On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 04:10:56 -0700 (PDT), GW0ETF wrote: > When I bought the 2nd receiver after it first came out I matched the > main rx > with an 8-pole 250 Hz roofing filter. After several years now of SO2V > contesting and dx pile-ups I've never had the 2nd receiver wound down > anywhere near the point where this filter would be switched in. So > I'm > wondering whether to liquidate this particular valuable little asset > and > invest in something more useful...such as antenna hardware. My K3 has 6, 2.8, 1.8, 400, and 200 filters in the main rec, and only the 2.8 and 200 (matched)in the Sub. I do use the sub dialed down to 200 hz when chasing DX at times. But the DSP works so well that I couln't justify the expense of the other filters for the sub. I'd keep it.
...bill nr4c > > Before I do perhaps others could say how they think the 2nd rx should > be > populated filter-wise, which presumably will vary with operating > mode. I > don't tend to do the 'second op with separate headphones tuning the > 2nd vfo' > scenario which is I assume where a full filter complement would be > useful..... > > Be interested in any opinions.....73, > > Stewart, GW0ETF > > -- > View this message in context: > > http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-Choice-of-filters-in-KRX3-tp6932305p6932305.html > Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 ______________________________________________________________ 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
