I am just guessing on this, but ... As I understand it, the K3 has quite short rise and fall times (about 2.5 msec) on CW with carefully shaped (i.e., CPU processed) corners of the waveform to prevent key clicks. The faster the CW the more often the CPU is required to process the signal, and it wouldn't surprise me to learn that 50 WPM was a practical limit based upon some ceiling that Elecraft set for CPU usage for that task. At speeds higher than that the wave shaping routine possibly becomes unreliable, and dit length maybe even becomes erratic as a function of their frequency of occurrence (a "b" versus a "c", for example).
As I said, that's just a guess on my part but it seems like a reasonable guess to me, at least until someone from Elecraft comments. 73, Dave AB7E On 5/14/2010 8:59 AM, DK4XL wrote: > it is not necessary to use special equipment to hear > the problem - if it is present. Sorry but I hear if a dot > is too short and is missing 1/1000 of a second if the > signal is strengh enough. > > It is always the same discussion - only a few people can > judge about CW speed, and only these people know what's > going on in the scene - but lots of guys continue writing > how unimportant this problem must be. > > For the qrq community, the knowledge that the K3 has this > QRQ CW problem (that 99% of the other transceivers have > as well), turns into a K.O. criterium. And I can't believe that > the K3 really HAS THIS problem. > > I will continue to collect more skilled feedbacks on the bands. > > > Martin > DK4XL > > ______________________________________________________________ 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
