Part of the back and forth on this thread seems to be over the definition of "chirp".
The original definition of CW chirp, quite familiar in the 50's and common, was a signal that went, "Dwooooiiiieeeep Dwoooip Dwooooiiiieeeep Dwoooip Dwooooiiiieeeep Dwooooiiiieeeep Dwoooip Dwooooiiiieeeep" The signals of the time would sometimes traverse a kHz in a single baud. With that reference in mind, the word "chirp" does not apply to anything I have heard on my K3. That is in contrast to a signal that would actually stay cleanly on the same frequency, but whose amplitude would gradually rise during the baud. This latter phenomenon, fairly rare by my recollection, was never referred to as a chirp. I only ever heard that called soft keying. The signal had to change frequency in the baud to be called a chirp. There were signals that would gradually run up or down the band as it was keyed. That wasn't called a chirp either. I have never heard a DSP chirp on my K3 that wasn't a chirp coming in. There certainly *IS* a *VERY* noticeable softening of leading and trailing edges of CW bauds in some DSP NB settings, particularly 2-7 and 3-7. Frankly I find it annoying, just *FAR* less annoying than the signal I want to listen to being buried in 20-30 dB of key clicks :>) The artificial softening of the signal makes it "muddy", but as I have found *NOT* less readable. 73, Guy. It turns out there is a difference between "workable" and "pleasing" ______________________________________________________________ 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
