How could Yaesu release the radio, with the original CW bandwidth, for
production in the first place?
73..de John/K4WJ
On 7/8/2015 9:43 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
On Wed,7/8/2015 10:28 AM, Mike Harris wrote:
The transceiver in question is an FTDX5000.
According to FCC measurments, it's one of
Bob,
Correcting my original post, I meant to say According to ARRL Lab
measurements.
I don't know enough about Yaesu history to know the answer to that.
On Wed,7/8/2015 7:01 PM, Richard W. Solomon wrote:
So you are saying the FTDX-5KMP is no longer one of the worst ???
No, just not as bad
Oh, that's easy to explain.
Overheard: CW? What's CW? ... Really? ... Nobody uses that anymore. You
actually going to spend money on THAT???
73, Guy K2AV
On Thursday, July 9, 2015, John Bohnovic k...@att.net wrote:
How could Yaesu release the radio, with the original CW bandwidth, for
Robert,
There is a significant reduction in phase noise.
That means you can work closer to the frequency of another station
without him interfering with the station you are trying to copy.
On transmit, it means your signal is more 'pure' and the sideband
'clutter' on your signal is
Al,
Let me pose a set of conditions, and see if I understand this...
Is the smearing caused mostly by the phase noise sidebands, as a
resultant of phase flicker?
i.e. If the phase noise were reduced on a transmitting VFO, then the
smearing would also be reduced, because the sidebands would no
Hi, Dave.
Well, there is one thing you did not do. A fourth condition, which would
be difficult, a lot more work given what you were doing. That would be
changing his syn first and noting the difference. It might be that the TX
change first would create a different middle picture in the series.
Hi,
Thanks, I need to think about this a bit prior to commenting on it. :)
--
Thanks and 73's,
For equipment, and software setups and reviews see:
www.nk7z.net
For MixW support see;
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info
For Dopplergram information see:
It would help a lot when your neighbor is not transmitting or transmitting on a
different band. Plus, it is courteous to transmit a cleaner signal.
wunder
K6WRU
CM87wj
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
On Jul 8, 2015, at 9:04 AM, Alan n...@sonic.net wrote:
By the way, a corollary to
On 07/08/2015 06:02 AM, David Cole wrote:
It occurs to me that the the the RX VFO phase noise would be less
influencing, (on phase noise sidebands), than the transmit VFO phase
noise... Is that correct?
If so, then that would explain why the largest change occurred when
K7OLN got his new
By the way, a corollary to this is that it doesn't help much to improve
the phase noise of your radio if your neighbor's radio is dirty.
Alan N1AL
On 07/08/2015 08:45 AM, Alan wrote:
On 07/08/2015 06:02 AM, David Cole wrote:
It occurs to me that the the the RX VFO phase noise would be less
Phase noise in oscillators is a subject much discussed amongst
microwave hams and eme'rs who are trying to obtain optimum reception.
It is not totally agreed but much thought is that MDS is lowered by
having low phase-noise (even in a completely quiet band (no adjacent
signals). Thinking is
My most active neighbor, (I have 5 hams in less than 1/2 mile from me),
runs an Icom 706MKII G, that is a real POS if I have ever seen one...
It takes out most of the band when he is on, and running 100W, as
opposed to the K7OLN's K3, (750 feet form me), when running a KW and I
am able to
I think that once your receiver's phase noise is about 1/10 (-10 dB) of the
incoming transmitted signal's phase noise, the incoming will dominate and
you'll no longer see an improvement no matter what you do to the receiver.
(This is a famous rule-of-thumb we use in any measurement.) From the
I have a neighbour approximately 300 metres away who causes significant
noise QRM on the next two bands LF, S3-5. Less so if I'm working a
higher higher band which I assume is due to cut-off of the TX BPFs in
both the transceiver and the linear.
The transceiver in question is an FTDX5000.
On Wed,7/8/2015 9:04 AM, Alan wrote:
By the way, a corollary to this is that it doesn't help much to
improve the phase noise of your radio if your neighbor's radio is dirty.
I can testify to that! My neighbor 8 miles away runs an IC7600. Real POS.
73, Jim K9YC
The solution is becoming clear. We all need to buy our near neighbours
shiny new K3S's.
Costly maybe but what price for some RF sanity.
Cheers
Martin, HS0ZED
Who has no obvious nearby hams :)
On 08/07/2015 20:28, Mike Harris wrote:
I have a neighbour approximately 300 metres away who causes
On Wed,7/8/2015 10:28 AM, Mike Harris wrote:
The transceiver in question is an FTDX5000.
According to FCC measurments, it's one of the worst of the expensive
modern rigs for CW bandwidth. BUT -- Yaesu issued a firmware update last
fall, and my before/after measurements of a N6TA's FTDX5000
David Cole d...@nk7z.net writes:
It occurs to me that the the the RX VFO phase noise would be less
influencing, (on phase noise sidebands), than the transmit VFO phase
noise... Is that correct?
If so, then that would explain why the largest change occurred when
K7OLN got his new
@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Observation on new Synthesizers for K3
On Wed,7/8/2015 10:28 AM, Mike Harris wrote:
The transceiver in question is an FTDX5000.
According to FCC measurments, it's one of the worst of the expensive modern
rigs for CW bandwidth. BUT -- Yaesu issued a firmware
Hello,
I had what I believe to be a unique opportunity to test the new
synthesizer in a high signal level environment, under some controlled
conditions.
K7OLN lives about 750 feet from me, and we both have static antenna
setups, and because he is running WSPR K7OLN also has static power
levels
David and all,
Eric's words at his early morning presentation at FDIM (Dayton) were
that the improvement surprised everyone at Elecraft - the results were
much better than expected. So all K3 owners can benefit from that part
of the K3S development.
73,
Don W3FPR
On 7/7/2015 6:32 PM,
Interesting reading. What does the synthesizer actually do? How is the new one
better than the old one?
NJ4J
Robert W. Clark
Executive Director
Center for Personnel Development In CTE
Temple University
Philadelphia, Pa
On Jul 7, 2015, at 6:56 PM, Don Wilhelm w3...@embarqmail.com wrote:
We like to think that a VFO exists only at one frequency -- the frequency on
the receiver display.
But in reality every VFO has width, and it occupies not only it's nominal
frequency but is smeared both lower and higher in frequency, too. This is
because of the phase noise of the synthesizer or
Hi,
I would be interested in a detailed explanation as to why things are
tighter with the new synths, as opposed to the old ones as well...
--
Thanks and 73's,
For equipment, and software setups and reviews see:
www.nk7z.net
For MixW support see;
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info
For
24 matches
Mail list logo
