Yes, I use the presets, and I agree with the field testers as to the change.
I would like to be able to return to fixed settings that I program and are stored. That way I always have a familiar starting point that works best in most situations, but that I can adjust further to customize for the particular signal I'm listening to. With the current setup, I feel I get lost and can't return to a familiar place. While we're at it, in Data mode I can't seem to get to a wide filter setting, which is important to find and initially tune in a station. Data seems to default to a very sharp filter (50 hz) that makes it difficult to tune in a station at the outset. Thanks for asking. Les WB6MND wayne burdick wrote: > > Do you find the DSP/XFIL filter presets, I/II, useful? If you haven't > tried them yet, please do. Here's the short version: > > In each mode, there are two presets (you can also think of them as > "configurations"). Each preset is just a combination of DSP settings > and the corresponding automatic crystal filter selection. They're > intended to be set to match the present operating situation. First, set > up preset I the way you like it, then switch to preset II and do the > same. From then on, you can go back and forth between them. For > example, you might want narrow and wide settings in CW mode. Or in SSB > mode you might want one setting that's normalized to the 2.7 or 2.8 kHz > crystal filter, and another that's shifted down and narrowed somewhat. > > Our firmware field testers have suggested a different way of using > these. Rather than have the presets "float" (change every time you move > the DSP controls), they'd like to see them "fixed" (so that they don't > change unless you specifically modify them via a menu entry, etc.). > > This change is more significant than it sounds. Instead of having two > freely-changing presets (configurations) that you go between, you'd now > have just one working configuration. When you hold I/II, you would be > loading either of the *saved* preset values into it. It would be > similar to recalling a saved frequency memory which gets loaded into a > VFO. Both the working configuration and the two saved presets would > still be independent for each mode. > > Before we make any changes, I'd like to know: > > - if you use presets at all > - if you like the new proposal better (making them fixed) > > This is the beauty of firmware: it's malleable. No need to keep > functionality if it gets zero positive feedback. > > 73, > Wayne > N6KR > > > --- > > http://www.elecraft.com > > _______________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: [email protected] > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/K3-filter-presets-I-II%3A-present-and-future-functionality-tp15766905p15769042.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [email protected] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
