/19, Rick Tavan <rick at tavan.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft K4 and Accessibility
 To: hwhite1 at maine.rr.com
 Cc: "Elecraft Reflector" <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>, KX3 at yahoogroups.com, Elecraft-K4 at groups.io
 Date: Sunday, May 26, 2019, 12:55 PM
 
 Wow. Your preference seems to be
 in a minority, Harry, although I have to
 admit that my opinion is subjective and based
 mainly on what I've read on
 this
 reflector which may well be biased by folks like me who
 *like* the K3.
 I think Elecraft retained in
 the K4 many of the design points that made the
 K3 very successful and enduring, including its
 light weight and small size
 which are two
 major complaints on your list. So it may be a chocolate
 vs.
 vanilla situation - some people (like
 me) value those characteristics while
 other
 people (like you) dislike them. Of course, you're right
 that many
 prospective buyers are aging and
 some may come to dislike smaller knobs, I
 for one still find the knobs and buttons plenty
 big enough and I'm now 70
 years old. I
 once measured the K3 button size and spacing against my
 prior
 favorite rig, the FT-1000MP, and found
 them practically the same. I never
 had
 trouble operating the K3 and its menu structure was logical,
 rarely
 needed, and self-documenting. The new
 K4 screen is plenty large enough for
 me and
 comparable to many current, competitive radios'. It can
 also be
 blown up to as large as you like
 through the addition of an in expensive,
 external, HDMI monitor or a tablet. I've
 seen it and it was gorgeous.
 
 So you're certainly correct that some
 people like big, heavy radios with
 "substantial" knobs and they may not
 buy the K4. Others like radios they
 can lift
 without back strain, carry to vacation homes and field
 sites,
 operate remotely with minimal
 external hardware, and expect to survive
 through upgrades for a decade. Many of them,
 like me, have been K3 fans for
 12 years or
 so and will be delighted to buy the K4. The market will
 decide.
 I think the K4 will be highly
 successful and I'm rooting for it. We'll see.
 
 73,
 
 /Rick N6XI
 --
 
 Rick Tavan
 Truckee, CA
 
 
 On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 5:00
 PM <hwhite1 at maine.rr.com>
 wrote:
 
 > Wayne and
 interested others,
 >
 >
 Way back when, I bought a loaded K3. I believe the S/N was
 around 4K? It
 > was back in the day when
 almost every DXpedition was using K3's so it was
 > obviously the radio to own. (Around 2009?)
 It was at the top of the
 > Sherwood
 ratings. Owner's bragged, incessantly, about its
 Sherwood rating.
 >
 >
 After a period of time I grew to really dislike that radio.
 The audio was
 > just plain awful and the
 man/machine interface was the worst I have ever
 > seen. I detest bar graphs. I suppose if
 you play at ham radio 8 hours a
 > day,
 seven days a week, the interface is "normal", even
 usable. For those
 > of us who might get
 on the air for an hour or two a week, the controls were
 > a mystery. Tap this button to do this,
 hold the same button for three
 > seconds
 to do that, the list goes on. NOTHING was intuitive. It did
 not
 > help that it was an incredibly
 ugly, too light and unsubstantial, radio.
 > It's looks may have been barely
 acceptable when first introduced but it
 >
 aged badly, rapidly. Over a ten year period it's price
 has become a real
 > problem.
 >
 > There were many, many
 questions on this reflector regarding the controls,
 > the same questions about the same
 controls, over and over and over again.
 >
 That should have been a very large hint that the controls
 should be
 > massively improved in any new
 radio.
 >
 > I sold my
 K3 and moved on to the big Japanese three, ANAN, and Flex,
 over
 > the years. All had many, fairly
 easy to understand, controls. All were far,
 > far more usable than the K3. Both the ANAN
 and Flex service departments are
 > as
 good as Elecraft's.
 >
 > Eventually I left the Elecraft reflector,
 and that is a whole other
 > story.....
 >
 > Last week the K4 was
 announced so I rejoined the reflector. It sounded
 > like a really great radio. Sadly, I have
 concluded it will be a dud, mostly
 >
 because it is designed with the same philosophy as the K3
 was, a small,
 > compact, easily
 transportable radio, "a hallmark of Elecraft
 transceivers",
 > to quote you,
 Wayne. From all that I have read, the controls will be
 even
 > more complex.
 >
 > Ham radio operators
 are an aging group. Some suffer from the "fat
 finger"
 > syndrome, others have
 vision problems, to name just two. The last thing
 > they need or want is a tiny radio with
 minimal controls, each of which
 > serves
 two or three or four or five purposes. They favor a radio
 that has
 > many single or dual purpose
 knobs. They want bigger screens, the K4 screens
 > are too small.
 >
 > I suggest you double the size of the radio
 and change your design
 > criteria.
 Enlarging the physical size would not be a huge cost
 driver.
 > Remember who your customers
 are.
 >
 > And when the
 Flex 6700 kicked the K3 out of first place in the
 Sherwood
 > ratings in 2014, the Koolaid
 drinkers on this reflector were heard to say,
 > "People put too much faith in
 numbers". Hypocrisy is thy name. I haven't
 > stopped laughing.
 >
 > This email pertains to only the second and
 third paragraphs of Wayne's
 > reply
 below.
 >
 > I wish
 Elecraft well with the K4 but I really think your
 minimalist/too
 > complex way of designing
 needs to change. You've probably already guessed
 > that I won't be a customer of the K4
 as currently proposed. And you really,
 >
 really ought to improve this reflector...........
 >
 > 73,
 >
 > Harry K1RSA
 >
 > -----Original
 Message-----
 > From: elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net
 <elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net>
 > On Behalf Of Wayne Burdick
 > Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 2:03 PM
 > To: Elecraft Reflector <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>;
 KX3 at yahoogroups.com;
 > Elecraft-K4 at groups.io
 > Subject: [Elecraft] Elecraft K4 and
 Accessibility
 >
 > Hi
 Buddy et al,
 >
 >
 We've definitely been thinking about this.
 >
 > There's a
 paradigm shift going on in transceiver design, and we
 reached a
 > point where we needed to
 embrace it. This shift is not entirely aligned
 > with accessibility, as you know. I'll
 address alternatives in this email.
 >
 > As for the K4 specifically, its user
 interface is dependent in part on use
 >
 of the touch screen. This was simply the only way to
 integrate an
 > equivalent of the K3S, P3,
 and all of the new hardware/software required to
 > implement a direct-sampling radio. The use
 of a touch screen allows context
 >
 sensitivity (physical overloading) for controls, making the
 K4 the
 > equivalent of a much larger
 radio without touch. The resulting compact size
 > is still compatible with portable use
 (4.5" x 13.5" x 11", 10 pounds, and
 > power-efficient), a hallmark of Elecraft
 transceivers.
 >
 >
 Regarding accessibility, there are three possible
 approaches:
 >
 > 1. The
 K4's entire complement of controls, both hard and touch,
 will be
 > represented by a set of
 "2-letter" commands. This API will be fully
 public
 > as it is for our other
 transceivers. Presumably external devices or
 > computers will be able to immediately make
 use of these commands to effect
 > a
 flexible accessible interface.
 >
 > 2. In theory we could implement a
 large-target version of the LCD's touch
 > controls, with proximity-based audio
 feedback and no panadapter. This would
 >
 be a very ambitious project requiring ongoing support,
 similar to that
 > needed for mobile/fixed
 app development. We don't have the staff to support
 > this, so we'd need to engage the wider
 community to find a developer with
 >
 suitable skills and motivation. The API or spec for such an
 effort doesn't
 > exist at this
 time.
 >
 > 3. The K3S
 has very similar strong-signal performance and similar
 basic
 > features, without touch. Since
 many of the added features of the K4 are
 > panadapter-centric, a blind ham may very
 well find that the K3S is a viable
 >
 alternative. No doubt there will be more used K3's and
 K3S's on the market
 > over the next
 year. The KX3 and KX2 provide audio CW feedback on most
 > controls and are another non-touch
 alternative.
 >
 > I
 hope the alternatives I've suggested to use of the
 K4's normal UI will
 > be helpful in
 most cases.
 >
 > 73,
 > Wayne
 > N6KR
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > On May 24, 2019, at 9:20 AM, Buddy Brannan buddy at brannan.name
 [KX3] <
 > KX3-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
 wrote:
 > >
 > >
 [Sorry, sent this to Gary instead of the list] Hey Gary,
 > >
 > > I’m
 curious about this as well, as are others…see K8HSY’s
 post on the
 > blind-hams list. See also
 my response full of speculation (below). Wayne,
 > please feel free to comment on my comments
 and correct me where I erred:
 > >
 > > I’ve been beating the accessibility
 drum on the Elecraft reflector for
 >
 ages, and Wayne has assured that they would not go to all
 touch screen
 > access, for that very
 reason. Elecraft has, in the person of one of their
 > tech support people in the past, and Wayne
 in emails to me, committed to
 > doing
 what they can in design parameters to make accessibility
 attainable,
 > and they have been super
 cooperative with people like the Hampod folks and
 > others who want to design accessibility
 tools.
 > >
 > >
 The K4 has a full GNU/Linux computer built into it, and
 it’s got a
 > client/server
 architecture, with network access available, so it seems
 to
 > me accessibility should be possible,
 even relatively easy, to implement.
 >
 Especially given that there are still a wide range of
 physical buttons and
 > knobs on board.
 > >
 > > And, unlike
 Yaecomwoodlincotec, the principals at Elecraft are not
 only
 > available by email, but very
 responsive besides. If you’re really
 >
 interested in a perspective direct from the horse’s mouth,
 write to Wayne
 > directly at n6kr at elecraft.com.
 He really does answer email.
 > >
 > > Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
 > > Email: buddy at brannan.name
 > > Mobile: (814) 431-0962
 > >
 > > > On May
 23, 2019, at 1:47 PM, Gary Lee kb9zuv at arrl.net
 [KX3] <
 > KX3-noreply at yahoogroups.com>
 wrote:
 > > >
 >
 > > could someone describe the front panel of the k4
 with reference to
 > that of the k3? With
 the added touch screen, I am wondering about usability
 > for the blind operator.
 > > >
 > >
 >
 > > >
 >
 >
 > >
 > >
 __._,_.___
 > > Posted by: Buddy
 Brannan <buddy at brannan.name>
 > > Reply via web post    •      
 Reply to sender         •       Reply to
 > group  •       Start a New Topic 
      •       Messages in this topic (2)
 > > VISIT YOUR GROUP
 >
 > • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
 > >
 > > SPONSORED
 LINKS
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > .
 > >
 > >
 > > __,_._,___
 >
 >
 ______________________________________________________________
 > 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
 >
 >
 >
 ---
 > This email has been checked for
 viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 >
 >
 ______________________________________________________________
 > 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


More information about the Elecraft mailing list