I concur 100%. I have a pair of Datong FL-3 audio filters that I used for years to give me peak filtering for CW and RTTY. Fabulous units, among the best audio filters ever made and much needed in the old days when I used analog JRC and Kenwood radios with IF filters no narrower than 500 Hz. Since getting the K3 they've been in the closet.
If the K3 automatically matches the AF and IF passbands, what would be the purpose or advantage of having manual control over this function? Maybe I'm missing something, too? 73 & HNY, Paul WW2PT DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote: > > But I have to ask why for this one. It has been my experience that > one uses an audio peak filter when the IF filtering is inadequate...it > is "another layer" of support (rejecting "unwanted" signals). But hey > guys...the stock K3 goes down to a 50hz bandwidth...at IF and AF (if I > understand the DSP correctly). Fifty HERTZ! > > I think that is a just as narrow (if not much narrower) and with as > steep skirts (if not steeper) than you will ever find on the Audio > Peak Filtering on any past or current radio. > > Not only can you narrow down the DSPs to 50hz, but you can also set > the "pitch" to whatever you like. Doesn't that do the same thing > (only better)? > > QUESTIONS: Are you sure that you actually need this? Have you tried > the method cited above? Why/how would an audio peak filter be > "better" or a further enhancement? > -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/K3-honest-question-re-Audio-Peak-Filter-tp4237359p4237481.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
