On Jun 13, 2010, at 2:07 PM, N1JM wrote: > In real world operating, has anyone really experienced a difference or could > tell a difference?
When you are a weak station looking for holes in between loud stations to put yourself in, yes, it will matter how wide those stations are. (It is like asking if wide CW keying sidebands (keyclicks) bothers anybody.) But my original response was really to document that fact that AFSK from a K3 can indeed be cleaner than FSK, in support of VE3KI's statement which responded to an earlier posting by someone else that said: > I do see FSK as a method that is slightly less prone to TX distortions. The K3's transmit IMD, although not stellar, is already good enough that you can produce an AFSK signal which is cleaner than the internally produced FSK for now. (If Elecraft can waveshape the CW signal, they probably can also do it to an FSK signal, thus the "for now" in the previous sentence.) What the K3 is very good at is how easy it is to adjust for the AFSK levels, and that VOX is available for use in digital modes (not true in many other rigs). It makes AFSK simpler and cheaper to set up than many other rigs. Cleaner signal, simpler setup, and cheaper... what is there not to like? To make it any simpler for digital mode users, the K3 would need an integrated USB sound card. 73 Chen, W7AY ______________________________________________________________ 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
