> The K2 is somewhat of a spiritual event. There are many
> who are very attached to their K2's... because we built them,
> got familiar with them, used them in memorable situations,
> and became fondly attached.
So true, Robert!
My K2 got soaked in a giant rainstorm in Virginia a few Field
I really enjoy my K2/100. I use it weekly for CWT’s, MST’s & SST’s with N1MM+.
I usually operate the tests barefoot but sometimes run a KPA1500 with the K2.
The shift/width controls are not as versatile as my K3S but I don’t need em for
the 1 hr CW tests. Computer control of the K2 and K3s
__
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:
> the K3 is a vastly superior radio
Brian - if you had nickel for every time someone declared one rig is better
than another without knowing your needs or offering reasons to back it up,
you could buy both ;)
As many will say, don't over think sensitivity. You'll probably find many
other
Brian...
The K2 is somewhat of a spiritual event. There are many - me included -
who are very attached to their K2's, not because the specs are amazing -
many modern radios perform better - but because we built them, got
familiar with them, used them in memorable situations, and became fondly
Complex, multivariate problem Brian, sensitivity being only one
variable, and some of the variables are very subjective. I love my K2
and use it QRP, usually in the summer, for field activities. It is not
a great multi-station FD rig and has nowhere near the capabilities of a
K3 in such an
On 7/14/2022 1:44 PM, brianpepperdine brianpepperdine wrote:
I realize there are a myriad of differences between the K2 and K3, but
today I read the specs in each owners manual and was somewhat surprised
that the each is listed at about -135 dBm sensitivity (pre-amp on for
K2...pre-amp off at
Brian,
depends on your use case - sensitivity is not the only spec you need (in
fact it could be an overkill to have -130 dBm). K3 with a better
synthesizer(you can upgrade K3 to have it) performs way better
with reciprocal mixing dynamic range - something which people want for
contesting. It is
You should be able to find a K2 for sale used for roughly 2/3 (sometimes
more, sometimes less) of the retail kit and included modules price. This
discount probably reflects the fact that you really don't know how well it
was originally built, but thankfully the K2 is fairly forgiving of
variations
You're going to get twice as many replies as there are people lurking on
this list, Lee. :-) In the end, the decision is yours but you can base
it on experience of others. Mine:
I have a KX1, K2/10, and K3/KPA500/P3. I built my K2, S/N 4398, perhaps
5 or 6 years ago, with the ATU. I bought
The K2 is all the radio the average CW op needs. The problem then
becomes what's average? If $$ is tight (been there, done that) and
you may want to migrate to SSB, then my suggestion is save your money up
for a K3, the current Queen of the Elecraft Fleet. The wait will be
worth it. In
Lee,
I would pick up a beginners HF rig from an old ham in the neighborhood for
cheap and save up for the K3.
Look around and find a couple Elmers where you live and see what they can help
you put a system together. Hang dipole and have some fun. A QRP rig could be a
nice option but
Lee,
I don't have a K2, but when I decided to buy a K3, it seemed that by the time I
added all of the extras on the K2 to make it contain all of the features of a
K3, there wasn't much difference in price. I bought my K3 kit with only one
option, a 400Hz filter. The price at that time was
Lee,
I'm with Keith's immediate solution. Waiting a year or two to get on the
HF is a long time. There are plenty of seasoned hams with HF gear
collecting dust that'll get you on the HF bands. In my area it is not
uncommon to get a loaner HF rig or one at a very reasonable price.
You'll be On
Lee
I agree with Fred Jensen. The K2 was all the radio I ever needed. The
operative word is needed. The K2 has served me well. I was licensed in
2009 and got my HF privileges in 2010. Since 2010, I have bought a TS830S used
from a Canadian Missionary radio amateur an FT897 and got 2/3
I agree with Keith's comments, but I'll contribute my two cents' as well.
My background, such as it is -- I got my ticket about 20 months ago,
spent 4 months just on 2 meters, and got my K3 a year after I got on
HF.
That experience leads me to point out four things:
1. Used rigs are widely
Rather than a traditional G5RV antenna, you might want to look at a ZS6BKW,
which is an updated version of the G5RV optimised using computer modelling
techniques that were not available when the G5RV was first designed:
http://www.nonstopsystems.com/radio/ZS6BKW.pdf
73, Matt VK2ACL
On
Why not a KX3? Buy first the simple version, get on the air sooner, and then
add to it little by little. If you decide to sell later you will have 100s of
buyers! It is not a K3 but it is budget~friendly. .
Enviado desde mi oficina móvil BlackBerry® de Telcel
-Original Message-
From:
Lee...
Welcome to the hobby and to Elecraft. Several years ago I assembled K2 #
5957 and immediately added the SSB, noise blanker, DSP and 100W modules.
This past spring I put together K3 #6232 with the 100W module and three
additional filters. I chase DX, operate contests [casually], and rag
Don,
I agree with Don, W3FPR, that a connection central box or Breakout Box, is
a good plan. The box which I built uses toggle switches (each with an
ON-OFF LED indicator) rather than rotary switches, because frequently I want
to listen to two, sometimes but not often to three, of my
Hello Don,
From the commercial side, I use the NCS 3240 Multi Switcher. Numerous input
devices, up to 4 radios. Individual level settings, etc. Love it.
http://www.ncsradio.com/m_switch.html
73,
Terry, W0FM
-Original Message-
From: Don KB1YBG [mailto:thompsond...@gmail.com]
Should note they are discontinuing these, per the referenced web page.
Apparently not enough demand to maintain production. 73, Guy.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Terry Schieler
terry.schie...@wirelessusa.com wrote:
Hello Don,
From the commercial side, I use the NCS 3240 Multi
: Re: [Elecraft] K2 and K3 Key/Phone Connections
Should note they are discontinuing these, per the referenced web page.
Apparently not enough demand to maintain production. 73, Guy.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Terry Schieler
terry.schie...@wirelessusa.com wrote:
Hello Don,
From
No longer available for individual sale...
Steve
W1SRD
Hello Don,
From the commercial side, I use the NCS 3240 Multi Switcher. Numerous input
devices, up to 4 radios. Individual level settings, etc. Love it.
http://www.ncsradio.com/m_switch.html
73,
Terry, W0FM
-Original
Don,
Sounds like a good plan to me. I might suggest the EC2 enclosure.
The switches obtained from a 4 port data switch will have more poles
than you will need.
You might also consider building a keyer into that box. The K1EL keyers
are inexpensive and quite good. If you contemplate also
Hi Bert,
I have both the K2 and K3. I also operate almost 100% CW and in a casual
manner. I don't contest but, I work a lot of QRP. I had the same question
before I bought the K3. So, to answer your question based on casual
operating, I would say that there is little difference. I seem to
Does anybody feel that the K2's rcvr is equal to or better than that of the
K3, additional bells and whistles notwithstanding?
Bert - There probably are some people, but if so they have never operated a K3.
I have had a K2 as
well as my K3 and in my opinion there are only 3 advantage of
Bert
The specs say it all. The K2 is no slouch compared to the K3 in terms of MDS
(Minimum discernable signal), BDR (Blocking Dynamic Range) and such. The K3
begins to have an edge in terms of IMD (intermodulation distortion) and phase
noise. In that sense I believe the K3 is a better
Hi Rick,
By better, I mean very quiet receive that's pleasing to the ear (Subjective, I
know.) That can dig the weakest dige out from the noise floor. My unit is
strictly a desktop rig, no portable operation. Tnx for the reply.
73, Bert
...and all the pieces matter.
-- Det.
Bert - From a purely technical / functional standpoint (i.e. numbers), and
aside from current drain and bells/whistles, the K3's receiver has the
edge, and I think most would agree.
The K2's receiver is superb, and I occasionally try to make it my only rig
by putting the K3 aside for a few days
On 1/6/2011 2:55 PM, George Jan wrote:
It is not critical at all - should be at least 10 times the microphone
impedance.
Actually, the current applicable IEC Standard DEFINES the impedance of a
microphone as 5X its rated load impedance. And yes, a higher input Z is
better -- the rated
John,
I would not select a radio on the input impedance of the microphone input!
It is not critical at all - should be at least 10 times the microphone
impedance.
Pro-Audio from as far back as the antique Western Electric unbalanced
systems of the 40s tend to be in the range of 1 k to 10 k.
Rest assured George, the mic input Z is not a rig selection criteria for
me. This is for a completely different item I am developing to adapt my
mics to various rigs including the K2 and K3.
John
On 1/6/2011 5:55 PM, George Jan wrote:
John,
I would not select a radio on the input impedance
I'm wondering if we took a ham into a room, blindfolded, sat him or her down
if front of a K2 and K3, didn't let them touch either one, if he or she could
tell which is the K2 and K3? I would have to be someone that doesn't have any
experience with either one. I wonder which one would win
Gary and All,
Well, interesting conjecture, but nowhere close to a valid
test of either rig.
Dave W7AQK
- Original Message -
From: Gary D Krause n7...@bresnan.net
To: Elecraft elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?
I'm
John Jeffers wrote:
Hi
I looked through the Archives and FAQ's and see the K3 is a All in one
rig with top of line features.
The K2 was the former one. With a little less features and not all in
one processor. It uses pic 18C452 instead of 18F452 etc so you can't
flash upgrade it
And they sold quickly from the beginning. My K2, purchased in April of 2000,
is S/N 1289.
At that time they had a 30-day order backlog.
Ron AC7AC
-Original Message-
Bob's comment is correct. I was at that meeting also, and was absolutely
blown away by the performance in such a
-Original Message-
... the K3 is a All in one rig with top of line features.
The K2 was the former one.
But I can make a qrp rig for $770 K2 kit instead of $1400 K3 semi-kit
and I am an electrical engineer.
Is there any good reason to go to the K3?
VE3GYV John
--- On Thu, 3/12/09, Darwin, Keith
keith.dar...@goodrich.com wrote:
From: Darwin, Keith keith.dar...@goodrich.com
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 11:03 AM
-Original Message-
... the K3 is a All in one rig
yes guys,
the K3 is a great rigg, with all the features we knew from oher great riggs.
But the K2 is classic and puristic. It is the same when you compare
motorbikes: the K3 is like a Honda Goldwing and the K2 is like a older
Harley. I for myself prefer riding a old Harley. I built 4 K2's and
As much as I love my K3, I'll admit that the K2 sounded better. The
difference wasn't big and I may be off-base, having not done a direct
A/B comparison, but I think the K2, with its simpler RX architecture,
has a smoother sound than the K3. Not enough for me to stay with the
K2, but enough that
John and other Elecrafters:
I am an extremely happy K2 owner. I have operated a K3 and I intend to
get one someday, but I am not in a particular hurry. In the interest of
full disclosure, I am strictly a CW guy, and any voice quality
advantages that K3 might have over the K2 are lost on me.
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?
yes guys,
the K3 is a great rigg, with all the features we knew from oher great riggs.
But the K2 is classic and puristic. It is the same when you compare
motorbikes: the K3 is like a Honda Goldwing and the K2 is like a older
Harley. I for myself prefer riding
!
-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ron D'Eau Claire
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 11:29 AM
To: 'elecraft List'
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3
And they sold quickly from the beginning. My K2, purchased in April of 2000
, 2009 3:03 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?
As much as I love my K3, I'll admit that the K2 sounded better. The
difference wasn't big and I may be off-base, having not done a direct
A/B comparison, but I think the K2, with its simpler RX architecture,
has a smoother
To: 'elecraft List' elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3
So for the discussion about K2 vs K3, I don't know much about either but
am
preparing to purchase. Is the K3 portable to any degree? One of the
things
that attracted me
I must agree with Jim Duffey's assessment.
The K2 is a great transceiver, but when all the options are added to
make it an all band 160m through 10 meter transceiver with SSB and noise
blanker and audio DSP, the K3 with its built-in 160 meter through 6
meter coverage, built-in IF DSP which
Don Wilhelm wrote:
I must agree with Jim Duffey's assessment.
The K2 is a great transceiver, but when all the options are added to
make it an all band 160m through 10 meter transceiver with SSB and noise
blanker and audio DSP, the K3 with its built-in 160 meter through 6
meter coverage,
K5EWJ
--- On Thu, 3/12/09, John Jolley jjol...@columbus.rr.com wrote:
From: John Jolley jjol...@columbus.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3
To: 'elecraft List' elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 4:17 PM
So for the discussion about K2 vs K3, I don't know much
about
Yes, It's called features and you get what you pay for. I Have both and they
are great radios. Let your budget help you decide.
73,
Bill
K9YEQ
K2 #35; KX1 #35; K3 #1744; mini mods
-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On
You should get MANY interesting responses to your query! I for one have
found the K3 receiver to be far and above better than the K2, although my
time with the K2 was limited to one weekend. As well, if SSB is a mode you
enjoy, in the K2 that is an add-on and a bit dicier than the smooth,
Here's my perspective from not owning any Elecraft radio until ~ a month ago. I
have read about the K2 for many years and always wanted one. I heard them on
the air and heard others comments about owning one. I have never owned a new
rig, only bought repair-ables and repaired them to use. So
Well, this is interesting! I'm agonizing over this very issue. I have
K2 #337, built in late 1999, that has served me extremely well. I have
always watched this reflector, so I was one of the first non-field test
people to notice Wayne's announcement of the K3. Then I read every word
about
My opinion, keep the K3 the K2. You may later on regret selling
anything and then the money might not be there to build another one.
Just put it on the shelf for now.
Other options are the AN762 amp that FAR circuits sells a board for and
eBay has 2SC2879 transistor's for it and they are dirt
Actually Randy, all you have discovered... is that there are a lot of folks out
there, that could benefit from the addition of a K3 in their shack, so they
would be able to hear as well as you do. Simple, and factual. Do you need to
send your K2 or K3 away because they can't hear? Likely not.
:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3
On Mar 11, 2009, at 4:53 PM, K2ZLS wrote:
Many of us on the Elecraft Reflector were raised on the K2. I
guess its been about 8 years in development.
More like 10+ years. I recall seeing Eric's presentation on the K2
at the 1999 Cactus Intertie
Don,
Perhaps you have suggested one possible solution to making the output from
DSP sound less harsh ('yucky' is a better term IMHO), add some harmonics of
the desired output signal. I can't at the moment see how this could be done
with relatively simple circuitry which would have to
I still like my K2, but I am very happy with the K3.
I had never gotten around to setting the K2 up to work digital modes,
or so I could use N1MM and send CW from the computer during a contest.
All those have already been done on the K3 in a short period of time.
In the past, I was often
Hi Mike,
It's funny you should post at this time. I don't have a K3 but, I was looking
at the test results on the Elecraft web site just yesterday. I was wondering
how much difference there really is since the numbers are pretty close.
Gary, N7HTS
K2
On Wed, 7 May 2008 10:13:11 -0400
Gary Krause N7HTS wrote:
It's funny you should post at this time. I don't have a K3 but, I was
looking
at the test results on the Elecraft web site just yesterday. I was
wondering
how much difference there really is since the numbers are pretty close.
Gary the numbers might be
At 08:13 AM 07/05/08, you wrote:
Hi,
I put my K2 #1400 back on line last night to have a listen around 40M CW.
I'm getting a bit fed up with one step forward, half a step back firmware
upgrades and am giving it a rest for a while. Anyway, I was surprised
just how nice it sounded compared to my
Hi Bill,
That's a good point. I guess I didn't really think about that since I've
rarely noticed it. Both of my other HF rigs are from the 80's and my K2 #6113
is the newest that I have. I'm use to fighting QRM. Hi! Hi! To me, the K2 is
way better than my other rigs. Now it makes me
Anyway, I was surprised just how nice it sounded compared to my K3.
The audio seems softer and warmer somehow. Same bandwidth (400Hz),
same phones. The K3 background noise just sounded harder, more harsh.
I've had this feeling from day one.
Have you played with Rx EQ? Add some bass,
Mike,
I believe it is all in the perception. The K2 is all analog (unless the
KDSP2 is active), but the K3 processing is digital. Each has its own
advantages and artifacts to contend with. Analog can soften the
background noise while the digital DSP can reproduce it 'in all its glory'.
I
Similar to vinyl vs. cd
David
G3UNA
Mike,
I believe it is all in the perception. The K2 is all analog (unless the
KDSP2 is active), but the K3 processing is digital. Each has its own
advantages and artifacts to contend with. Analog can soften the
background noise while the digital DSP
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Don Rasmussen wrote:
Give it a try this weekend and pass along any feedback
you may have wb8yqj at yahoo dot com
Please contact me directly so as not to clog this
reflector with my personal traffic. t u
Of course you could open up a topic about it on the forum at
The K3 RX specs are better than the K2 and most other radios in just about
every
category. The optional filters are roofing filters to control what is passed
to
the IF and AF DSP. The ultimate BW is based on adjusting the WIDTH
control...making it much more flexible in determining BW than
Both,
I wouldn't miss winding toroid's and aligning
filters, not to mention real soldering. Then seeing
how close you can get WWV. The internal battery and
tuner is a blast on the porch with an all band doublet
with 600 ohm feeders. 10 to 15 watts with that antenna
does quite well at times.
I think the eventual goal should be to get both.
The K3 is likely to be a far better radio than the K2,
maybe the best radio on the market, but you BUILD the K2.
Besides the fun of building, you get attached to a radio
you built.
Maybe get the K2 now and have fun building it, then get a K3
after
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, John Huggins wrote:
- Do I buy a K2 with accessories (or add them later) and get it right now
plus build time or...
- Spring for a K3 with enough options for SSB and hope to get it before March
2008 (Virginia QSO Party)
Depends on how much money you have, and the a vs
On Jun 30, 2007, at 8:23 PM, John Tobias Croteau wrote:
As some of you know, I've been looking at putting together a K2
station for portable RTTY/PSK31 operation. However, as I am looking
at the cost differences, I am now wondering if I might better off with
a K3.
Go with the K3. The K2/100
On 7/1/07, Ron D'Eau Claire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the differences between the K2 and K3 is that, being in a bigger box,
the K3 has bigger knobs, bigger buttons and a bigger display with bigger
letters.
Those are a huge so what? for many young ops, but it sounds to me like
they might
Welcome to the economics of SMT: tape and reel vs poly bags for kits,
relentless and unerring automated assembly and volume economics benefits of
the basic parts.
When added to the technical benefits of improved parasitics and thermals it
puts thruhole on the endangered species list.
73
jim
DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote:
Did Elecraft unintentionally put the K2 semi-official builders out to
pasture?
Doug,
That may likely be true that a fair price to build the K2 will cast a
shadow on the K3 kit price.
Comparisons are being made between an assembled K2 and the K3 kit price.
When
On 7/1/07, Don Wilhelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Comparisons are being made between an assembled K2 and the K3 kit price.
When you use the assembled K3 prices, there is still room for the
lower priced K2. the kit to assembled differential on the K3 adds $200
or more depending on the power
I doubt if it is SMT devices and auto-board
stuffers that made the economy of K3 what it is.
Electronic integration marches on. Remember the
Collins 75A4, or Heath Marauder? Now it is possible
to put just about everything, save the large L's,
into siicon. I suspect one bright engineer on
the
Most of the posts, so far, have dealt with the K2/K3 cost differential on a
basis of fun to build and production manufacturing economics. In the SMT vs
PTH/discreet component examples cited there was limited mention of the vastly
expanded capabilities and somewhat improved performance - not
In a message dated 7/1/07 5:55:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I doubt if it is SMT devices and auto-board
stuffers that made the economy of K3 what it is.
I think it is.
Electronic integration marches on.
Remember the
Collins 75A4, or Heath Marauder?
remember, not too many years ago (88),
having a meeting in a room at Bell Lab's Allentown
facility (or was it NJ) - and behind me on
the wall of that lab - which had a brass plaque
which read ... in this lab in 1953 (or whatever
the correct year was), the first transistor
IC was invented.
... which had a brass plaque
which read ... in this lab in 1953 (or whatever
the correct year was), the first transistor
IC was invented. Wow - time marches on!
1959, IIRC.
Actually, the transistor was born in the Labs in late 1947. It
became available at an affordable price to kids like
It is a simple answer, really. A factory built K3 and you're all set.
de Joe, aa4nn
- Original Message -
From: John Tobias Croteau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 8:23 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] K2 or K3
As some of you know, I've been
Therefore, by the time I buy the kits from Elecraft and pay
for assembly, I am looking at $1270 to $1370 for a basic K2
with what I need for data ops. For $1399, I can get a K3/10
with the same features plus many extras and better
performance.
Maybe I should also look for a used K2 but
On 6/30/07, Mike Short [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The basic 10W rig is about 1400. More than the K2, though.
What were you getting with the K2?
Yup, that's my dilemma. K2 + KAF2 + KSB2 + KIO2 is $925 delivered.
Builders want between $350 and $450 for assembly. According to my
doctor and social
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John
Tobias Croteau
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 9:07 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 or K3
On 6/30/07, Mike Short [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The basic 10W rig is about 1400. More
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, John Tobias Croteau wrote:
On 6/30/07, Mike Short [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The basic 10W rig is about 1400. More than the K2, though.
What were you getting with the K2?
Yup, that's my dilemma. K2 + KAF2 + KSB2 + KIO2 is $925 delivered.
Builders want between $350 and $450
One of the differences between the K2 and K3 is that, being in a bigger box,
the K3 has bigger knobs, bigger buttons and a bigger display with bigger
letters.
Those are a huge so what? for many young ops, but it sounds to me like
they might making operating the K3 much more pleasant for you, not
Hello Everyone,
Like Ken, I too am puzzled over the insufficient-audio issue with the K2.
FWIW both of my K2s (one with a QRP lid, the second with the KPA100 lid)
produce way more audio than I find necessary for my needs.
I typically run both rigs with the RF Gain fully CW and the Audio Gain
I am new user of K2. Pretty recent serial number. 100 w version. I also
find the radio has not enough audio gain. It is OK when I operate from my
city shack but when I am in the country where level of QRM is really low
then there are stations on 10 and 15 meters that are definitely copiable but
My K2 (#5945) has tons of audio, both in the headphones as well as in
the speaker. My volume knob never gets above about 1/4-1/3 scale.
Jeff N6GQ
On 6/23/07, Ken Kopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From the posts I've read in the past there would seem to
be large differences in the amount of audio
In a message dated 5/27/07 7:58:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Why couldn't there be a redesign of pieces and parts in the K2 that is a
result of the K3 experience. What would it be to put out a new control
board
that takes the lessons from the K3 to the K2?
In looking at the K2 schematic, it occurred to me that you could take
the IF from the Noise Blanker plug, buffer it, and send to an outboard
unit (how's that for outside of the box thinking) that could have the
roofing filters and downconverter to the 15KHz DSP IF and then use the
K3 DSP
91 matches
Mail list logo
