Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
It has been a known (documented by W8JI with fix) issue since the FT-1000D. The noise blanker contains a dual gate MOSFET connected to the IF that runs all the time. Instead of disabling the MOSFET, the second gate is simply biased into an off state when the NB is turned off. Unfortunately this allows the first gate to be overdriven by strong signals which creates IMD that is coupled directly back into the IF. The FT-2000 uses the same noise blanker circuit as the FT-1000, FT-1000D, FT-1000MP, etc. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 1/3/2011 2:31 PM, Jan Erik Holm wrote: Is this a known issue with the FT-2000? /SM2EKM On 2010-12-31 23:31, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: or issues of IMD generated in the noise blanker (even when the NB is off). 73, ... Joe, W4TV __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
I wonder if a company like Network Sciences did build an improved 8 mhz filter how much performance increase we would see. Surely if a 20db jump in IMD dynamic range can be achieved at 70mhz, imagine what the improvement would be at 8mhz! We will never know unless someone tries. The claimed jump in dynamic range in the FT-2000 with the NS/AC0C filter is entirely due to the ability of that filter to reduce the level of the IMD causing signals at +/- 2 KHz (outside the window). If you study the AC0C information, you will see the response of the filter is down about 35 dB at +/- 2KHz. From a theoretical consideration, reducing the interfering signals by 35 dB should reduce the IMD by 70 dB! This performance would indicate that the NS/AC0C filter is probably protecting the second mixer and second IF but does nothing to solve the improper (narrow band/reactive) termination of the first mixer or issues of IMD generated in the noise blanker (even when the NB is off). 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/31/2010 5:00 PM, juergen wrote: Hi Bill I understand the differences in IF frequencies. The question still remains, how much extra IMD dynamic could be squeezed from the K3 if high performance 8mhz roofing filters were used. We have seen no data on the K3 filters that quantified their impact on IMD dynamic range. PA3AKE has shown that careful selection of crystals and building a roofing with due care contributes a significant amount to the ultimate IMD dynamic range. http://www.xs4all.nl/~martein/pa3ake/hmode/roofer_intro.html I wonder if a company like Network Sciences did build an improved 8 mhz filter how much performance increase we would see. Surely if a 20db jump in IMD dynamic range can be achieved at 70mhz, imagine what the improvement would be at 8mhz! We will never know unless someone tries. 73 John --- On Fri, 12/31/10, Bil Tippettbtipp...@alum.mit.edu wrote: From: Bil Tippettbtipp...@alum.mit.edu Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Date: Friday, December 31, 2010, 4:18 AM I wonder how such a high performance filter would work in the K3? Not that its needed in the K3. However in the interest of science, it might be a worthy pursuit. It also might push the K3 well ahead of the FT5000 in ultimate performance. Not very well since it's at 70 MHz. ;-) The Inrad filters are already better than whatever is in the FT5000 since Sherwood measured ultimate rejection in the K3 at 105 dB vs 90 dB for the 5000. 73, Bill W4ZV __ 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 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Is this a known issue with the FT-2000? /SM2EKM On 2010-12-31 23:31, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: or issues of IMD generated in the noise blanker (even when the NB is off). 73, ... Joe, W4TV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Yes I know all of this about the FT-1000, this was NOT the question. I have never heard that the NB in the 2000 is problematic. Maybe it is maybe it isn´t, I just like to find out. It seems you just assume it´s problematic since it uses as you say the same circuit as in the 1000. Since you did bring it up, is this the case or do you know something else? /Jim -- On 2011-01-03 21:09, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: It has been a known (documented by W8JI with fix) issue since the FT-1000D. The noise blanker contains a dual gate MOSFET connected to the IF that runs all the time. Instead of disabling the MOSFET, the second gate is simply biased into an off state when the NB is turned off. Unfortunately this allows the first gate to be overdriven by strong signals which creates IMD that is coupled directly back into the IF. The FT-2000 uses the same noise blanker circuit as the FT-1000, FT-1000D, FT-1000MP, etc. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 1/3/2011 2:31 PM, Jan Erik Holm wrote: Is this a known issue with the FT-2000? /SM2EKM On 2010-12-31 23:31, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: or issues of IMD generated in the noise blanker (even when the NB is off). 73, ... Joe, W4TV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Sure that is logical. OK this is good information, TNX Seems they never learn. If you would have put it like this in the first place I wouldn´t have said anything. 73 Jim --- On 2011-01-04 07:16, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: It seems you just assume it´s problematic since it uses as you say the same circuit as in the 1000. Since you did bring it up, is this the case or do you know something else? It has been 18 months since I have had a FT-2000 on my bench. When I did, I did not perform IMD testing but I did study the schematic (Service Manual) to determine that the noise blanker amplifier had the same unswitched design as the FT-1000 and FT-1000MP (and MK V). It is insanity to assume that identical circuits that operate one way in two (three) different models of Yaesu transceiver will suddenly operate differently in a fourth model. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 1/4/2011 12:54 AM, Jan Erik Holm wrote: Yes I know all of this about the FT-1000, this was NOT the question. I have never heard that the NB in the 2000 is problematic. Maybe it is maybe it isn´t, I just like to find out. It seems you just assume it´s problematic since it uses as you say the same circuit as in the 1000. Since you did bring it up, is this the case or do you know something else? /Jim -- On 2011-01-03 21:09, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: It has been a known (documented by W8JI with fix) issue since the FT-1000D. The noise blanker contains a dual gate MOSFET connected to the IF that runs all the time. Instead of disabling the MOSFET, the second gate is simply biased into an off state when the NB is turned off. Unfortunately this allows the first gate to be overdriven by strong signals which creates IMD that is coupled directly back into the IF. The FT-2000 uses the same noise blanker circuit as the FT-1000, FT-1000D, FT-1000MP, etc. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 1/3/2011 2:31 PM, Jan Erik Holm wrote: Is this a known issue with the FT-2000? /SM2EKM On 2010-12-31 23:31, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: or issues of IMD generated in the noise blanker (even when the NB is off). 73, ... Joe, W4TV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
happy new year, Wayne Burdick schrieb am 31 Dec 2010 um 17:26: On Dec 31, 2010, at 4:13 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: What gets me in a K3 is that there is still some room in there, even after installing the KRX3 to the 100W transceiver, to add something else. So far the possibilities haven't tickled my fancy. We're saving it for a fuel cell :) Wayne N6KR ooops -- I already filled half of the room with a pactor modem. What is the size of the fuel cell? 73! de Werner OE9FWV -- Driving People Insane: 9. Put your garbage can on your desk and label it IN Email powered by Pegasus Mail free at http://www.pmail.com Homepage: http://www.qsl.net/oe9fwv/ Fone +43 5522 75013 Fax +43 5522 22505 Mobile +43 664 6340014 Fax-Email Gateway +43 820 220262990 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
M Something is cooking at Elecraft headquarter,maybe soon we'll see the coming of a K3 Pro ?? Hector AD4C If freedom means something,it is the right to tell others what they don't want to hear –George Orwell --- On Sat, 1/1/11, Gary Gregory garyvk...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gary Gregory garyvk...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table To: Bruce Beford bruce.bef...@myfairpoint.net Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Date: Saturday, January 1, 2011, 6:32 AM Room for some Wine? Nah, not good, my bones will fall out of my legs I'm told. Gary HNY 2 all On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Bruce Beford bruce.bef...@myfairpoint.net wrote: On Dec 31, 2010, at 4:13 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: What gets me in a K3 is that there is still some room in there, even after installing the KRX3 to the 100W transceiver, to add something else. So far the possibilities haven't tickled my fancy. We're saving it for a fuel cell :) Wayne N6KR Mr. Fusion? Bruce, N1RX __ 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 -- Gary VK4FD - Motorhome Mobile http://www.qsl.net/vk4fd/ K3 #679, P3 #546 For everything else there's Mastercard!!! __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
I wonder how such a high performance filter would work in the K3? Not that its needed in the K3. However in the interest of science, it might be a worthy pursuit. It also might push the K3 well ahead of the FT5000 in ultimate performance. Not very well since it's at 70 MHz. ;-) The Inrad filters are already better than whatever is in the FT5000 since Sherwood measured ultimate rejection in the K3 at 105 dB vs 90 dB for the 5000. 73, Bill W4ZV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Is there a non-engineer's guide to the Sherwood table for those of us who are not engineers? In particular, the table is sorted by Narrow Spaced Dynamic Range, and I see that the FT5000 is listed first, but the K3 also gets a 101 in that column, albeit with a pf footnote instead of just an f. I decode these footnotes to be f = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited And pf = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited and was with 200 Hz 5-pole filter OK - so why is the FT5000 at the top of the list? Why no indication of what filter was used in the FT5000? What is the second sort column for the table? What puts the FT5000 on top? What does this table really tell us? It seems that both of these receivers are pretty close as many of the numbers are similarly different from those listed below them. When a parameter is higher or lower - which is better? I presume that the higher the narrow-spaced dynamic range, the better, but what about 100kHz blocking (for example). Is higher or lower there better? The K3 is a 140 on that one, and the FT5000 is a lowly 127. The Down-conversion Kenwood 590 gets a 144 in this column - is that better or worse than the K3? But, the 590 only gets an 88 in the narrow-spaced dynamic range, so I guess that means it's much worse? How does one interpret this data? 73, Bob W5OV -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Bil Tippett Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 6:18 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table I wonder how such a high performance filter would work in the K3? Not that its needed in the K3. However in the interest of science, it might be a worthy pursuit. It also might push the K3 well ahead of the FT5000 in ultimate performance. Not very well since it's at 70 MHz. ;-) The Inrad filters are already better than whatever is in the FT5000 since Sherwood measured ultimate rejection in the K3 at 105 dB vs 90 dB for the 5000. 73, Bill W4ZV __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Nice !!! Ditto. py2adr - Original Message - From: Bob Naumann w...@w5ov.com To: 'Bil Tippett' btipp...@alum.mit.edu; elecraft@mailman.qth.net Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 10:42 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table Is there a non-engineer's guide to the Sherwood table for those of us who are not engineers? In particular, the table is sorted by Narrow Spaced Dynamic Range, and I see that the FT5000 is listed first, but the K3 also gets a 101 in that column, albeit with a pf footnote instead of just an f. I decode these footnotes to be f = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited And pf = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited and was with 200 Hz 5-pole filter OK - so why is the FT5000 at the top of the list? Why no indication of what filter was used in the FT5000? What is the second sort column for the table? What puts the FT5000 on top? What does this table really tell us? It seems that both of these receivers are pretty close as many of the numbers are similarly different from those listed below them. When a parameter is higher or lower - which is better? I presume that the higher the narrow-spaced dynamic range, the better, but what about 100kHz blocking (for example). Is higher or lower there better? The K3 is a 140 on that one, and the FT5000 is a lowly 127. The Down-conversion Kenwood 590 gets a 144 in this column - is that better or worse than the K3? But, the 590 only gets an 88 in the narrow-spaced dynamic range, so I guess that means it's much worse? How does one interpret this data? 73, Bob W5OV -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Bil Tippett Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 6:18 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table I wonder how such a high performance filter would work in the K3? Not that its needed in the K3. However in the interest of science, it might be a worthy pursuit. It also might push the K3 well ahead of the FT5000 in ultimate performance. Not very well since it's at 70 MHz. ;-) The Inrad filters are already better than whatever is in the FT5000 since Sherwood measured ultimate rejection in the K3 at 105 dB vs 90 dB for the 5000. 73, Bill W4ZV __ 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 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Bob, I can't think of an easy answer - mainly because many or the parameters tested are in the realmm of engineering, and as such use engineering terms to achieve some level of communications clarity. In short, if you do not develop some understanding of the terms, there is no easy way and must involve some study. I would suggest two things - first is to try looking up each of the parameters on Wikipedia, second, do some study of the Receivers section in the ARRL Handbook to provide you with some understanding of how the various parameters work together. If you want to gain a little better understanding, look at the ARRL Testing procedures (for Receivers) - you really don't have to read the entire test procedure, usually the Purpose of each test will provide some insight. You can find the ARRL Test procedures at http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/Procedure%20Manual%202010%20with%20page%20breaks.pdf Lastly, some parameters will be more important to one type of operation than others. Exactly which ones relate to your operating tastes and style will vary. A contester or avid DXer will want good performance in the narrow spaced dynamic range because he must work in a section of the band crowded with signals and does not want the stronger ones to overload the receiver. If your operating style is more of the ragchew variety, that same parameter may not be important to you since you will likely QSY if QRM is nearby rather than trying to stick it out and work within the QRM area of the band. 73, Don W3FPR On 12/31/2010 7:42 AM, Bob Naumann wrote: Is there a non-engineer's guide to the Sherwood table for those of us who are not engineers? In particular, the table is sorted by Narrow Spaced Dynamic Range, and I see that the FT5000 is listed first, but the K3 also gets a 101 in that column, albeit with a pf footnote instead of just an f. I decode these footnotes to be f = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited And pf = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited and was with 200 Hz 5-pole filter OK - so why is the FT5000 at the top of the list? Why no indication of what filter was used in the FT5000? What is the second sort column for the table? What puts the FT5000 on top? What does this table really tell us? It seems that both of these receivers are pretty close as many of the numbers are similarly different from those listed below them. When a parameter is higher or lower - which is better? I presume that the higher the narrow-spaced dynamic range, the better, but what about 100kHz blocking (for example). Is higher or lower there better? The K3 is a 140 on that one, and the FT5000 is a lowly 127. The Down-conversion Kenwood 590 gets a 144 in this column - is that better or worse than the K3? But, the 590 only gets an 88 in the narrow-spaced dynamic range, so I guess that means it's much worse? How does one interpret this data? 73, Bob W5OV -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Bil Tippett Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 6:18 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table I wonder how such a high performance filter would work in the K3? Not that its needed in the K3. However in the interest of science, it might be a worthy pursuit. It also might push the K3 well ahead of the FT5000 in ultimate performance. Not very well since it's at 70 MHz. ;-) The Inrad filters are already better than whatever is in the FT5000 since Sherwood measured ultimate rejection in the K3 at 105 dB vs 90 dB for the 5000. 73, Bill W4ZV __ 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 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Bob Naumann w...@w5ov.com wrote: Is there a non-engineer's guide to the Sherwood table for those of us who are not engineers? In particular, the table is sorted by Narrow Spaced Dynamic Range, and I see that the FT5000 is listed first, but the K3 also gets a 101 in that column, albeit with a pf footnote instead of just an f. I decode these footnotes to be f = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited And pf = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited and was with 200 Hz 5-pole filter ***Correct on both counts. OK - so why is the FT5000 at the top of the list? Why no indication of what filter was used in the FT5000? ***The default assumption is always a 500 Hz filter or the closest that the manufacturer provides, so ~500 Hz results results are NOT footnoted. The FT5000 measurements were using its standard 600 Hz filter and the K3 is footnoted for the 400 Hz and 200 Hz measurements. The K3's 5-pole 500 Hz is NOT footnoted per the assumed convention. What is the second sort column for the table? What puts the FT5000 on top? ***The sort is by 2 kHz IMDDR3 only. Since the FT5000 achieved 101 dB using its 600 Hz filter, it is listed above the K3 which achieved 95 dB with a 500 Hz filter. What does this table really tell us? It seems that both of these receivers are pretty close as many of the numbers are similarly different from those listed below them. ***Yes it tells you that for all practical purposes all of the rigs from Orion up are practically identical. I doubt you would notice the difference in 95 dB versus 101 dB in most real world cases. When a parameter is higher or lower - which is better? I presume that the higher the narrow-spaced dynamic range, the better, but what about 100kHz blocking (for example). Is higher or lower there better? The K3 is a 140 on that one, and the FT5000 is a lowly 127. The Down-conversion Kenwood 590 gets a 144 in this column - is that better or worse than the K3? But, the 590 only gets an 88 in the narrow-spaced dynamic range, so I guess that means it's much worse? How does one interpret this data? ***Higher blocking (BDR) is better. BDR is important in a multi-transmitter environment or if you have a very near neighbor. If you had either of these situations, you might opt for the higher BDR result if the rigs' IMDDR3 results were similar. Phase noise (both TX and RX) is another very important parameter in multi-transmitter environments (where the K3 also shines). Hope this helps! 73 HNY to all! Bill W4ZV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
* On 2010 31 Dec 08:43 -0600, Bill Tippett wrote: On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Bob Naumann w...@w5ov.com wrote: What is the second sort column for the table? What puts the FT5000 on top? ***The sort is by 2 kHz IMDDR3 only. Since the FT5000 achieved 101 dB using its 600 Hz filter, it is listed above the K3 which achieved 95 dB with a 500 Hz filter. IMO, while Bob's efforts have long been to document very close dynamic range, it seems that this one singular focus tends to skew the table somewhat (I'm not just saying that because the K3 is now presumed second rate by those who don't understand all of the parameters fully). I say it because I think one must take all parameters into account as I think they show that focusing strictly on one area leads to deficiencies in other areas. If, for instance, the Yaesu engineers consciously set out to acheive the top spot based soley on 2 kHz BDR, they won that battle but lost the war as other numbers indicate poorer performance for the FT-5000. IMO, the K3 should rank higher as the overall numbers are better and more consistent than the FT-5000. But, it's Bob's data and website and he has decided how to rank the various transceivers. What does this table really tell us? It seems that both of these receivers are pretty close as many of the numbers are similarly different from those listed below them. ***Yes it tells you that for all practical purposes all of the rigs from Orion up are practically identical. I doubt you would notice the difference in 95 dB versus 101 dB in most real world cases. And this is where other factors do begin to come into play. After the considering them, the K3 came in on top by a wide margin *for me*. YMMV. 73, es HNY, de Nate N0NB -- The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true. Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://n0nb.us/index.html __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Bob Naumann w...@w5ov.com wrote: Is there a non-engineer's guide to the Sherwood table for those of us who are not engineers? On Sherwood's main page, there's a very good presentation at the upper left: Roofing Filters, Transmitted BW Receiver Performnce *Dayton Contest University 2008 * Slide Show with Audio (wmvhttp://www.sherweng.com/audio/Sherwood_CU_2008_final_b.wmv) Slide Show only (ppthttp://www.sherweng.com/documents/NC0B-Contest-U-2008-9.pptor pdf http://www.sherweng.com/documents/NC0B-Contest-U-2008-9.pdf) - Audio only (mp3 http://www.sherweng.com/audio/CU-Presentation-Edited-2a.mp3) Click to view or listen or to save, right click Save Target/Link Rob covers many of the issues you'll see on his Receiver Test Data page. 73, Bill W4ZV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Thank you, Don. To make what I'm saying clear, I do understand that this is all very complex and decoding it all takes a deep level of understanding, which I suppose comes naturally to engineers and people who enjoy that sort of thing. I'm no longer one of those people. Even though I have been involved in electronics for decades and was an Electronic Engineering Technician for many years until I went to the dark side of management back in the 80's. So, I can/could understand what each of the terms means - but I don't see from the table how they were used to reach a conclusion of which radio is ranked #1. I guess that what I'm looking for is an Executive Summary with some answers to my specific questions: 1) Why is the FT5000 at the top of the list? (And not the K3 when they both get a 101 in the column the table is sorted on?) Is it because the FT5000 is newer so it goes at the top? 2) Why no indication of what filter was used in the FT5000? (Is that significant or not?) 3) What is the second sort column for the table? (which I presume puts the FT5000 on top since they seem equivalent in the Narrow Dynamic Range column with 101 for both). I think that even if I were to gain enough knowledge to fully explain each parameter in engineering terms, I would still be guessing at what criteria Rob used to rank these radios. A simple explanation like: Even though the FT-5000 and the K3 have the same Narrow Dynamic Range measurement, the ___ of the FT5000 puts it ahead of the K3 in the table. Make sense? -Bob W5OV -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 7:54 AM To: Bob Naumann Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table Bob, I can't think of an easy answer - mainly because many or the parameters tested are in the realmm of engineering, and as such use engineering terms to achieve some level of communications clarity. In short, if you do not develop some understanding of the terms, there is no easy way and must involve some study. I would suggest two things - first is to try looking up each of the parameters on Wikipedia, second, do some study of the Receivers section in the ARRL Handbook to provide you with some understanding of how the various parameters work together. If you want to gain a little better understanding, look at the ARRL Testing procedures (for Receivers) - you really don't have to read the entire test procedure, usually the Purpose of each test will provide some insight. You can find the ARRL Test procedures at http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/Procedure%20Manual%20 2010%20with%20page%20breaks.pdf Lastly, some parameters will be more important to one type of operation than others. Exactly which ones relate to your operating tastes and style will vary. A contester or avid DXer will want good performance in the narrow spaced dynamic range because he must work in a section of the band crowded with signals and does not want the stronger ones to overload the receiver. If your operating style is more of the ragchew variety, that same parameter may not be important to you since you will likely QSY if QRM is nearby rather than trying to stick it out and work within the QRM area of the band. 73, Don W3FPR On 12/31/2010 7:42 AM, Bob Naumann wrote: Is there a non-engineer's guide to the Sherwood table for those of us who are not engineers? In particular, the table is sorted by Narrow Spaced Dynamic Range, and I see that the FT5000 is listed first, but the K3 also gets a 101 in that column, albeit with a pf footnote instead of just an f. I decode these footnotes to be f = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited And pf = Measurement was Phase-Noise Limited and was with 200 Hz 5-pole filter OK - so why is the FT5000 at the top of the list? Why no indication of what filter was used in the FT5000? What is the second sort column for the table? What puts the FT5000 on top? What does this table really tell us? It seems that both of these receivers are pretty close as many of the numbers are similarly different from those listed below them. When a parameter is higher or lower - which is better? I presume that the higher the narrow-spaced dynamic range, the better, but what about 100kHz blocking (for example). Is higher or lower there better? The K3 is a 140 on that one, and the FT5000 is a lowly 127. The Down-conversion Kenwood 590 gets a 144 in this column - is that better or worse than the K3? But, the 590 only gets an 88 in the narrow-spaced dynamic range, so I guess that means it's much worse? How does one interpret this data? 73, Bob W5OV -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Bil Tippett Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 6:18 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
hey guys FACE IT ; THE YAESU IS ON TOP let someone have their 15 minutes ok3 minutes,,, TIMES UP .. BILL /3 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
The Yaesu car may be on top because of slightly higher acceleration, but I'm watching what people are driving around the race track, ya know those guys who have to add *everything* up to finish the race in front. The Yakencom boys keep throwing something or the other overboard to try and match the K3. And I would have thought that the Kenwood 590 would have finished in better shape (that's what's new on the list BTW). If you bought your K3 in a fit of p***s envy, you're sure to get knocked down on some list sooner or later. But if you bought it for all those high numbers AND reasonable cost AND two equally excellent receivers AND true diversity AND customer support AND constantly evolving firmware AND configurability AND an owner who's always listening to the troops AND ... , then the other guys on the list don't really compare. I note that the one other REALLY sharp RX on the list (Perseus) does not have a transmitter inside it's case. PS, after listening to a friend for a while last night, I recommended a 590 to him. Whatever else, the K3 has had an enormous effect on the state of the art. 73, Guy. On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Bill NY9H n...@arrl.net wrote: hey guys FACE IT ; THE YAESU IS ON TOP let someone have their 15 minutes ok 3 minutes,,, TIMES UP .. BILL /3 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Every time this table comes out I am pleasantly surprised at how competitive the K2 remains after so many years. In nearly every category except the sort criteria, the classic kit radio is still right up there! But, then, I am looking forward to building my own K2, so I've got some rose-tinted glasses on. 20 dB is a lot. 73, Byron N6NUL K1 #2799 On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 7:06 AM, Nate Bargmann n...@n0nb.us wrote: * On 2010 31 Dec 08:43 -0600, Bill Tippett wrote: On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Bob Naumann w...@w5ov.com wrote: What is the second sort column for the table? What puts the FT5000 on top? ***The sort is by 2 kHz IMDDR3 only. Since the FT5000 achieved 101 dB using its 600 Hz filter, it is listed above the K3 which achieved 95 dB with a 500 Hz filter. IMO, while Bob's efforts have long been to document very close dynamic range, it seems that this one singular focus tends to skew the table somewhat (I'm not just saying that because the K3 is now presumed second rate by those who don't understand all of the parameters fully). I say it because I think one must take all parameters into account as I think they show that focusing strictly on one area leads to deficiencies in other areas. -- - Northern California Contest Club - CU in the 2011 Cal QSO Party 1-2 Oct 2011 - www.cqp.org __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Well said. Plus we should remember that Bob's table is NOT a buyer's guide to HF transceivers, but simply a valuable ranking by one criterion - 2kHz BDR. Harry WE1X Dec 31, 2010 03:23:14 PM, n...@arrl.net wrote: === hey guys FACE IT ; THE YAESU IS ON TOP let someone have their 15 minutes ok3 minutes,,, TIMES UP .. BILL /3 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
On 12/31/2010 4:42 AM, Bob Naumann wrote: Is there a non-engineer's guide to the Sherwood table for those of us who are not engineers? Certainly one of us could write up a guide to it, but a better way is for you to find and study the material ARRL has written about this to go along with their own lab tests. Search the product review section of the ARRL website. Not a member? You should be. :) 73, Jim K9YC __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
The numbers are there and pretty straight forward. What they really are saying is that unless you are operating under very stressful conditions, you can pony up your money and take your choice. I have 2K3s, 1 Eagle, 1 TS590, 1 ORION ll, and 1 FT5K. And I have many other radios. At this level the performance is a given. It is a matter of price, features, and value and no chart is going to help you decide based on those criteria. George, W6GF PS: The customer service of the company is a VERY big factor in my book. Think about that!! From: Jim Brown j...@audiosystemsgroup.com To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Sent: Fri, December 31, 2010 9:22:56 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table On 12/31/2010 4:42 AM, Bob Naumann wrote: Is there a non-engineer's guide to the Sherwood table for those of us who are not engineers? Certainly one of us could write up a guide to it, but a better way is for you to find and study the material ARRL has written about this to go along with their own lab tests. Search the product review section of the ARRL website. Not a member? You should be. :) 73, Jim K9YC __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Guy: - The Yakencom boys keep throwing something or the other overboard to try and match the K3. And I would have thought that the Kenwood 590 would have finished in better shape (that's what's new on the list BTW). If you bought your K3 in a fit of p***s envy, you're sure to get knocked down on some list sooner or later. But if you bought it for all those high numbers AND reasonable cost AND two equally excellent receivers AND true diversity AND customer support AND constantly evolving firmware AND configurability AND an owner who's always listening to the troops AND ... , then the other guys on the list don't really compare. -- Completely agree... And dont forget the weight factor... Its much harder to cart a pair of 7800'ds a kilometer across the soggy Russian Tundra than to carry a pair of K3 in each hand... And your table wont start sinking into the ground with the weight, either! OK, ducking I wont start that again! :) HNY Lu-W4LT __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
On Dec 31, 2010, at 12/316:22 AM, Bob Naumann wrote: 1) Why is the FT5000 at the top of the list? (And not the K3 when they both get a 101 in the column the table is sorted on?) Is it because the FT5000 is newer so it goes at the top? I don't know if it is Rob Sherwood's rationale, but when you look at all the footnotes, you will see that the K3 required a narrower roofing filter to achieve the same close-in dynamic range as the FT-5000. So, going by the numbers alone, the FT-5000 does have better close in dynamic range. The Radcom (June 2010) and QST (December 2010) reviews show even larger differences. 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Uh Oh! Lesse now E-mail options | Filters | New Filter | Filter Name: Sherwood | If Sender = Elecraft | If Header Contains = Sherwood | Move to Folder = Trash There, done! Have at it guys! 8-) 73, Ken Alexander VE3HLS --- On Thu, 12/30/10, Ed Schuller eschul...@sbcglobal.net wrote: http://www.sherweng.com/table.html __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
On Dec 31, 2010, at 12/316:22 AM, Bob Naumann wrote: 1) Why is the FT5000 at the top of the list? (And not the K3 when they both get a 101 in the column the table is sorted on?) Is it because the FT5000 is newer so it goes at the top? W7AY: I don't know if it is Rob Sherwood's rationale, but when you look at all the footnotes, you will see that the K3 required a narrower roofing filter to achieve the same close-in dynamic range as the FT-5000. So, going by the numbers alone, the FT-5000 does have better close in dynamic range. The Radcom (June 2010) and QST (December 2010) reviews show even larger differences. ARRL's and (just recently) Radcom's measurements are using ARRL's convention of a 3 Hz BW spectrum analyzer to separate IMD from phase noise effects. Since the human ear is ~50 Hz instead of 3 Hz, this is a very misleading way to present real world measurements. Rob (BTW it's ROB...not BOB) is now the ONLY one making measurements that are both realistic and comparable to other models over many years. If you listen to Rob's presentation I mentioned previously, he covers this in some detail. 73, Bill W4ZV P.S. To VE3HLS, if you would learn how to read lists on the webpage archives, you would never need to download a single message (or filter them). __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Hi Bill I understand the differences in IF frequencies. The question still remains, how much extra IMD dynamic could be squeezed from the K3 if high performance 8mhz roofing filters were used. We have seen no data on the K3 filters that quantified their impact on IMD dynamic range. PA3AKE has shown that careful selection of crystals and building a roofing with due care contributes a significant amount to the ultimate IMD dynamic range. http://www.xs4all.nl/~martein/pa3ake/hmode/roofer_intro.html I wonder if a company like Network Sciences did build an improved 8 mhz filter how much performance increase we would see. Surely if a 20db jump in IMD dynamic range can be achieved at 70mhz, imagine what the improvement would be at 8mhz! We will never know unless someone tries. 73 John --- On Fri, 12/31/10, Bil Tippett btipp...@alum.mit.edu wrote: From: Bil Tippett btipp...@alum.mit.edu Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Date: Friday, December 31, 2010, 4:18 AM I wonder how such a high performance filter would work in the K3? Not that its needed in the K3. However in the interest of science, it might be a worthy pursuit. It also might push the K3 well ahead of the FT5000 in ultimate performance. Not very well since it's at 70 MHz. ;-) The Inrad filters are already better than whatever is in the FT5000 since Sherwood measured ultimate rejection in the K3 at 105 dB vs 90 dB for the 5000. 73, Bill W4ZV __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 5:00 PM, juergen plebia...@yahoo.com wrote: The question still remains, how much extra IMD dynamic could be squeezed from the K3 if high performance 8mhz roofing filters were used. We have seen no data on the K3 filters that quantified their impact on IMD dynamic range. I believe the relevant question is Who cares? I don't because I don't feel I need 120 dB of dynamic range. It's one thing to take the FT2000 from ~66 dB to 86 dB, but taking the K3 from ~100 to 120 dB is a don't care unless TX signals become a LOT cleaner than they are today. 73 HNY to all! Bill W4ZV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Both the Inrad and Elecraft filters use crystals that are hand- screened for low IMD. We built several high-performance test fixtures for ourselves and Inrad to make sure this was done consistently. A slight improvement may be possible, but it would probably double the cost of the filters. The K3's receive IMD numbers are already excellent. 73, Wayne N6KR On Dec 31, 2010, at 2:00 PM, juergen wrote: Hi Bill I understand the differences in IF frequencies. The question still remains, how much extra IMD dynamic could be squeezed from the K3 if high performance 8mhz roofing filters were used. We have seen no data on the K3 filters that quantified their impact on IMD dynamic range. PA3AKE has shown that careful selection of crystals and building a roofing with due care contributes a significant amount to the ultimate IMD dynamic range. http://www.xs4all.nl/~martein/pa3ake/hmode/roofer_intro.html I wonder if a company like Network Sciences did build an improved 8 mhz filter how much performance increase we would see. Surely if a 20db jump in IMD dynamic range can be achieved at 70mhz, imagine what the improvement would be at 8mhz! We will never know unless someone tries. 73 John --- On Fri, 12/31/10, Bil Tippett btipp...@alum.mit.edu wrote: From: Bil Tippett btipp...@alum.mit.edu Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Date: Friday, December 31, 2010, 4:18 AM I wonder how such a high performance filter would work in the K3? Not that its needed in the K3. However in the interest of science, it might be a worthy pursuit. It also might push the K3 well ahead of the FT5000 in ultimate performance. Not very well since it's at 70 MHz. ;-) The Inrad filters are already better than whatever is in the FT5000 since Sherwood measured ultimate rejection in the K3 at 105 dB vs 90 dB for the 5000. 73, Bill W4ZV __ 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 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
What gets me in a K3 is that there is still some room in there, even after installing the KRX3 to the 100W transceiver, to add something else. So far the possibilities haven't tickled my fancy. But the way it is put together allows some intriguing homegrown devices. We ARE around here designing some quiet 160 RX antennas SPECIFICALLY for diversity, kind of like a 4 square, where one ear listens to the selected direction, and the other ear listens to an equally quiet channel of the two directions adjacent to the selected. No K3 and we wouldn't even be THINKING of such a thing. Now the RX antenna switch box HAS to have a diversity port on it, and sending just ONE direction from the array back to the RX is intolerable. Two runs of flooded RG6. Whoodda thunk it... 73, Guy. On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Lu Romero lrom...@ij.net wrote: Guy: - The Yakencom boys keep throwing something or the other overboard to try and match the K3. And I would have thought that the Kenwood 590 would have finished in better shape (that's what's new on the list BTW). If you bought your K3 in a fit of p***s envy, you're sure to get knocked down on some list sooner or later. But if you bought it for all those high numbers AND reasonable cost AND two equally excellent receivers AND true diversity AND customer support AND constantly evolving firmware AND configurability AND an owner who's always listening to the troops AND ... , then the other guys on the list don't really compare. -- Completely agree... And dont forget the weight factor... Its much harder to cart a pair of 7800'ds a kilometer across the soggy Russian Tundra than to carry a pair of K3 in each hand... And your table wont start sinking into the ground with the weight, either! OK, ducking I wont start that again! :) HNY Lu-W4LT __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
On Dec 31, 2010, at 4:13 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: What gets me in a K3 is that there is still some room in there, even after installing the KRX3 to the 100W transceiver, to add something else. So far the possibilities haven't tickled my fancy. We're saving it for a fuel cell :) Wayne N6KR __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
On Dec 31, 2010, at 4:13 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: What gets me in a K3 is that there is still some room in there, even after installing the KRX3 to the 100W transceiver, to add something else. So far the possibilities haven't tickled my fancy. We're saving it for a fuel cell :) Wayne N6KR Mr. Fusion? Bruce, N1RX __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Room for some Wine? Nah, not good, my bones will fall out of my legs I'm told. Gary HNY 2 all On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Bruce Beford bruce.bef...@myfairpoint.net wrote: On Dec 31, 2010, at 4:13 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: What gets me in a K3 is that there is still some room in there, even after installing the KRX3 to the 100W transceiver, to add something else. So far the possibilities haven't tickled my fancy. We're saving it for a fuel cell :) Wayne N6KR Mr. Fusion? Bruce, N1RX __ 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 -- Gary VK4FD - Motorhome Mobile http://www.qsl.net/vk4fd/ K3 #679, P3 #546 For everything else there's Mastercard!!! __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
TRUE portable operation. Fill it up BEFORE the DXpedition, run it without noisy generators. Obviously an Elecraft miniature of the Apollo versions. Need one to replace the battery in my K2. Selling these WHEN? Oh gak. I've been day-dreaming again. On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Wayne Burdick n...@elecraft.com wrote: On Dec 31, 2010, at 4:13 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: What gets me in a K3 is that there is still some room in there, even after installing the KRX3 to the 100W transceiver, to add something else. So far the possibilities haven't tickled my fancy. We're saving it for a fuel cell :) Wayne N6KR __ 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
[Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
updated 12/30/10 http://www.sherweng.com/table.html __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
In case it isn't obvious what has changed, note the TS-590 entry (ninth entry in the table). Wayne N6KR On Dec 30, 2010, at 5:59 PM, Ed Schuller wrote: updated 12/30/10 http://www.sherweng.com/table.html __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Actually there are two entries in the table, one for 20 meters and one for 17 meters. Rob needed to do this because the TS590 uses down- conversion (higher performance) on about half the bands, and up- conversion on the others, including the WARC bands. There are question marks entered for a couple of the measurements on 17 m. I won't speculate; perhaps Rob can give us an explanation. Wayne N6KR On Dec 30, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote: In case it isn't obvious what has changed, note the TS-590 entry (ninth entry in the table). Wayne N6KR On Dec 30, 2010, at 5:59 PM, Ed Schuller wrote: updated 12/30/10 http://www.sherweng.com/table.html __ 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 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
There are question marks entered for a couple of the measurements on 17 m. I won't speculate; perhaps Rob can give us an explanation. The question mark is foot-noted -- in the ninth column, the measurement is phase-noise limited. Paul, W9AC - Original Message - From: Wayne Burdick n...@elecraft.com To: Ed Schuller eschul...@sbcglobal.net Cc: Elecraft Reflector Elecraft@mailman.qth.net Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table Actually there are two entries in the table, one for 20 meters and one for 17 meters. Rob needed to do this because the TS590 uses down- conversion (higher performance) on about half the bands, and up- conversion on the others, including the WARC bands. Wayne N6KR On Dec 30, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote: In case it isn't obvious what has changed, note the TS-590 entry (ninth entry in the table). Wayne N6KR On Dec 30, 2010, at 5:59 PM, Ed Schuller wrote: updated 12/30/10 http://www.sherweng.com/table.html __ 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 __ 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 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table
Hi Ed It will be interesting to see where the FT2000 places with the new AC0C Network Sciences filter. This radio with the new filter might be bargain if it does perform well. I dont know if Sherwood will be testing this new filter radio combination. I wonder how such a high performance filter would work in the K3? Not that its needed in the K3. However in the interest of science, it might be a worthy pursuit. It also might push the K3 well ahead of the FT5000 in ultimate performance. PA3AKE in his H mode mixer work has already proven that high performance roofing filters can make a substantial difference towards achieving ultimate receiver performance. 73 John --- On Thu, 12/30/10, Ed Schuller eschul...@sbcglobal.net wrote: From: Ed Schuller eschul...@sbcglobal.net Subject: [Elecraft] Latest Sherwood table To: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net Date: Thursday, December 30, 2010, 5:59 PM updated 12/30/10 http://www.sherweng.com/table.html __ 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 __ 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
