Sherwood has posted his measurements of the K4D's receiver performance in his 
table:

   http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

We're quite pleased with his test results, which confirm that the K4/K4D is 
near the top of its class (direct-sampling SDRs). A K4HD would provide somewhat 
higher dynamic range for those stations in extreme signal environments, but the 
vast majority of operators will find that the K4/K4D more than meets their 
needs.

I'd like to highlight a few important items in Rob's chart.

First, the K4D has a high 2 and 20 kHz dynamic range value of 101 dB. Because 
it's a direct-sampling radio, this figure will hold at nearly all offsets from 
strong signals. Second is the block dynamic range number (128 dB), higher than 
almost every other "pure" SDR measured. Finally, there's the LO noise (local 
oscillator; 148 to 155 dB) -- again, very favorable compared to all competing 
SDRs. This is an important number correlated with reciprocal mixing dynamic 
range (RMDR).

Taken together these demonstrate that the K4D will offer excellent performance 
in crowded band conditions. 

Inevitably a question will arise regarding the chart position of the K4D 
relative to a couple of our other transceivers: the K3S and KX3. There's a bit 
of "apples to oranges" in both comparisons.

The K3S uses a superhet receiver architecture. The K4HD will provide a receive 
setting that emulates this superhet performance when and if it's needed. But 
the "pure" (direct sampling) method used by the K4 (all models) has many 
advantages. One is the elimination of artifacts associated with crystal 
filters. Another is that, as a pure SDR, the K4 has a far more flexible 
architecture. We'll be able to provide updates to the receive and transmit 
digital signal chains that cannot be added to a superhet like the K3S or its 
competitors.

The KX3 is another Elecraft radio high on Sherwood's chart. Its performance is 
excellent, especially at its price point. But its numbers relative to the K4 
are somewhat misleading, as hinted at by Rob's footnotes. The KX3 uses a 
quadrature downsampling architecture, which digitally samples at baseband audio 
rather than at RF. This is ideal for a radio like the KX3 that has to have very 
low current drain for portable operations. The K4 uses a direct-samping 
architecture that requires a higher power digital signal chain, resulting in 
important benefits over quadrature downsampling including much higher and more 
consistent opposite sideband image suppression and 2nd-order intermod 
rejection. So the two are really designed for different applications.

Overall, this first independent test of the K4 validates the performance of our 
SDR architecture. Feel free to send us any further performance questions.

73,
Wayne
N6KR


______________________________________________________________
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] 

Reply via email to