This is a good example of just how subjective "improvement" can be.
Sure, the "hash" is gone, but it's replaced by the "underwater" warbling sound so common with highly processed audio. Personally, I find that warbling variation in the audio far less pleasant than the noise. Ron AC7AC -----Original Message----- > > Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own. It > is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3. I > should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR performance. > > These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off. These > recordings are found on W4RT's website > > 20 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/20Mband-ssb.wav> > 80 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/80conv-ssb.wav> > 80 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/80Mconv2-ssb.wav> > > I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3 > which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as the > ANEM. > > Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can > easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get as > affected as the K3s. This is really surprising to me as the NR for the ANEM > is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios. This leads me to > believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing > background noise while leaving speech unaffected. > > What do you guys think? > > Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your ideas/suggestions. > -- > 73 de James K2QI > President UNARC/4U1UN ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
