My first experience with DSP was using my FT-847. It is OK but not spectacular. I mainly operate VHF+ and mostly eme so that is a different thing than HF. The FT-847 is audio DSP so that limits it right away. DSP filters are fixed in CW: 400-200-100-25 Hz. NR worked OK on SSB. NB was not worth turning on.
The K3 has IF DSP so a different animal. I like the versatility but that means a steep learning curve to discover what works, when and where. I am impressed with NR on HF SSB. Having a combination of roofing filters and DSP filtering really works nice when digging out super weak signals. The NB is pretty good on impulse noise (way better than the FT-847). DSP technology is advancing quickly. My hearing aids are digital. They separate the audio spectrum into 22 channels and have echo cancellation and four NR routines including noise-cancellation. So I guess I will always have DSP when listening to my K3 (or anything) ;-) . As the sampling rate increases for DSP the closer it will be to analog hearing. My hearing is -30dB so I must use hearing aids. They are predicting in 10-15 years implant DSP on the audio nerve will render hearing loss completely cured...in fact those with it will hear better than natural hearing (ahh, bionic ears!). This applies to radio DSP in the same fashion. The K3 has versatility that I have not begun to use (and not just DSP). I think as one gains experience in using DSP in more situations it will grow on you. 73, Ed - KL7UW ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:11:39 -0400 From: Don Wilhelm <w3...@embarqmail.com> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Regarding the K3 and high QRN levels To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <4c365b2b.8020...@embarqmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Tom, I do agree that a specially tuned analog system will provide better results for the specific task that it is tuned for than a digital system any day. The advantage of digital is that it can be made "almost as good" while being more flexible through the use of computing power. Your desires tend toward weak signal CW operation on the low bands - we all know that. But an analog system tuned to those needs would not be ideal for ease of operation in say a ragchewing SSB situation - for one thing the filters are too narrow :-) . The major advantage offered by DSP is the ability to change the filtering with the turn of a knob, and process the modulation and demodulation tasks with computational algorithms rather than changing the hardware - tailoring the algorithms to each task. Is it as good as analog tuned for a specific task? NO - but it is usually better than a general purpose analog system that attempts to be "everything to everybody". The equivalent flexibility with the same degree of "best-ness" would be cost prohibitive if attempted in analog. 73, Don W3FPR 73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45 ====================================== BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com EME: 144-QRT*, 432-100w, 1296-QRT*, 3400-fall 2010 DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubus...@hotmail.com ====================================== *temp ______________________________________________________________ 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
