Thank you for your thoughtful feedback. I don't want to seem to be
arbitrary in my decision making, which is why I wrote the cost-benefit
analysis. Also, I want folks to have a chance to let me know what's most
important to them and inform me of anything I may have overlooked or am
not as studied on as themselves. The bottom line is, what best serves
the users is the best product to produce.
At present, I'm leaning toward creating just the SPX3 with the following
1. 12V (9-15V) DC input with same power input jack as the KX3.
2. Internal, removable, Lithium battery
3. Operable with or without battery when connected to external power
4. Power cable with input plug at one end, and no connector at the other
5. Optional power cable with input plug at one end, and PowerPole at the
6. 3.5mm (1/8") Stereo input
7. Left input channel to amplifier for speaker driver
8. Reversed Left and Right channels passed to 3.5mm (1/8") stereo
9. 2W (3W max) to speaker driver
10. On/Off volume control. This only affects amplifier and speaker
driver; not pass through to output
11. 3.5mm (1/8") Stereo cable with two L male ends.
Items 1, 4, 5, and 10 are what will be new in comparison to the first
Since the KX2 and KX3 have the same look and feel, the SPX3 would
certainly look natural next to either, even though it would be as tall
and deep as the KX3. I'll have to see whether there is demand for a
smaller SPX2 before embarking on it. It would have the same parts
stuffed into a smaller enclosure.
Adding a switch to make a speaker flip between active and passive would
require a second switch to determine whether the output would be
amplified, or a triple throw switch. After all, when connected to a PC,
the output would not be amplified, but it would be active in order to
power the internal speaker driver. Adding such a switch, which would be
an entirely new feature for a speaker, would add cost and complexity,
and likely cause confusion. It would be much simpler, cheaper, and
straightforward to power the second speaker with a separate cord. I
could put a power output port on it so that a power cord could pass from
one speaker to the other, allowing both to be run from the same battery.
However, if someone is really bent on saving weight and consolidating
the power source, then it seems to me that person would simply remove
both batteries and power both externally.
In all honesty, the battery doesn't really weigh that much more than a
power cord, is nicely tucked away inside the speaker, and doesn't need
to be connected up along with all the other cords when operating in the
field. The weight of extra switches would offset the weight savings of
removing a battery. Furthermore, this speaker will go all day on a
charge. I turned it on the other day, and fell asleep when it had been
on for over 15 hours connected to my portable music player. So, I don't
really know how long it went before the low battery protection circuit
turned it off. I just know it lasted longer than I did without sleep.
The battery recharges quickly, so you wouldn't have to wait long to go
another day using it nonstop, if you didn't charge it while you slept.
Thanks and 73,
On 2018-04-16 19:14, Joan wrote:
> Hey, Robert, here's a thought: Given the irony of a secondary model (a
> passive version of the speaker) actually having higher production cost (due
> to the more limited production run), you could simply produce one model: an
> active speaker--which has the added versatility of being able to be
> configured as a passive speaker. Cost-wise, it would be less expensive to
> add another 'A' model to serve as a second [passive] speaker (albeit with the
> amp turned off, with a bypass for the direct feed from an external source).
> This would only require the 'A' model to be switchable to either L or R input
> (a channel swap DPDT)--and be able to go into bypass [through] mode
> Although it may seems wasteful to have a 2nd active speaker doing duty as a
> passive one, but it would be less expensive to implement (both for producer
> and user), and, hey, you'd have the utility of having a 2nd active speaker
> kicking around in your kit (for whatever:)
> As an incentive [sweetener], Robert, you could offer a discount on ordering a
> second 'A' speaker at time of purchase
> Addendum: if you only made one model, an SPX3A, to pair with the KX3, as a
> KX2 user I would be willing to lump it and purchase them anyway... 'cuz,
> Elecraft <3
> FB es 73 de KX2CW Joan kn
> Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra, said Piglet.
> Shaka, when the walls fell, said Pooh.
Elecraft mailing list
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com