I agree with Eric; I started with the 1000Hz and the 400Hz for the cw section
and was just curious about an additional 250Hz Filter: I would never put it
out again. My normal work is done in the 400 range, if I want more
atmosphere I open up to 1K but when it comes to contest work the 250 is a
How does the loss of the 250Hz compare to the 400HZ. I would think that
there would not be much difference since they only differ by 65Hz. Would
someone who has used both of these filters respond to this? Thanks.
Art, WB8ENE
--
View this message in context:
What is the big deal with some loss in a narrow filter when the filter set up
includes compensation for the loss. I bet the other filters also have
insertion loss but this loss is pretty uniform and already compensated for with
adequate gain. A bit of loss in the IF which is compensated for
WB8ENE wrote:
How does the loss of the 250Hz compare to the 400HZ.
http://www.inrad.net/product.php?productid=150cat=140page=1 (see plot)
http://www.inrad.net/product.php?productid=149cat=140page=1 (no plot)
Typical Insertion Loss 250 Hz: 9 dB; 500 Hz: 7 dB
Both appear to be
meters :)
Olli
OH6CT
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] Puolesta n...@aol.com
Lähetetty: 16. helmikuuta 2010 20:51
Vastaanottaja: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Aihe: [Elecraft] Roofing filter for CW
As a prospective buyer of the K3, and a 100 percent CW op, I am wondering
which of the roofing filters is the correct choice, assuming I am buying only
one?? I usually find that when operating weak sigs with my Pro 3, a bandwidth
of about 600 to 800 hz is plenty adequate in normal QRM
it is compulsory to own a k3
--- On Tue, 2/16/10, n...@aol.com n...@aol.com wrote:
From: n...@aol.com n...@aol.com
Subject: [Elecraft] Roofing filter for CW
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2010, 6:50 PM
As a prospective buyer of the K3, and a 100 percent CW op, I am
I agree that no wider then the 500Hz. If I had umlimited money, I would add a
1000Hz to my 250Hz as it would be nice for tuning, but then tuning with the
DSP set to 1000Hz it just fine.
Inrad should have another batch of 1500Hz filters made up next month, and
that is a nice filter for CW tuning,
Bill,
I have a very similar filter set (to Brett's as shown below),
including the 250 Hz 8-pole.
I find the 1 KHz is best for casual CW and digital modes, and the 250
Hz filter is best for eliminating strong adjacent signals and in CW
pileups. Would have to say that I'm on the 1 KHz filter
I VOTE FOR 250 HZ.
No ringing, I don't think I miss much as I tune around,
and you can narrow it further with the DSP filtering.
eric [ 250 Hz Forever!] VA7DZ
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Bill,
I find that both the 200Hz and 500Hz filters work just fine. I decided to save
$50 and not buy 8 pole filters. I think the 8 pole hype is somewhat just that.
I have a 2nd 500Hz in the second RX.
73,
Dave N8AG
__
I don't think it is hype, as the 8 pole filters have steepers skirts, but in
practical terms, do the steeper skirts buy you much? I do know that the 250
has a lot of loss.
I keep hoping I can find a 500 for $50. It would be a nice addition to the
250. :)
I find that both the 200Hz and 500Hz
12 matches
Mail list logo
