The K3 is entirely different. I've been operating SSB with a 1.5 kHz bandwidth for three years now and it is perfectly intelligible. On prior radios, though, I couldn't even get a 2.1 kHz filter to sound intelligible enough to be useful. I think the difference is where the filter is located relative to the signal. In the K3, narrow filtering on SSB sounds best if you simply reduce the HI CUT to get the desired bandwidth. If you first reduce the WIDTH, then you have to also adjust SHIFT to optimize intelligibility. (Note the word "intelligibility", not "high fidelity", the emphasis being on communication and the ability to copy.)
You don't need to buy a crystal filter to try narrow SSB bandwidths. Just use the DSP HI CUT control. If you find a narrow SSB bandwidth you like to use regularly, AND also you need to protect the IF from very strong nearby signals, then consider a crystal filter of the appropriate bandwidth, ahead of the DSP. Ed - W0YK Jack, WA9FVP, wrote: > I owned 5 transceivers in my lifetime and I purchased a > narrow (1.8) SSB > filter for only one. It was a total wast of money. For me > the filter was > too narrow for voice communications and if a nearby station > was too close > the splatter and the narrow passband made the situation > worse. When I > ordered my K3 I kept the stock 2.7/5 pole filter. I ordered > the 250, 500, 6KHz and 13KHz (FM) filters. ______________________________________________________________ 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
