-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Bill W4ZV
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 2:21 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter question - SSB
Barry N1EU wrote:
Bill W4ZV wrote:
1
Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
Unlike a 1.8kHz DSP filter with a 2.5kHz roofing filter, the 1.8kHz
crystal filter also avoids artefacts caused by pumping of the hardware
AGC loop by strong signals in the gaps between the wider and the
narrower passband.
The suggestion is that a 1.8Khz
As I operate much more CW than SSB I need some advice and opinions from the
SSB contesters before adding additional filters for my K3s. Currently I
only have the stock 2.7Khz filters in both K3s (main and sub rx) for SSB. I
have 400hz and 250hz for CW. If I wanted to add an additional roofing
Go the 1.8KHz filter bruce,
Forget the 2.1.
73 de
Jeff Cochrane - VK4BOF
East Innisfail
QLD, Australia
K3 #4257, P3#1629, KPA-500 #161
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Meier
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 9:29 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Filter
Bruce this is from a similar question on the Yahoo Groups K3 list:
-- In elecraft...@yahoogroups.com, Hector Padron ad4c2006@... wrote:
The 1.8 roofer today with so much band noise and fool ops close to your
freq disrespecting the spectrum, its a must.This 8 poles filter together
with the DSP
Bill W4ZV wrote:
3. It *WILL* require very careful tuning for intelligibility. With callers
that are off frequency by only 100 Hz, you'll miss off-frequency callers
the
first time which will slow your run rate. I had one caller even 500 Hz
below my
run frequency and I'm certain I would
The 1.8 is where I would go. Inrad also sells a 1.5 which a number of
people swear by for really nasty SSB contests.
Mike W0MU
J6M CQ WW DX CW Contest 2011
J6/W0MU November 21 - December 1 2011
W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net
On 11/10/2011 4:29 AM, Bruce Meier wrote:
As I operate much more CW
I would not go any tighter than 1.8 KHz. I have a pair of the 1.5 KHz
filters that I would swap for 1.8s.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 11/10/2011 10:11 AM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
The 1.8 is where I would go. Inrad also sells a 1.5 which a number of
people swear by for really nasty SSB
Bill W4ZV wrote:
1. It *WILL* keep your AGC from pumping if there's another strong station
within the 1.8 kHz passband. However, do you really think you could copy a
weak
signal while a S9+30 interfering signal is inside your 1.8k bandwidth? I
don't
think so. With any typical SSB filter
I also have a pair of the 1.5 KHz filters, and while I find them to be
desirable under certain DXing situations, I rarely use them in a
contest. In a contest you need quick intelligibility and filters as
narrow as 1.5 KHz don't necessarily give you that. I have a pretty good
ear, but lots
On 11/10/2011 8:34 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
there is so much
atrocious splatter from crummy rigs or ignorantly adjusted rigs during a
major contest
YES, YES, YES.
that it is truly rare to find such a narrow filter
actually being helpful. I also would trade my 1.5 KHz filters for a
pair
Barry N1EU wrote:
Bill W4ZV wrote:
1. It *WILL* keep your AGC from pumping if there's another strong station
within the 1.8 kHz passband. However, do you really think you could copy
a weak
signal while a S9+30 interfering signal is inside your 1.8k bandwidth? I
don't
think so. With
I've had exactly the same experience. If the offending QRM is outside
the passband of the filter, the narrower filter setting helps. However,
If the offending QRM is heavily inside the passband (i.e., splatter), it
seems that the additional intelligibility gain by capturing more of the
Bill W4ZV wrote:
However, given that most SSB signals generate 3rd garbage (spurs, phase
noise, etc) in the area of -35 dBc, an S9+30 signal just outside your 1.8k
passband will easily obliterate a weak signal inside the passband.
I agree. Although I routinely use 1.8Khz roofing filters
happens outside of contests as well
I can get alongside of a SSB signal
and if it is clean have no problem
but the guys that feel increasing there bandwidth for a better/pleasant
sounding
signal creep me out,,, the K3 is the first rcv I can say this about
if the signal next door is clean
I'm glad this came up because it is an aspect of filtering that seldom is
addressed.
Many folks seem to think that you can arbitrarily close down the bandwidth of a
receiver to eliminate QRM and improve intelligibility.
1.8 kHz is deemed better than 2.1 kHz, and 1.5 kHz is deemed better than
Interesting to me is position today that 2.1 kHz is narrow. For many
decades, a 2.1 kHz filter was normal, and sometimes only SSB filter.
Heathkit SB-101 etc 350 - 2450 (center 1400)
Collins KWM-2A etc 400 - 2500 (center 1450)
Sometime during the 90s, or so, the standard seemed to move
filter to improve readability
(signals below noise) once I found a signal.
--
Message: 43
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:27:05 -0500
From: Joe Subich, W4TV li...@subich.com
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter question - SSB
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Message-ID
On 11/10/2011 3:33 PM, John Oppenheimer wrote:
I use a 1200 Hz center frequency with my 1800 Hz roofing filter. It gives
roughly the same passband as my ancient FT-101E with a cascaded pair of
Yaesu filters, one in the normal receive line and the second in the speech
clipper.
Dunc, W5DC
Al Lorona wrote:
1.8 kHz is deemed better than 2.1 kHz, and 1.5 kHz is deemed better
than both.
But at some point intelligibility itself suffers because you start to
eliminate the signal you're trying to copy in the first place.
I for one suffer from a type of listener's fatigue when forced
Jim Brown wrote:
On 11/10/2011 8:34 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
there is so much
atrocious splatter from crummy rigs or ignorantly adjusted rigs during a
major contest
YES, YES, YES.
that it is truly rare to find such a narrow filter
actually being helpful. I also would trade my 1.5 KHz
Folks - We are now hitting the single subject posting limit. Please wrap
this thread up ASAP.
73, Eric
list moderator
---
www.elecraft.com
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help:
22 matches
Mail list logo
