Hi Stephen. I'm surprised with your NB comment regarding electric fences. I have one for my horses and on 40M and up it does a great job with the pulses. below that they are still there though much reduced. Are you trying a combination of the DSP and the IF NBs? Is your pulse generator well grounded?
------------------------- 73, Greg - AB7R Whidbey Island WA NA-065 On Mon Apr 27 13:57 , Stephen Prior sent: >I agree, I have used my K3 for almost a year now and I don't recall one >situation where the NR was more effective than the filtering between my >ears, whether on ssb or cw. As much as I have and continue to enjoy the >radio, I must say much the same about the NB performance. It was very >enlightening to hook up my FT-817 to the main station antenna the other >night and find that the 817's noise blanker did a far better job than the >K3's in getting rid of the interference from the electric fence which keeps >the foxes away from our chickens! I don't have any DSP on my K2 so I can >draw no comparison there. > >On a really positive note, the one thing which makes the K3 so special to >listen to (on headphones at least) is the AFX. I would not want to be >without it. And in all other respects the K3 is a very fine radio indeed. > >73 Stephen G4SJP > >K3 #980 > > > >On 27/04/2009 21:43, "WA6L" w...@arrl.net> wrote: > >> >> >> >> Hi, Roy, >> >> As I approach a year's ownership of the K3, I have to say that there are >> very few times that I find the NR capability to be useful. On a very noisy >> band and with reasonably wide bandwidths (> 800 Hz) the NR can work well, >> but never without pressing the Level button and optimizing the setting each >> time. >> >> When I compare the K3's NR with my K2's, the K2 seems far superior to me. >> It may be because the K2 does its DSP at the audio instead of the IF, or it >> may be that the K2 implements longer FIR filters. Whatever the reason, the >> K2's noise reduction works much better and in my shack is left on almost all >> the time. >> >> Both the K3 manual and the Wikipedia explanation of the K3 noise reduction >> recommend using NR only with a wide bandwidth, and imply that it is not as >> effective on SSB as it is on CW. I concur with these recommendations, but I >> have to say that I agree with you. The NR implementation could have been >> done much better. >> >> 73, >> >> John >> >> >> >> Roy Morris-6 wrote: >>> >>> When I turn on NR the audio noise level goes down. When a SSB signal is >>> received the audio peaks. I have my RX EQ set flat. In these peaks there >>> are resonances in my internal speaker (if I use it) as well as my two >>> external speakers that plainly makes noise reduction unpleasant. It can >>> be minimally tolerated at F-1-1 level with speakers. It is somewhat more >>> tolerable with a good headset. Part of the problem may be in speaker >>> response, but I also think a big part of the problem is in the noise >>> reduction algorythms. If noise reduction is not recommended with reduced >>> bandwidth in CW, and unpleasant artifacts occur in SSB; then I find NR to >>> be useless. I hope the discussion of white noise and pink noise will lead >>> to something that will improve the noise reduction function in the K3. >>> Roy Morris W4WFB >>> > > > >______________________________________________________________ >Elecraft mailing list >Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >Post: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net','','','')">Elecraft@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@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
