See:
http://n2.nabble.com/K3-skematics-td4021941.html#a4021941
~Iain / N6ML
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Jan Holmer SM6TUW wrote:
>
> Lyle,
>
> What is the status, will there be a 2009 schematic?
>
> 73
>
> Jan SM6TUW
>
>
> KK7P wrote:
>>
>>> I think what some folks are requesting is
Lyle,
What is the status, will there be a 2009 schematic?
73
Jan SM6TUW
KK7P wrote:
>
>> I think what some folks are requesting is an updated schematic...
>
> Approximately every October I gather the latest schematics and integrate
> them
> into a PDF document which we post on the website
> Juan, I think your 3rd harmonic measurement is the key. If you research
> audio fatigue you may find that odd harmonics are particularly troublesome
> and that they can cause audio fatigue even when the level is below what
> you
> might consider audible.
Mike,
There may be several variables oc
>Wished I had a set of ears like yours.
12 KHz alias signals measure 65 dB down from CW beat note in my K3
while 3rd harmonic is 55 dB down.
Juan, I think your 3rd harmonic measurement is the key. If you research
audio fatigue you may find that odd harmonics are particularly troublesome
and that t
Wished I had a set of ears like yours.
12 KHz alias signals measure 65 dB down from CW beat note in my K3
while 3rd harmonic is 55 dB down.
73
Juan EA5RS
Mike Scott-7 wrote:
>
> I have installed the beta version of the Low Pass filter board. It turned
> my
> K3 into a whole different radio.
Whatever happened to the filter being tested by Elecraft which was
described in this post:
http://marc.info/?l=elecraft&m=124561590925425&w=2
Bob NW8L
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:37 AM, Eric Tichansky wrote:
> Unfortunately, the issue with the 12 kHz leakage (DAC clock?) and beat
> notes (+/- CW
Paul Christensen wrote:
> Take a look at what's happening before the ADC and after the DAC circuits.
> The K3 has some of the best designed audio circuits for a communications
> transceiver.
>
> Paul, W9AC
>
>
Unfortunately, the issue with the 12 kHz leakage (DAC clock?) and beat
notes (+/-
e not related to audio response.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
> -Original Message-
> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Julian, G4ILO
> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 6:44 AM
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subjec
> But since the capacitor values are all being increased, is it not an
> option
> simply to add conventional electrolytic capacitors in parallel to the SMT
> ones, as the photos on the Russian website appear to illustrate?
I don't know what he has done, but it's possible to stack SMT capacitors i
P.B. Christensen wrote:
>
> I think what some folks are requesting is an updated schematic, showing
> the
> new values. But what they may not realize is that 7 SMT capacitors are
> changed -- or in the alternative, the corresponding SMT resistors require
> solder re-work and that's in addit
Is there any chance of a list of changes that aren't published as mods?
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 22:15 -0700, lyle johnson wrote:
> > I think what some folks are requesting is an updated schematic...
>
> Approximately every October I gather the latest schematics and integrate them
> into a PDF docu
> I think what some folks are requesting is an updated schematic...
Approximately every October I gather the latest schematics and integrate them
into a PDF document which we post on the website. The original schematic set
was Oct 2007, the present set is Oct 2008. When I return from vacation,
> 3) At the time these capacitors were changed, *other* component changes
> were
> made to improve the *transmit* audio low frequency response. Several
> components were changed to improve this response for the front panel
> microphone, rear panel microphone, and line input paths.
Lyle,
As I re
Let me try and eliminate the confusion.
1) The low frequency response is constrained by two things: the audio path
components, and the various filters (roofing filter, DSP IF filter and DSP
audio filter (including Rx Equalizer).
2) Several months ago, there were circuit component changes made t
Steve,
Hopefully I can make it more clear.
The speaker and line out audio *already* had sufficient low response
with no changes. The headphone output had limitations unless higher
impedance headphones were used. The capacitor changes allowed lower
frequency response with lower impedance hea
0, 2009 7:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] K3 Rev C DSP with Low Freq Enhancement
shipdateinfo; New swap out option on parts order page. CORRECTION
>> Why was the improvement not applied to all audio outputs, or am I missing
>> something here?
>
> When you go through the schematic
> Why was the improvement not applied to all audio outputs, or am I missing
> something here?
When you go through the schematic and run the response calculations, those
were the only changes necessary to improve low-end response for all Rx and
Tx paths.
Take a look at what's happening before t
KK7P wrote:
>
>> May I ask why the LF response improvement was confined to headphones
>> only?
>
> The speaker system has its own amplifier and already has excellent low
> frequency response.
>
> The headphones have their own amplifier and had 10 uF output caps, now
> changed
> to 100 uF.
>
> May I ask why the LF response improvement was confined to headphones only?
The speaker system has its own amplifier and already has excellent low
frequency response.
The headphones have their own amplifier and had 10 uF output caps, now changed
to 100 uF.
Line out also has its own amplifier
May I ask why the LF response improvement was confined to headphones only?
Why was the improvement not applied to all audio outputs, or am I missing
something here?
Grateful thanks. DaveL G3TJP
Lyle Johnson wrote:
The hardware mods improve the *TX* audio path low frequency response from all
I have a lot of confidence in SMT rework and I've done the C9 and C13
mod with exact replacement caps. I was told that changing those to
100uF was an official Elecraft mod so I went out and found the exact
size replacement SMT caps and got them on there. They look like they
were installed from th
> This should be close but Elecraft has not updated their schematics since
> October 2008, so there could be differences:
>
> http://n1eu.com/K3/k3audiomod.htm
Lyle and I exchanged notes on this a while back as he and I were
experimenting with DSP Board component changes above and beyond the
muc
Brett Howard wrote:
>
>
> I really wish we could get a full listing of the modifications that
> Elecraft is officially rolling into this DSP board revision. It doesn't
> even have to come with rework instructions and pictures... Just a list
> of value changes would have me pleased as punch.
On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 13:37 -0700, Craig K3OOL wrote:
> Is the hardware mod to the DSP board required to see any effect from the f/w
> change in
> 3.41?
>
>
> That's primarily it. We increased coupling caps and a few other values
> in the audio chain to increase low freq audio response below 300
> Is the hardware mod to the DSP board required to see any effect from the f/w
> change in 3.41?
No.
The hardware mods improve the *TX* audio path low frequency response from all
three sources (front microphone, rear microphone, line in). They also improve
the Rx low frequency response for *he
Is the hardware mod to the DSP board required to see any effect from the f/w
change in
3.41?
That's primarily it. We increased coupling caps and a few other values
in the audio chain to increase low freq audio response below 300 Hz.
when combines with the latest f/w beta release it results in
Bruce Beford-2 wrote:
>
> Eric,
>
> Would it be possible to release an app note listing the component value
> changes you mention:
>
> "We increased coupling caps and a few other values in the audio chain to
> increase low freq audio response below 300 Hz."
>
> This way, those of us who feel
27 matches
Mail list logo
