Discussion:
[Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
Bill W4ZV
2010-10-29 11:02:44 UTC
Permalink
Wayne released APF to Field Test last night and also said it was OK to post
comments. It seems to work very well and I expect it will be released
publicly soon.

APF (as implemented in the FT-1000) has always been a weak signal receiving
tool. It's not for adjusting PITCH or some of the other ideas discussed.
Last night I happened to be listening on 160m around 02z just after I got it
installed. 5R8RJ usually comes on 1826.44 a little before his sunrise.
Conditions were very poor but he was spotted by a UA4 around 0210z. I
could hear nothing of him on his normal frequency. CW Skimmer's waterfall
was also showing absolutely no signal there...not even a faint trace. I
then actuated APF and could then copy him about Q3 in the noise.

This is exactly what APF is designed for...pulling extremely weak signals
out of noise...and it does it very well. The user interface is also very
simple. Although it may change slightly before public release, you hold
DUAL PB (as though you were going into the previous CW focus mode) and then
adjust SHIFT in 10 Hz steps to peak the signal (independent of your PITCH
setting). It works well in diversity also.

Nice job guys...all the previous FT-1000 owners will rejoice!

73, Bill W4ZV
--
View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/APF-in-4-16-2-63-works-well-tp5686011p5686011.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Dale Parfitt
2010-10-29 13:19:43 UTC
Permalink
Great Bill,
This is the only reason I have kept my Alpha Delta VRC speaker. As before,
the peak filter always did what xtal filters and DSP could not.
With the EME contest this weekend, perfect timing for me too.

Dale W4OP

> Wayne released APF to Field Test last night and also said it was OK to
> post
> comments. It seems to work very well and I expect it will be released
> publicly soon.
>
> APF (as implemented in the FT-1000) has always been a weak signal
> receiving
> tool. It's not for adjusting PITCH or some of the other ideas discussed.
> Last night I happened to be listening on 160m around 02z just after I got
> it
> installed. 5R8RJ usually comes on 1826.44 a little before his sunrise.
> Conditions were very poor but he was spotted by a UA4 around 0210z. I
> could hear nothing of him on his normal frequency. CW Skimmer's waterfall
> was also showing absolutely no signal there...not even a faint trace. I
> then actuated APF and could then copy him about Q3 in the noise.
>
> This is exactly what APF is designed for...pulling extremely weak signals
> out of noise...and it does it very well. The user interface is also very
> simple. Although it may change slightly before public release, you hold
> DUAL PB (as though you were going into the previous CW focus mode) and
> then
> adjust SHIFT in 10 Hz steps to peak the signal (independent of your PITCH
> setting). It works well in diversity also.
>
> Nice job guys...all the previous FT-1000 owners will rejoice!
>
> 73, Bill W4ZV
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/APF-in-4-16-2-63-works-well-tp5686011p5686011.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.864 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3225 - Release Date: 10/28/10
14:34:00
Gordan Hribar
2010-10-29 13:35:44 UTC
Permalink
Hi,
I am a bit impatient waiting for new beta firmware, WAYNE, WAYNE??

Gordan E72X

--- On Fri, 10/29/10, Dale Parfitt <parinc1 at frontier.com> wrote:

From: Dale Parfitt <parinc1 at frontier.com>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
To: "Bill W4ZV" <btippett at alum.mit.edu>, elecraft at mailman.qth.net
Date: Friday, October 29, 2010, 4:19 PM

Great Bill,
This is the only reason I have kept my Alpha Delta VRC speaker. As before,
the peak filter always did what xtal filters and DSP could not.
With the EME contest this weekend, perfect timing for me too.

Dale W4OP

> Wayne released APF to Field Test last night and also said it was OK to
> post
> comments.? It seems to work very well and I expect it will be released
> publicly soon.
>
> APF (as implemented in the FT-1000) has always been a weak signal
> receiving
> tool.? It's not for adjusting PITCH or some of the other ideas discussed.
> Last night I happened to be listening on 160m around 02z just after I got
> it
> installed.? 5R8RJ usually comes on 1826.44 a little before his sunrise.
> Conditions were very poor but he was spotted by a UA4 around 0210z.???I
> could hear nothing of him on his normal frequency.? CW Skimmer's waterfall
> was also showing absolutely no signal there...not even a faint trace.? I
> then actuated APF and could then copy him about Q3 in the noise.
>
> This is exactly what APF is designed for...pulling extremely weak signals
> out of noise...and it does it very well.? The user interface is also very
> simple.? Although it may change slightly before public release, you hold
> DUAL PB (as though you were going into the previous CW focus mode) and
> then
> adjust SHIFT in 10 Hz steps to peak the signal (independent of your PITCH
> setting).? It works well in diversity also.
>
> Nice job guys...all the previous FT-1000 owners will rejoice!
>
> 73,? Bill? W4ZV
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/APF-in-4-16-2-63-works-well-tp5686011p5686011.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.864 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3225 - Release Date: 10/28/10
14:34:00

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Joe Subich, W4TV
2010-10-29 14:25:13 UTC
Permalink
I agree with Bill. I've had a chance to preview the APF function and
it seems to operate very well although I haven't seen a any really
weak stations like 5R8RJ on 160.

APF as implemented by Lyle may become an alternative to a very narrow
(e.g. 250 or 200 Hz) CW filter for casual operators as it provides a
"spotlight" selectivity but does not provide the same level of IF
protection as the tighter first IF filter.

The one reservation I have is the potential need to use the menu
system to select between the original Dual PB filter and APF. I
would much prefer to see a two level "hold" - normal (500 ms) hold
for Dual PB and long (1 sec) hold for APF like Link and Diversity
with the KRX3 - for selecting Dual PB or APF.

There are a few other control items and questions about use with the
programmer's interface to be resolved but it looks like the capability
is well on its way to a wider public beta.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 10/29/2010 7:02 AM, Bill W4ZV wrote:
>
> Wayne released APF to Field Test last night and also said it was OK to post
> comments. It seems to work very well and I expect it will be released
> publicly soon.
>
> APF (as implemented in the FT-1000) has always been a weak signal receiving
> tool. It's not for adjusting PITCH or some of the other ideas discussed.
> Last night I happened to be listening on 160m around 02z just after I got it
> installed. 5R8RJ usually comes on 1826.44 a little before his sunrise.
> Conditions were very poor but he was spotted by a UA4 around 0210z. I
> could hear nothing of him on his normal frequency. CW Skimmer's waterfall
> was also showing absolutely no signal there...not even a faint trace. I
> then actuated APF and could then copy him about Q3 in the noise.
>
> This is exactly what APF is designed for...pulling extremely weak signals
> out of noise...and it does it very well. The user interface is also very
> simple. Although it may change slightly before public release, you hold
> DUAL PB (as though you were going into the previous CW focus mode) and then
> adjust SHIFT in 10 Hz steps to peak the signal (independent of your PITCH
> setting). It works well in diversity also.
>
> Nice job guys...all the previous FT-1000 owners will rejoice!
>
> 73, Bill W4ZV
The Smiths
2010-10-29 18:12:16 UTC
Permalink
I've been a major perponant of having the Dual PB disapear from the front of the rig (even though I'm with the 1% of others that use it)... I would be okay with a HOLD push that toggles the two features on and off. One hold turns on Dual PB, the next turns on APF the thrid turns which ever off.. This isn't ideal by any means, but it could solve the issue of having to go back into the config menu to turn it on and off. Long and Short holds are just the same as toggles... Sorry folks but my 80 year old ham buddy just can't control his hand long enough to know how long 500ms is vs 1 second. He can barely click a mouse two times in a row to open a program.
I guess if the Dual PB was that important to you, you could always just keep the config menu option on a quick key.. That's what I'll end up doing.



> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:25:13 -0400
> From: lists at subich.com
> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
>
>
> I agree with Bill. I've had a chance to preview the APF function and
> it seems to operate very well although I haven't seen a any really
> weak stations like 5R8RJ on 160.
>
> APF as implemented by Lyle may become an alternative to a very narrow
> (e.g. 250 or 200 Hz) CW filter for casual operators as it provides a
> "spotlight" selectivity but does not provide the same level of IF
> protection as the tighter first IF filter.
>
> The one reservation I have is the potential need to use the menu
> system to select between the original Dual PB filter and APF. I
> would much prefer to see a two level "hold" - normal (500 ms) hold
> for Dual PB and long (1 sec) hold for APF like Link and Diversity
> with the KRX3 - for selecting Dual PB or APF.
>
> There are a few other control items and questions about use with the
> programmer's interface to be resolved but it looks like the capability
> is well on its way to a wider public beta.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
> On 10/29/2010 7:02 AM, Bill W4ZV wrote:
> >
> > Wayne released APF to Field Test last night and also said it was OK to post
> > comments. It seems to work very well and I expect it will be released
> > publicly soon.
> >
> > APF (as implemented in the FT-1000) has always been a weak signal receiving
> > tool. It's not for adjusting PITCH or some of the other ideas discussed.
> > Last night I happened to be listening on 160m around 02z just after I got it
> > installed. 5R8RJ usually comes on 1826.44 a little before his sunrise.
> > Conditions were very poor but he was spotted by a UA4 around 0210z. I
> > could hear nothing of him on his normal frequency. CW Skimmer's waterfall
> > was also showing absolutely no signal there...not even a faint trace. I
> > then actuated APF and could then copy him about Q3 in the noise.
> >
> > This is exactly what APF is designed for...pulling extremely weak signals
> > out of noise...and it does it very well. The user interface is also very
> > simple. Although it may change slightly before public release, you hold
> > DUAL PB (as though you were going into the previous CW focus mode) and then
> > adjust SHIFT in 10 Hz steps to peak the signal (independent of your PITCH
> > setting). It works well in diversity also.
> >
> > Nice job guys...all the previous FT-1000 owners will rejoice!
> >
> > 73, Bill W4ZV
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Bill Tippett
2010-10-29 14:55:38 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:23 AM, drewko <drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:

That sounds great. I would like to compare the new APF against the
> BeaconSee (IARU beacon monitoring) program. I'm not sure how the
> BeaconSee sensitivity compares to CW Skimmer but I beileve it is
> somewhat more sophisticated in weak signal recovery.
>
> 73,
> Drew
> AF2Z
>

I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.

73, Bill
drewko
2010-10-29 15:01:33 UTC
Permalink
Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
recovery algorithms.

73,
Drew
AF2Z


On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:

>
>I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
>kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
>not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>
>73, Bill
Guy Olinger K2AV
2010-10-29 16:58:46 UTC
Permalink
APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...

I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
control Q is intuitive.

When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
while during operation.

E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.

If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
stuff I couldn't hear before.

73, Guy.

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko <drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
> recovery algorithms.
>
> 73,
> Drew
> AF2Z
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>
>>I think you may be confused about what APF is. ?It is NOT a waterfall or any
>>kind of visual indicator. ?It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>>enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. ?It will
>>not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>>know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>>trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>>
>>73, ?Bill
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
Joe Subich, W4TV
2010-10-29 17:29:12 UTC
Permalink
> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required.

The design goal was to duplicate the FT-1000D APF. The FT-1000D has
no variable Q function. What you are proposing is completely different
than the design parameters ... you want an Autek QF1 not the FT-1000D APF.

>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult.

That's the goal of the FT-1000D APF ... single signal reception in
noise and QRM. If you want a context filter, the original Dual PB
filter with it's variable with and shift fill that role.

>> ONLY when APF is on could we have the WIDTH tap toggle between APF
>> Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display and between Roofing/DSP
>> bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do the same thing with
>> SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting Roofing/DSP SHIFT
>> displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45.

Width/shift taps are already "taken" if the user has not chosen PB
Shift=.01. There is no current requirement to select PB Shift=.01
in order to use APF and I hope that *someday* Wayne will give us the
ability to use LO-CUT-HI with PB Shift=.01.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 10/29/2010 12:58 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
> I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
>
> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
> all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
> weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
> control Q is intuitive.
>
> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
> back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
> is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
> NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
> while during operation.
>
> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>
> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
> contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>
> 73, Guy.
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko<drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
>> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
>> recovery algorithms.
>>
>> 73,
>> Drew
>> AF2Z
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
>>> kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
>>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>>>
>>> 73, Bill
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
Paul Christensen
2010-10-29 17:50:35 UTC
Permalink
> The design goal was to duplicate the FT-1000D APF. The FT-1000D has
> no variable Q function. What you are proposing is completely different
> than the design parameters ... you want an Autek QF1 not the FT-1000D APF.

I agree with Joe on this. The bandwidth of a CW transmission is narrow and
does not change.(*) I think pursuing variable Q would amount to diminishing
returns over fixed Q and adds an unnecessary variable. I also like the use
of the context filtering - a feature not found in the original FT-1000/D
circuit.

As Joe suggests, an Autek QF1A can be used if one really wants extreme APF
flexibility, or a single-channel parametric EQ may be a better way to go
since a PEQ allows the user to alter gain, Q, and frequency. Either way,
those devices can be easily inserted into the K3's audio path.

Paul, W9AC

(*) CW bandwidth does change with speed but at normal CW keying rates,
bandwidth is largely a function of only the waveform slope. At high
switching speeds, bandwidth becomes relevant as a function of both waveform
slope and keying speed.
Guy Olinger K2AV
2010-10-29 18:29:19 UTC
Permalink
I don't give a hoot about resurrecting an FT1000D, I need the
variability. I stand by what I said. The goal is whatever Wayne
makes of it. He's the only one I'm trying to convince here. 73, Guy.

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists at subich.com> wrote:
>
> ?> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
> ?> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required.
>
> The design goal was to duplicate the FT-1000D APF. ?The FT-1000D has
> no variable Q function. ?What you are proposing is completely different
> than the design parameters ... you want an Autek QF1 not the FT-1000D APF.
>
>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult.
>
> That's the goal of the FT-1000D APF ... single signal reception in
> noise and QRM. ?If you want a context filter, the original Dual PB
> filter with it's variable with and shift fill that role.
>
>>> ONLY when APF is on could we have the WIDTH tap toggle between APF
>>> Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display and between Roofing/DSP
>>> bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do the same thing with
>>> SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting Roofing/DSP SHIFT
>>> displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45.
>
> Width/shift taps are already "taken" if the user has not chosen PB
> Shift=.01. ?There is no current requirement to select PB Shift=.01
> in order to use APF and I hope that *someday* Wayne will give us the
> ability to use LO-CUT-HI with PB Shift=.01.
>
> 73,
>
> ? ?... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 10/29/2010 12:58 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
>> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
>> I completely agree with prior posters. ? HOWEVER...
>>
>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. ?If I can back
>> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
>> all the time and grind in as needed. ?I already do that with Width in
>> weak cases that are on frequency. ?ONLY when APF is on could we have
>> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
>> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW ?0.40??? ?You could do
>> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
>> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. ? ?Using WIDTH to
>> control Q is intuitive.
>>
>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. ?It will
>> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
>> back out for normal use. ?Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
>> is a problem. ?In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
>> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, ?I repeatedly hit
>> NTCH instead. ?HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
>> while during operation.
>>
>> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. ?I need
>> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
>> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
>> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
>> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>>
>> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
>> contest. ?No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. ?In the
>> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
>> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
>> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. ?Then when I
>> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
>> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>>
>> 73, Guy.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko<drewko1 at verizon.net> ?wrote:
>>> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
>>> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
>>> recovery algorithms.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>> Drew
>>> AF2Z
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. ?It is NOT a waterfall or any
>>>> kind of visual indicator. ?It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>>>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. ?It will
>>>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>>>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>>>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>>>>
>>>> 73, ?Bill
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
The Smiths
2010-10-29 18:39:02 UTC
Permalink
I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit idly by while some other ham who's in love with his 1980's FT-1000 dictates why I can't have a Q setting on my rig. The Q is a necessary part of this feature in my mind. This is NOT an FT-1000 this is a K3. Just because your old rig used to work well for you without a Q has nothing to do with my new rig.

And if you must make comparisons, than you can use the FT-2000 and it's contour filter (APF) which does have it's variable Q and boost level... Both living in the menus... Sorry but times move on, and you should too. Only the IDEA of the APF was conceived from the FT-1000, not the entire design and implementation... Please don't limit the rest of us.




> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:29:12 -0400
> From: lists at subich.com
> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
>
>
> > I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
> > LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required.
>
> The design goal was to duplicate the FT-1000D APF. The FT-1000D has
> no variable Q function. What you are proposing is completely different
> than the design parameters ... you want an Autek QF1 not the FT-1000D APF.
>
> >> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
> >> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult.
>
> That's the goal of the FT-1000D APF ... single signal reception in
> noise and QRM. If you want a context filter, the original Dual PB
> filter with it's variable with and shift fill that role.
>
> >> ONLY when APF is on could we have the WIDTH tap toggle between APF
> >> Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display and between Roofing/DSP
> >> bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do the same thing with
> >> SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting Roofing/DSP SHIFT
> >> displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45.
>
> Width/shift taps are already "taken" if the user has not chosen PB
> Shift=.01. There is no current requirement to select PB Shift=.01
> in order to use APF and I hope that *someday* Wayne will give us the
> ability to use LO-CUT-HI with PB Shift=.01.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 10/29/2010 12:58 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
> > APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
> > I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
> >
> > I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
> > LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
> > it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
> > all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
> > weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
> > the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
> > and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
> > the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
> > Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
> > control Q is intuitive.
> >
> > When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
> > passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
> > require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
> > back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
> > is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
> > and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
> > NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
> > while during operation.
> >
> > E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
> > it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
> > and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
> > Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
> > was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
> >
> > If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
> > contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
> > end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
> > leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
> > you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
> > get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
> > stuff I couldn't hear before.
> >
> > 73, Guy.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko<drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
> >> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
> >> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
> >> recovery algorithms.
> >>
> >> 73,
> >> Drew
> >> AF2Z
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
> >>> kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
> >>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
> >>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
> >>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
> >>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
> >>>
> >>> 73, Bill
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________________________
> >> Elecraft mailing list
> >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> >>
> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >>
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Elecraft mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Wayne Burdick
2010-10-29 18:44:45 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,

We'd like to get a lot of feedback on our current APF implementation
before we make additional changes. Variable Q is one of several
possible enhancements.

Keep those cards and letters coming, but holster your weapons :)

73,
Wayne
N6KR
Richard Squire - HB9ANM
2010-10-30 17:18:20 UTC
Permalink
After extensive tests with the new APF feature, I can say the results in
digging out weak CW signals are impressive. I was so enthusiastic that I
forgot about the SSB contest this weekend and concentrated on CW! The fact
that it is independent for the main and sub receivers is a very useful
feature - when working split, I like to search the pileup in a rather
broad-banded way? whilst the DX is being enhanced.
I agree that a variable Q would be "nice to have" but the APF is already
very good "as is".
Just as impressive is the way Elecraft responded so quickly and efficiently
to this "suggested feature"!
Thank you again, Wayne and all Elecrafters.
73
Richard ? HB9ANM


-----
Richard - HB9ANM
--
View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/APF-in-4-16-2-63-works-well-tp5686011p5689837.html
Sent from the [K3] mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Ken Chandler
2010-10-30 17:45:51 UTC
Permalink
Thanks for you ob's Richard.
Well perhaps the powers to be can secretly have a look-see at the variable Q and IF they collectively think it's well worth the mod then, 'make it so'!!!

Ken..G0ORH K2, K3, P3.

CW4EVER

Sent from my iPhone




On 30 Oct 2010, at 18:18, Richard Squire - HB9ANM <hb9anm at bluewin.ch> wrote:

>
> After extensive tests with the new APF feature, I can say the results in
> digging out weak CW signals are impressive. I was so enthusiastic that I
> forgot about the SSB contest this weekend and concentrated on CW! The fact
> that it is independent for the main and sub receivers is a very useful
> feature - when working split, I like to search the pileup in a rather
> broad-banded way? whilst the DX is being enhanced.
> I agree that a variable Q would be "nice to have" but the APF is already
> very good "as is".
> Just as impressive is the way Elecraft responded so quickly and efficiently
> to this "suggested feature"!
> Thank you again, Wayne and all Elecrafters.
> 73
> Richard ? HB9ANM
>
>
> -----
> Richard - HB9ANM
> --
> View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/APF-in-4-16-2-63-works-well-tp5686011p5689837.html
> Sent from the [K3] mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Joe Subich, W4TV
2010-10-29 18:53:30 UTC
Permalink
>> I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit idly by while some other ham
>> who'sin love with his 1980's FT-1000 dictates why I can't have a
>> Q setting on my rig. The Q is a necessary part of this feature in
>> my mind.

If you want a low Q peaking filter, it's already present in the Dual PB
filter. Select it and use the Width control to set the Q you want.

A low Q peaking filter is not what those who originally proposed the
feature and have advocated regularly for it are after. As has already
been said, de-Qing the filter currently in Field Test will render it
useless just like Yaesu did when they tried to eliminate the ringing
in the FT-1000D (and like the poor imitation "contour" filter in the
FT-2000/FT-5000/FT-9000).

The K3 Dual PB filter performs better than the "contour" filter in
the FT-2000 that is gathering dust in my closet. The new APF is
light years ahead of that when used *for the intended purpose.*

Thanks to Lyle and Wayne, K3 users will soon have two tools - each
designed for a different set of operating conditions. Please do not
dull the scalpel by trying to make it cut lumber.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 10/29/2010 2:39 PM, The Smiths wrote:
>
> I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit idly by while some other ham who's in love with his 1980's FT-1000 dictates why I can't have a Q setting on my rig. The Q is a necessary part of this feature in my mind. This is NOT an FT-1000 this is a K3. Just because your old rig used to work well for you without a Q has nothing to do with my new rig.
>
> And if you must make comparisons, than you can use the FT-2000 and it's contour filter (APF) which does have it's variable Q and boost level... Both living in the menus... Sorry but times move on, and you should too. Only the IDEA of the APF was conceived from the FT-1000, not the entire design and implementation... Please don't limit the rest of us.
>
>
>
>
>> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:29:12 -0400
>> From: lists at subich.com
>> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
>>
>>
>>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required.
>>
>> The design goal was to duplicate the FT-1000D APF. The FT-1000D has
>> no variable Q function. What you are proposing is completely different
>> than the design parameters ... you want an Autek QF1 not the FT-1000D APF.
>>
>>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult.
>>
>> That's the goal of the FT-1000D APF ... single signal reception in
>> noise and QRM. If you want a context filter, the original Dual PB
>> filter with it's variable with and shift fill that role.
>>
>>>> ONLY when APF is on could we have the WIDTH tap toggle between APF
>>>> Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display and between Roofing/DSP
>>>> bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do the same thing with
>>>> SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting Roofing/DSP SHIFT
>>>> displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45.
>>
>> Width/shift taps are already "taken" if the user has not chosen PB
>> Shift=.01. There is no current requirement to select PB Shift=.01
>> in order to use APF and I hope that *someday* Wayne will give us the
>> ability to use LO-CUT-HI with PB Shift=.01.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 10/29/2010 12:58 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
>>> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
>>> I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
>>>
>>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
>>> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
>>> all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
>>> weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
>>> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
>>> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
>>> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
>>> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
>>> control Q is intuitive.
>>>
>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
>>> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
>>> back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
>>> is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
>>> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
>>> NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
>>> while during operation.
>>>
>>> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
>>> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
>>> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
>>> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
>>> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>>>
>>> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
>>> contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
>>> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
>>> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
>>> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
>>> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
>>> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>>>
>>> 73, Guy.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko<drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
>>>> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
>>>> recovery algorithms.
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>> Drew
>>>> AF2Z
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
>>>>> kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>>>>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
>>>>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>>>>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>>>>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73, Bill
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
Robert Harmon
2010-10-30 01:10:48 UTC
Permalink
I agree 100%.


Bob
K6UJ




On Oct 29, 2010, at 11:53 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

>
>>> I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit idly by while some other ham
>>> who'sin love with his 1980's FT-1000 dictates why I can't have a
>>> Q setting on my rig. The Q is a necessary part of this feature in
>>> my mind.
>
> If you want a low Q peaking filter, it's already present in the Dual PB
> filter. Select it and use the Width control to set the Q you want.
>
> A low Q peaking filter is not what those who originally proposed the
> feature and have advocated regularly for it are after. As has already
> been said, de-Qing the filter currently in Field Test will render it
> useless just like Yaesu did when they tried to eliminate the ringing
> in the FT-1000D (and like the poor imitation "contour" filter in the
> FT-2000/FT-5000/FT-9000).
>
> The K3 Dual PB filter performs better than the "contour" filter in
> the FT-2000 that is gathering dust in my closet. The new APF is
> light years ahead of that when used *for the intended purpose.*
>
> Thanks to Lyle and Wayne, K3 users will soon have two tools - each
> designed for a different set of operating conditions. Please do not
> dull the scalpel by trying to make it cut lumber.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 10/29/2010 2:39 PM, The Smiths wrote:
>>
>> I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit idly by while some other ham who's in love with his 1980's FT-1000 dictates why I can't have a Q setting on my rig. The Q is a necessary part of this feature in my mind. This is NOT an FT-1000 this is a K3. Just because your old rig used to work well for you without a Q has nothing to do with my new rig.
>>
>> And if you must make comparisons, than you can use the FT-2000 and it's contour filter (APF) which does have it's variable Q and boost level... Both living in the menus... Sorry but times move on, and you should too. Only the IDEA of the APF was conceived from the FT-1000, not the entire design and implementation... Please don't limit the rest of us.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:29:12 -0400
>>> From: lists at subich.com
>>> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
>>>
>>>
>>>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>>>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required.
>>>
>>> The design goal was to duplicate the FT-1000D APF. The FT-1000D has
>>> no variable Q function. What you are proposing is completely different
>>> than the design parameters ... you want an Autek QF1 not the FT-1000D APF.
>>>
>>>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult.
>>>
>>> That's the goal of the FT-1000D APF ... single signal reception in
>>> noise and QRM. If you want a context filter, the original Dual PB
>>> filter with it's variable with and shift fill that role.
>>>
>>>>> ONLY when APF is on could we have the WIDTH tap toggle between APF
>>>>> Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display and between Roofing/DSP
>>>>> bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do the same thing with
>>>>> SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting Roofing/DSP SHIFT
>>>>> displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45.
>>>
>>> Width/shift taps are already "taken" if the user has not chosen PB
>>> Shift=.01. There is no current requirement to select PB Shift=.01
>>> in order to use APF and I hope that *someday* Wayne will give us the
>>> ability to use LO-CUT-HI with PB Shift=.01.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 10/29/2010 12:58 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
>>>> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
>>>> I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
>>>>
>>>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>>>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
>>>> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
>>>> all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
>>>> weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
>>>> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
>>>> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
>>>> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
>>>> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
>>>> control Q is intuitive.
>>>>
>>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
>>>> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
>>>> back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
>>>> is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
>>>> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
>>>> NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
>>>> while during operation.
>>>>
>>>> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
>>>> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
>>>> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
>>>> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
>>>> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>>>>
>>>> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
>>>> contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
>>>> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
>>>> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
>>>> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
>>>> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
>>>> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>>>>
>>>> 73, Guy.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko<drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
>>>>> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
>>>>> recovery algorithms.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>> Drew
>>>>> AF2Z
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
>>>>>> kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>>>>>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
>>>>>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>>>>>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>>>>>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73, Bill
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>>
>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft
2010-10-29 19:12:49 UTC
Permalink
Folks - It is inappropriate to reply pro or con on this thread. That is
outside of the list guidelines and only serves to inflame the issue and
clog the list with comments. Please send all concerns of this type
directly to the moderator.

This thread is now closed.

73, Eric
Elecraft List Moderator

On 10/29/2010 11:39 AM, The Smiths wrote:
> I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit idly by while some other ham who's in love with his 1980's FT-1000 dictates why I can't have a Q setting on my rig. The Q is a necessary part of this feature in my mind. This is NOT an FT-1000 this is a K3. Just because your old rig used to work well for you without a Q has nothing to do with my new rig.
>
> And if you must make comparisons, than you can use the FT-2000 and it's contour filter (APF) which does have it's variable Q and boost level... Both living in the menus... Sorry but times move on, and you should too. Only the IDEA of the APF was conceived from the FT-1000, not the entire design and implementation... Please don't limit the rest of us.
>
>
>
>
>> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:29:12 -0400
>> From: lists at subich.com
>> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
>>
>>
>>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required.
>> The design goal was to duplicate the FT-1000D APF. The FT-1000D has
>> no variable Q function. What you are proposing is completely different
>> than the design parameters ... you want an Autek QF1 not the FT-1000D APF.
>>
>>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult.
>> That's the goal of the FT-1000D APF ... single signal reception in
>> noise and QRM. If you want a context filter, the original Dual PB
>> filter with it's variable with and shift fill that role.
>>
>>>> ONLY when APF is on could we have the WIDTH tap toggle between APF
>>>> Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display and between Roofing/DSP
>>>> bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do the same thing with
>>>> SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting Roofing/DSP SHIFT
>>>> displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45.
>> Width/shift taps are already "taken" if the user has not chosen PB
>> Shift=.01. There is no current requirement to select PB Shift=.01
>> in order to use APF and I hope that *someday* Wayne will give us the
>> ability to use LO-CUT-HI with PB Shift=.01.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 10/29/2010 12:58 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
>>> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
>>> I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
>>>
>>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
>>> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
>>> all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
>>> weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
>>> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
>>> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
>>> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
>>> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
>>> control Q is intuitive.
>>>
>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
>>> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
>>> back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
>>> is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
>>> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
>>> NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
>>> while during operation.
>>>
>>> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
>>> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
>>> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
>>> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
>>> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>>>
>>> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
>>> contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
>>> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
>>> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
>>> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
>>> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
>>> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>>>
>>> 73, Guy.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko<drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
>>>> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
>>>> recovery algorithms.
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>> Drew
>>>> AF2Z
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
>>>>> kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>>>>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
>>>>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>>>>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>>>>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73, Bill
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft
2010-10-29 19:15:30 UTC
Permalink
Clarification - I was responding to the tone of these postings. Its
perfectly OK to discuss technical requests in a -polite- and un-rude manner.

73, Eric
List Moderator
-----


On 10/29/2010 12:12 PM, Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft wrote:
> Folks - It is inappropriate to reply pro or con on this thread. That
> is outside of the list guidelines and only serves to inflame the issue
> and clog the list with comments. Please send all concerns of this type
> directly to the moderator.
>
> This thread is now closed.
>
> 73, Eric
> Elecraft List Moderator
>
> On 10/29/2010 11:39 AM, The Smiths wrote:
>> I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit idly by while some other ham who's
>> in love with his 1980's FT-1000 dictates why I can't have a Q setting
>> on my rig. The Q is a necessary part of this feature in my mind.
>> This is NOT an FT-1000 this is a K3. Just because your old rig used
>> to work well for you without a Q has nothing to do with my new rig.
>>
>> And if you must make comparisons, than you can use the FT-2000 and
>> it's contour filter (APF) which does have it's variable Q and boost
>> level... Both living in the menus... Sorry but times move on, and you
>> should too. Only the IDEA of the APF was conceived from the FT-1000,
>> not the entire design and implementation... Please don't limit the
>> rest of us.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:29:12 -0400
>>> From: lists at subich.com
>>> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
>>>
>>>
>>>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>>>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required.
>>> The design goal was to duplicate the FT-1000D APF. The FT-1000D has
>>> no variable Q function. What you are proposing is completely different
>>> than the design parameters ... you want an Autek QF1 not the
>>> FT-1000D APF.
>>>
>>>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult.
>>> That's the goal of the FT-1000D APF ... single signal reception in
>>> noise and QRM. If you want a context filter, the original Dual PB
>>> filter with it's variable with and shift fill that role.
>>>
>>>>> ONLY when APF is on could we have the WIDTH tap toggle between APF
>>>>> Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display and between Roofing/DSP
>>>>> bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do the same thing with
>>>>> SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting Roofing/DSP SHIFT
>>>>> displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45.
>>> Width/shift taps are already "taken" if the user has not chosen PB
>>> Shift=.01. There is no current requirement to select PB Shift=.01
>>> in order to use APF and I hope that *someday* Wayne will give us the
>>> ability to use LO-CUT-HI with PB Shift=.01.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 10/29/2010 12:58 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
>>>> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
>>>> I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
>>>>
>>>> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
>>>> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
>>>> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
>>>> all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
>>>> weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
>>>> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
>>>> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
>>>> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
>>>> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
>>>> control Q is intuitive.
>>>>
>>>> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
>>>> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
>>>> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
>>>> back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
>>>> is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
>>>> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
>>>> NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
>>>> while during operation.
>>>>
>>>> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
>>>> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
>>>> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
>>>> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
>>>> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>>>>
>>>> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
>>>> contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
>>>> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
>>>> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
>>>> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
>>>> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
>>>> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>>>>
>>>> 73, Guy.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko<drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
>>>>> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise
>>>>> signal
>>>>> recovery algorithms.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>> Drew
>>>>> AF2Z
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a
>>>>>> waterfall or any
>>>>>> kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF)
>>>>>> meant to
>>>>>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears.
>>>>>> It will
>>>>>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum,
>>>>>> but if you
>>>>>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or
>>>>>> waterfall
>>>>>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in
>>>>>> noise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73, Bill
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>>
>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

--
Go Giants!
Grant Youngman
2010-10-29 19:48:59 UTC
Permalink
Thank you very much for that small favor :-)

Grant/NQ5T


On Oct 29, 2010, at 2:12 PM, Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft wrote:

> Folks - It is inappropriate to reply pro or con on this thread. That is
> outside of the list guidelines and only serves to inflame the issue and
> clog the list with comments. Please send all concerns of this type
> directly to the moderator.
>
> This thread is now closed.
The Smiths
2010-10-29 18:27:33 UTC
Permalink
I Completely agree with this idea of Q adjustments! I think that putting it on the Width as a TAP is a great idea. I do NOT want to loose my width control at all! but having a Tap to Q setting would be very nice indeed, and almost a MUST. I don't believe that it belongs on the shift knob since it has nothing to do with that nomenclature.

Again, I'm going to push for my idea where the outside lines displayed are the Filter width, the inner lines display the Q, the shift moves the Q around within the Passband, or even outside of it if that's what you're doing. If you have your Width filter at 50 Hz and the Q is closed all the way down, the two lines (inside and out) would overlap each other, or sit right next to each other (assuming you were centered in the IF position)


> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:58:46 -0400
> From: olinger at bellsouth.net
> To: drewko1 at verizon.net
> CC: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net; btippett at alum.mit.edu
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] APF in 4.16/2.63 works well!
>
> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
> I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
>
> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
> all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
> weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
> control Q is intuitive.
>
> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
> back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
> is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
> NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
> while during operation.
>
> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>
> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
> contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>
> 73, Guy.
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko <drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
> > Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
> > APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
> > recovery algorithms.
> >
> > 73,
> > Drew
> > AF2Z
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
> >>kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
> >>enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
> >>not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
> >>know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
> >>trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
> >>
> >>73, Bill
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Elecraft mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Brendan Minish
2010-10-29 19:20:59 UTC
Permalink
Variable Q might be nice, it seems a pretty good compromise as is though.
the issue I would have with putting the Q on the width control is that
this then prevents the user altering the IF filter bandwidth when the
APF is selected

Currently I am finding that I am still playing with the IF width control
quite a bit when APF is selected

so far on 160m the APF feature is able to help dig out signals that are
too poor to dig out by ear without it. This is a great addition


On 29/10/2010 16:58, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
> I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
>
> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
> all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
> weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
> control Q is intuitive.
>
> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
> back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
> is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
> NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
> while during operation.
>
> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>
> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
> contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>
> 73, Guy.
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko<drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
>> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
>> recovery algorithms.
>>
>> 73,
>> Drew
>> AF2Z
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
>>> kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
>>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>>>
>>> 73, Bill
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Robert Harmon
2010-10-30 01:00:06 UTC
Permalink
Please lets not dumb it down for contesting. Let's optimize it. !
You can choose to use the extra peaking it provides with a little more knob turning
or choose to not use it. Ask how many 160 meter contesters will use it !!!
If you are a CW contester I guarantee you will choose to use !!

Bob
K6UJ




On Oct 29, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:

> APF has a very significant improvement on weak signals in the noise.
> I completely agree with prior posters. HOWEVER...
>
> I would like to be able to ***VARY THE Q*** with the width control and
> LEAVE IT ON with a mild Q, and sharpen it as required. If I can back
> it out to 2 dB with a width function I would probably leave that on
> all the time and grind in as needed. I already do that with Width in
> weak cases that are on frequency. ONLY when APF is on could we have
> the WIDTH tap toggle between APF Q displaying APF Q=3 in lower display
> and between Roofing/DSP bandwidth displaying BW 0.40??? You could do
> the same thing with SHIFT to go back and forth between adjusting
> Roofing/DSP SHIFT displaying FC *0.45 and APF *0.45. Using WIDTH to
> control Q is intuitive.
>
> When APF is in there is no moderate setting, it takes over the
> passband and makes copy of a signal up band difficult. It will
> require repeated use of DUAL PB to go in and out for weak signals and
> back out for normal use. Use of a HOLD function as a frequent change
> is a problem. In trying to get used to the HOLD on DUAL PB to go in
> and out of APF to hear in the rest of the channel, I repeatedly hit
> NTCH instead. HOLD's are only good for settings that persist for a
> while during operation.
>
> E.g. I don't need APF ONLY as a better substitute for 50 Hz. I need
> it to work ALSO as a milder center emphasis inside the 400 Hz roofer,
> and be able to twist a knob somewhere to move between mild and sharp.
> Even with what appears to be only a 2 dB peaking around 450, the MP
> was improved inside its excellent dual INRAD 400 selectivity.
>
> If this is not done, it will be very difficult to use it well in a
> contest. No easy-to-use variable Q is a deal-breaker for me. In the
> end for contests it will cost Q's and will have to tell people to
> leave it off, just like NR. Only turn it on for a really weak one if
> you can remember how, and then turn it right back off. Then when I
> get home chasing weak DX I'll turn it all back on again, and work some
> stuff I couldn't hear before.
>
> 73, Guy.
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, drewko <drewko1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>> Yes, I realize that. I would like to compare what is heard using the
>> APF filter to what is displayed by BeaconSee with its sub-noise signal
>> recovery algorithms.
>>
>> 73,
>> Drew
>> AF2Z
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:55:38 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I think you may be confused about what APF is. It is NOT a waterfall or any
>>> kind of visual indicator. It IS an Audio Peaking Filter (APF) meant to
>>> enhance weak signal audio using the processor between your ears. It will
>>> not automatically show you where weak signals are in a spectrum, but if you
>>> know approximately where to look (either from a Packet spot or waterfall
>>> trace) it can help your ear/brain decode the CW audio buried in noise.
>>>
>>> 73, Bill
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
drewko
2010-10-29 14:23:47 UTC
Permalink
That sounds great. I would like to compare the new APF against the
BeaconSee (IARU beacon monitoring) program. I'm not sure how the
BeaconSee sensitivity compares to CW Skimmer but I beileve it is
somewhat more sophisticated in weak signal recovery.

73,
Drew
AF2Z


On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 04:02:44 -0700 (PDT), Bill W4ZV wrote:

>
>Conditions were very poor but he was spotted by a UA4 around 0210z. I
>could hear nothing of him on his normal frequency. CW Skimmer's waterfall
>was also showing absolutely no signal there...not even a faint trace. I
>then actuated APF and could then copy him about Q3 in the noise.
>

>
>73, Bill W4ZV
Merv Schweigert
2010-10-29 18:05:10 UTC
Permalink
> Nice job guys...all the previous FT-1000 owners will rejoice!
>
> 73, Bill W4ZV

Being a former owner of several FT-1000D radios, and one left in the shack
on the shelf next to the K3 which is in the "primary position" I have
to agree,
at first try this is the answer that will put my FT-1000D out of work,
for sale
and replaced by another K3.
Kudos super job, Im sure there will be small amount of tweaking here
and there etc, but this is great.
Bill has testified to what is probably the greatest use for APF,
pulling weak
signals out of the noise ( and I mean weak), it will not make 100 percent
copy of them, but sure will allow for a QSO that was impossible before.
This brings to K3 to the best there is in my book.

Thanks thanks thanks Wayne and Lyle for listening to users who want the
best performance for not only our personal use but for the K3 in general.
I think Waynes comments on his and Lyles surprise as to APF effectiveness
is the icing on the cake.

Also please do not do as Yaesu did in its mistakes, they listened to
people
who thought it was too "ringy" and reduced the "Q" it made the
FT-1000D later
series worthless and they had to be modified to the old circuit. so lets
not go that road again. Slight ring is normal and the price you pay to hear
a signal or not hear it.

Thanks .. Merv K9FD / KH7C
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...