Well, Never mind. Thanks anyway. I did NOT have
them turned on in all modes. It seems since I did that
they work just fine after a power down.
More questions to follow I am sure. 73
Mike Sanders
KØAZ
-Original Message-
From:
I never use the XFIL buttons. I dial the bandwidth I want by twisting the
width knob just to the left of VFO A. Or I tap the LOW knob to
normalize the settings for CW or phone.
73 de Dick, K6KR
-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
Or I tap the LOW knob to normalize the settings for CW or phone.
Of course you mean *hold* the LOW knob ...
It would be handy if *hold* would normalize at 2.8 KHz bw in DATA A
and 400 Hz in AFSK A/FSK D for data modes. Normalizing to 400 Hz in
DATA A is a problem.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On
Hi Wes,
This is by design. Selecting a filter manually via XFIL normalizes the
DSP bandwidth to the crystal filter bandwidth. Using any other method
(WIDTH, SHIFT, LO, HI) selects a crystal filter based on the DSP
bandwidth (which you can see by rotating WIDTH, or just tapping it
twice).
Bill W4ZV wrote:
400 and 250: A waste of money IMHO. Since the 400 is actually 435 and the
250 is actually 370, there is only 65 Hz difference in this combination and
you'll probably never notice the difference between them (370/435 = only 15%
narrower). Total cost $250.
I think you are
.
Dave W7AQK
- Original Message -
From: David Woolley (E.L) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 3:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Filter selection
Bill W4ZV wrote:
400 and 250: A waste of money IMHO. Since the 400 is actually 435
: [Elecraft] K3 Filter selection
Bill W4ZV wrote:
400 and 250: A waste of money IMHO. Since the 400 is actually 435
and the 250 is actually 370, there is only 65 Hz difference in this
combination and you'll probably never notice the difference between
them (370/435 = only 15% narrower
Jim Miller-14 wrote:
I keep seeing talk of the 400(435) or 500 combined with the 250(370). I
see
very little talk about the 200. My thought was to use the 400 and the
200.
Maybe the decision should include the 500/200 combination. Is the 200
just
too narrow or why don't I see more
I have the 400/200 and have been happy with it for CW and digital modes,
though I added the 1KHz for CW tuning and wide digital modes (not RTTY).
Leigh/WA5ZNU
Jim Miller wrote:
I keep seeing talk of the 400(435) or 500 combined with the 250(370). I see
very little talk about the 200. My
Keep in mind that the working selectivity for shaving off QRM is provided
by the adjustable DSP filter in the 2nd I.F.
The crystal filters in the K3 are actually pre-filters whose primary
function is to avoid overload from extremely strong signals.
Ron AC7AC
My choice:
Main RX: 2.7 / 2.1 / 500 / 200
Sub RX : 2.7 / 400
73
Arie PA3A
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
Chris,
Many people like the 1.8. I have the 2.1 Inrad combo in my ol' MP.
Pretty narrow to my ears. And I can use the shift width controls to
decrease the bandwidth some more.
I ordered the 2.1 for my K3.
If I need to knock out something, I'm convinced that the DSP filtering
will make it so.
I have the 1.8 and like it - it's not hard to get SSB down to that and
still hear clearly if you adjust it properly.
I always start at 2.8KHz and then bring in the filter. On LSB, start
by adjusting the Hi cut until you've almost got to 1.8KHZ, then adjust
the Lo cut and maybe the high cut
I like the 1.8 and have ordered it for my K3. I used a 1.8 on FT-Mark 5,
FT-MP, IC-775, and IC-706 and found them useful in all cases.
Charles Harpole
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:31:08 +1000
Subject: [Elecraft]
14 matches
Mail list logo
