Don Wilhelm wrote:
Ron,
I too am a firm believer in the KISS principle.
Too much automation drives me crazy trying to remember what the
automation is trying to do for me. Oft times the automation does not do
what I want to be done. manual controls forever.
This is not a vote against
request - I want Ducking!
So I guess it's a good idea whose time has come, just like people on the
board don't need to play with the gain control any longer.
But I wonder just how automatic our world is becoming?
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post
It seems to me with all the feature requests people are looking
for a custom radio and wanting the rig to do everything for them.
... If you don't want to hear the band between characters why are
you working QSK? Why request a feature that could cause serious
problems down the road.
So,
-Original Message-
Isn't this just a matter of setting the monitor sidetone as loud as the
AF audio from the signals you are listening to? The MON control is on
the front panel, just for that reason.
73, Guy.
--
I have MON set to match the AF RX level. That
: [Elecraft] K3 feature request - I want Ducking!
I believe that most people using QSK are trying to simulate full duplex.
I think the step function up and down RX signal level proposed here
would sound awful when being keyed.
The brain has enough to do without having to accommodate this level
change
I've always advocated having sidetone and SPOT levels be independently
adjustable - I sidestep the issue by using CWT rather than SPOT to
zero beat a received signal (either auto or manual mode). I then keep
MON set for my preferred sidetone level (relatively high, I also use a
bug).
Bob NW8L
On
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 feature request - I want Ducking!
I believe that most people using QSK are trying to simulate full duplex.
I think the step function up and down RX signal level proposed here
would sound awful when
Kevin wrote:
It seems to me with all the feature requests people are looking for a
custom radio and wanting the rig to do everything for them. The QSK on
the Elecraft rigs is very good the way it is. If you don't want to hear
the band between characters why are you working QSK?
1) The
- Original Message -
From: Brian Alsop als...@nc.rr.com
Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 feature request - I want Ducking!
I think the crux of this problem is one of learning to use QSK.
True, Brian . For some QSK
Hey troops,
I had an idea last night while in CW QSO with my K3. I've noticed that
I always turn the AF gain down when I send CW. I have the side tone
volume set to just the right level for the Spot function to work, but
when I send CW I want to greatly reduce the distraction from the
the bandwidth to 500 Hz or so after a delay set by the semi-QSK delay?
73,
Erik K7TV
- Original Message -
From: Darwin, Keith
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 5:47 AM
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 feature request - I want Ducking!
Hey troops,
I had
What is ducking, as you call it here?
73! Ken Kopp - K0PP
elecraftcov...@rfwave.net
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
Ducking is a commercial radio / sound industry technique of attenuating
the music when the DJ talks. In the old days, the DJ at the radio
station would just pan down the music volume whenever he spoke into the
mic. These days, recording studios will use a compressor with a
separate trigger (side
I still don't understand this notion. For CW, don't you obtain this
effect simply by turning down the sidetone volume? On transmit,
receive is already muted.
Peter
On 1/20/09, Darwin, Keith keith.dar...@goodrich.com wrote:
Ducking is a commercial radio / sound industry technique of
No, the manual way to achieve this effect is to turn down the AF gain
while you're transmitting. Sidetone is still there nice loud but the
RX audio that you hear between elements is reduced. When you're done
sending, you reach for the AF gain and turn it back up to the normal
listening level.
Keith,
This is an interesting idea, and I've added it to the firmware
wish-list. Thanks. In the interim you might try a non-zero value of CW
semi-QSK delay, assuming you don't need full break-in.
Wayne
N6KR
On Jan 20, 2009, at 9:52 AM, Darwin, Keith wrote:
No, the manual way to achieve this
feature request - I want Ducking!
Another idea: Since much of the distracting noise between characters can be
eliminated by using a really narrow bandwidth, how about a new twist on Dual
Passband: transmit full QSK with the very narrow receive bandwidth and open
up the bandwidth to 500 Hz or so
Reflector'
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] K3 feature request - I want Ducking!
Hopefully if implemented it is an option. If not using QSK it is fine.
But if using QSK I want to hear between elements, even if the other
station is weak while I am sending so that I don't need to keep sending
if the other
wayne burdick wrote:
Keith,
This is an interesting idea, and I've added it to the firmware
wish-list. Thanks. In the interim you might try a non-zero value of CW
semi-QSK delay, assuming you don't need full break-in.
I would use this if the amount of compression was adjustable. But
-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of wayne burdick
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 12:57 PM
To: Darwin, Keith
Cc: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 feature request - I want Ducking!
Keith,
This is an interesting idea, and I've
On Jan 20, 2009, at 10:54 AM, N2TK wrote:
Hopefully if implemented it is an option.
Definitely.
Wayne
If not using QSK it is fine. But
if using QSK I want to hear between elements, even if the other
station is
weak while I am sending...
---
http://www.elecraft.com
N2TK wrote:
Hopefully if implemented it is an option. If not using QSK it is fine. But
if using QSK I want to hear between elements, even if the other station is
weak while I am sending so that I don't need to keep sending if the other
station starts transmitting.
Actually, I think a small
I like this ducking idea and would very likely use it. It's sort of a
'soft' QSK.
I certainly understand the benefits of full QSK operation, but it's
something that I simply cannot get my brain to cooperate with. To me,
operating full QSK with other signals present is like trying to count
I like the idea as well... if one could adjust the audio attenuation to suit
one's needs it would help those of us who aren't as proficient as we'd wish
and distracted as well.
73,
Bill
K9YEQ
K2 #35; KX1 #35; K3 #1744; mini mods
-Original Message-
Keith,
This is an interesting idea,
That is an interesting idea Keith. I've been reducing the gain by hand
whenever the band noise is objectionable while sending. Been doing that
since I was using a regenerative receiver back in the early 1950's.
But I also grabbed the gain control on the board at KVCR when I was spinning
platters
Ron,
I too am a firm believer in the KISS principle.
Too much automation drives me crazy trying to remember what the
automation is trying to do for me. Oft times the automation does not do
what I want to be done. manual controls forever.
This is not a vote against automation and ease of use,
26 matches
Mail list logo
