Just to add further confusion to the cw opinions, I currently have the 250 Hz 8 pole, which I like as it allows me to work very close to strong locals including those with key clicks, and I plan the purchase the 8 pole 500 Hz Inrad filter on New Years Day. Some of the responders have commented that the -6dB width of the 250 Hz filter is not that much smaller than the 250 Hz filter width, which is true. The problem is that the response on either side of the peak of the 250 Hz filter isn't symmetrical, at least mine isn't, I assume the result of working with real, physical, hardware.. One side matches well with the 250 Hz dsp filter width but the other side is wider and sets most of the overall -6 dB with if the dsp filter is set to a wider bandwidth.
Dunc, W5DC DM4iM wrote: > Elecrafters, thanks for all the input. > I had many replies, personal mail or via the reflector. > > To sum it up: > > Matched filters are important for diversity. > > 8 votes for the 1.8khz, 4 for the 2.1 ssb filter for contesting. > Some use the 1.8khz ssb filter for cw, with the dsp set to narrower > bandwith. I think i will order one of those, it makes sense to use it > for cw-operation on a quiet band and in ssb contests when things get rough. > > The 200hz and 250hz cw filters got an equal number of votes, you left me > alone on this ;-) > > The expense on 2 matched 5 pole or 2 8-pole filters is about the same, > so the criteria here is performance. > > May i call for a run-off? > > Thanks to all es HNY > > Martin > > ______________________________________________________________ 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
