I don’t think you need the second ADC since the two frequencies are only 6 kHz away from each other. Otherwise if you used two different ADCs you would then need two antennas.
Dave wo2x Sent from my waxed string and tin cans. > On Aug 20, 2019, at 7:03 AM, Nr4c <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think you need a K4D with the second ADC. You’d have VFO A in left ear, > VFO C in right ear. Two instances (installed in two separate folders) WSJT, > one listening to left channel, other listening to right channel. > > But you have to keep up with which is transmitting. Once you start a ASO on > VFO A you don’t touch VFO C. > > What’s to gain in this scenario? > > > > Sent from my iPhone > ...nr4c. bill > > >> On Aug 20, 2019, at 6:34 AM, Dave <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Dave, >> >> Will be interesting to hear official answer from Elecraft. >> >> A competitor’s radio does exactly what Logan outlined. You would bring up >> two instances of WSJT-X. Only one can transmit at a time. >> >> Dave wo2x >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Aug 20, 2019, at 3:38 AM, David Gilbert <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I'm no expert by any stretch of the imagination, but it doesn't sound to me >>> like that would be effective with any single rig, K4 or otherwise. >>> >>> First off, as best I can tell you need to assign different rigs to the >>> multiple instances of WSJT-X if run on the same computer. I don't believe >>> you can assign the same rig to two different instances unless you use two >>> separate computers, and then you have the nasty problem of feuding CAT >>> signals. Please correct me if you have found that statement to be >>> erroneous. >>> >>> Secondly, you can't simultaneously transmit on both frequencies (unless you >>> use Fox/Hound mode, which is an entirely different matter) and you can't >>> receive on one frequency while transmitting on the other so you end up >>> staggering your QSOs with no gain in effectiveness ... other than maybe >>> quicker band switching than doing it manually. >>> >>> It seems to me that to gain any benefit without using Fox/Hound you need >>> two separate transmitters, of course fed through a passive combiner if >>> using the same antenna. >>> >>> Or what am I misunderstanding? >>> >>> 73, >>> Dave AB7E >>> >>> >>>> On 8/19/2019 11:06 PM, Logan R Zintsmaster wrote: >>>> Here is a use case question.. >>>> >>>> The radio is connected to a single antenna. >>>> >>>> VFO A is tuned to 14.074 MHz and VFO B is tuned to 14.080. >>>> >>>> An audio data stream from the VFO A frequency is "connected" to an instance >>>> of WSJT-X decoding FT8. >>>> >>>> A second, independent audio stream from the VFO B frequency is concurrently >>>> "connected" to a second instance of WSJT-X decoding FT4. >>>> >>>> Both instances of WSJT-X decode their respective audio streams, >>>> concurrently. >>>> >>>> Starting a QSO in either instance of WSJT-X switches the transmitter to the >>>> appropriate VFO for the duration of the QSO. >>>> >>>> The audio stream for the instance of WSJT-X not in the QSO is interrupted >>>> while the transmitter is operating. >>>> >>>> >>>> Can a K4 support this use case or is a K4D required? >>> Dave, >> >> Will be interesting to hear official answer from Elecraft. >> >> A competitor’s radio does exactly what Logan outlined. You would bring up >> two instances of WSJT-X. Only one can transmit at a time. >> >> Dave wo2x >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Aug 20, 2019, at 3:38 AM, David Gilbert <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I'm no expert by any stretch of the imagination, but it doesn't sound to me >>> like that would be effective with any single rig, K4 or otherwise. >>> >>> First off, as best I can tell you need to assign different rigs to the >>> multiple instances of WSJT-X if run on the same computer. I don't believe >>> you can assign the same rig to two different instances unless you use two >>> separate computers, and then you have the nasty problem of feuding CAT >>> signals. Please correct me if you have found that statement to be >>> erroneous. >>> >>> Secondly, you can't simultaneously transmit on both frequencies (unless you >>> use Fox/Hound mode, which is an entirely different matter) and you can't >>> receive on one frequency while transmitting on the other so you end up >>> staggering your QSOs with no gain in effectiveness ... other than maybe >>> quicker band switching than doing it manually. >>> >>> It seems to me that to gain any benefit without using Fox/Hound you need >>> two separate transmitters, of course fed through a passive combiner if >>> using the same antenna. >>> >>> Or what am I misunderstanding? >>> >>> 73, >>> Dave AB7E >>> >>> >>>> On 8/19/2019 11:06 PM, Logan R Zintsmaster wrote: >>>> Here is a use case question.. >>>> >>>> The radio is connected to a single antenna. >>>> >>>> VFO A is tuned to 14.074 MHz and VFO B is tuned to 14.080. >>>> >>>> An audio data stream from the VFO A frequency is "connected" to an instance >>>> of WSJT-X decoding FT8. >>>> >>>> A second, independent audio stream from the VFO B frequency is concurrently >>>> "connected" to a second instance of WSJT-X decoding FT4. >>>> >>>> Both instances of WSJT-X decode their respective audio streams, >>>> concurrently. >>>> >>>> Starting a QSO in either instance of WSJT-X switches the transmitter to the >>>> appropriate VFO for the duration of the QSO. >>>> >>>> The audio stream for the instance of WSJT-X not in the QSO is interrupted >>>> while the transmitter is operating. >>>> >>>> >>>> Can a K4 support this use case or is a K4D required? >>>> >>>> Can this use case be supported if each instance of WSJT-X is in a different >>>> band? >>>> >>>> >>>> 73 >>>> >>>> Logan, KE7AZ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ______________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> Message delivered to [email protected] >>>> >>> >>> ______________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> Message delivered to [email protected] >> ______________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> Message delivered to [email protected] > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [email protected]
