CW Pitch Resolution

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
37 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

donhall161
Oliver,

I've used my K3 on 440 for several years.

73  Don  K5AQ
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Joe Subich, W4TV-4
In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4

What 1.69 beta firmware?

Current/Latest Production release is 4.67

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 10/20/2013 3:22 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:

> I'm using 1.69 beta firmware that stops at 400 Hz.
>
> I'm just happy that the 1 kHz sidetone that was almost "standard" for many
> years is no longer popular. All of my radio licensing CW tests at the FCC
> offices used 1 kHz. That made my brain ache, not to mention the tendency for
> it to echo when using a speaker.
>
> 73, Ron AC7AC
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> On 10/20/2013 1:43 PM, Oliver Johns wrote:
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> My only gripe is that the K3 choice range doesn't go down to 400 Hz.  I'd
> like to use 440, a pure standard A.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Oliver
>> W6ODJ
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> 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:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Bruce Beford-2
In reply to this post by John Seney
I assume you are talking about the KX3 beta firmware. This discussion has
been about the K3 sidetone pitch. Production firmware level for the K3 is
4.67.
Bruce N1RX

> I'm using 1.69 beta firmware that stops at 400 Hz.



______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Tony Estep
In reply to this post by W6ODJ
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Oliver Johns <[hidden email]>wrote:

> ...440, a pure standard A...
> ============

Gee, maybe it's a good thing radio wasn't invented back in the days when A
was 415.

Tony KT0NY
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

mcduffie
In reply to this post by Sverre Holm (LA3ZA)
On Sun, 20 Oct 2013 06:36:00 -0700 (PDT), Sverre Holm (LA3ZA) wrote:

> Based on this result, it would be interesting to zoom in on the frequencies
> between 250 and 500 Hz for further testing, also higher speeds would be
> interesting to test as 40 and 80 is the same as 8 and 16 wpm. Peter
> Montnemery is by the way SM7CMY.

After this thread got going good, I did some testing on my own.  First, I moved
from my normal 650 down to see how low the rig would go.  My KW goes from 300 to
1000 in 50 Hz steps.  I found I liked 400 for awhile, but noticed when I went
very low at higher speeds, I started losing the resolution between signal and
noise.  I've settled at 550 for the time being, and liking it so far.  Like
others, I started decades ago at 750 or even 800, but several years ago went to
700 and stayed there until a year or so ago when I got back active on HF.  I'm
going to stay at 550 for awhile and see what happens in the long run.

All this said, remember if you are detecting tones ELECTRONICALLY (not by
ear/brain cooperation), higher frequencies work better.  The reason is the same
as what makes VHF PL tones work better when they are in the higher end of the
chart.  There are more AC cycles per millisecond so the decoders can detect them
quicker.

Gary
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Jim Brown-10
On 10/20/2013 1:46 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
> All this said, remember if you are detecting tones ELECTRONICALLY (not by
> ear/brain cooperation), higher frequencies work better.  The reason is the same
> as what makes VHF PL tones work better when they are in the higher end of the
> chart.  There are more AC cycles per millisecond so the decoders can detect them
> quicker.

The problems are unrelated, so your conclusion doesn't make sense to me.
The PL decoders are determining the frequency of the tone, whereas the
brain, and a CW decoder, are listening to or looking at the envelope.
Moreover, the filtering in front of the decoder will be most effective
on the lower frequency tones, again because of the greater percentage
bandwidth as compared to the difference in Hz of an interfering signal.

FWIW, my CW pitch is usually set around 500-550 Hz unless a guest op
changes it.

73, Jim K9YC
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Sverre Holm (LA3ZA)
In reply to this post by Dr. William J. Schmidt, II
To sum up the interesting studies from the early 90's on Morse code recognition and the effects of pitch frequency, signal to noise ratio and code speed I posted the abstracts of some of the Montnemery papers on my blog as well as some key illustrations.

See http://la3za.blogspot.no/2013/10/studies-on-morse-code-recognition.html
Sverre, LA3ZA

K2 #2198, K3 #3391,
LA3ZA Blog: http://la3za.blogspot.com,
LA3ZA Unofficial Guide to K2 modifications: http://la3za.blogspot.com/p/la3za-unofficial-guide-to-elecraft-k2.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Cortland Richmond-2
The KWM-2 was IIRC 1500 Hz -- and my FPM-300 was 1750. *That* was too much, and inspired a relay-switched front -panel RIT control.  The design reason was sound (no pun intended, for once) enough; the transmit IF filter had to suppress harmonics of the keyed tone for a pure signal.   This is something that might help some digital-soundcard ops.

Also once upon a time -- so I recall -- some legal [half] wit at the FCC decreed that tone-generated CW on the KWM-2 was "A2" and NOT lawful in the CW segments.

Today it's "images sent in data mode are SSTV." Give 'em an inch and they think they're a ruler.

Cortland
KA5S

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

From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[hidden email]>


I'm just happy that the 1 kHz sidetone that was almost "standard" for many
years is no longer popular. All of my radio licensing CW tests at the FCC
offices used 1 kHz. That made my brain ache,


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Bill W4ZV
In reply to this post by Sverre Holm (LA3ZA)
Sverre Holm (LA3ZA) wrote
To sum up the interesting studies from the early 90's on Morse code recognition and the effects of pitch frequency, signal to noise ratio and code speed I posted the abstracts of some of the Montnemery papers on my blog as well as some key illustrations.

See http://la3za.blogspot.no/2013/10/studies-on-morse-code-recognition.html
Sverrre I posted the following on your website but am repeating it here in the hopes Fabian DJ1YFK will see it and notify me when his SNR challenge is available on LCWO.net:

Hi Fabian

Copying weak CW signals and psychoacoustics has been a passion of mine since I was first licensed (1957). More recently it has taken the form of DXing on the low bands (especially Topband) and SOTA operating (QRP from summits). I've signed up on LCWO and hope you will implement your SNR challenge. BTW here is a related website by AB7E about weak signals:

http://www.ab7e.com/weak_signal/mdd.html

Many years ago I discovered 270 Hz was my personal optimum pitch for copying very weak signals on the low bands. This was using a TS-930S which had continuously adjustable pitch. I even found 240 Hz was sometimes useful. I was disappointed that the Elecraft K3's lowest pitch setting is 300 Hz but have learned to "live with it".

73, Bill W4ZV
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

drewko
If you want to go lower than 300 Hz for your preferred cw pitch you
could offset the RIT for the lower tone then compensate with SHIFT to
bring it back to the center of the filter. A keyswitch macro could do
this automatically if you hve a set pitch in mind, say 270.

It would be nice if there were commands to increment and decrement RIT
and SHIFT. Then you could write a macro to adjust the pitch of a
signal throughout a range while keeping it in the center of the
filter.

Or, better yet, an optional RIT mode that would make SHIFT
automatically track changes in RIT. Say, if you "detune" the RIT by 30
Hz, the SHIFT would automatically follow to 270 Hz (assuming PITCH
setting is 300).

73,
Drew
AF2Z




On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 04:25:23 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:

>
>Many years ago I discovered 270 Hz was my personal optimum pitch for copying
>very weak signals on the low bands. This was using a TS-930S which had
>continuously adjustable pitch. I even found 240 Hz was sometimes useful. I
>was disappointed that the Elecraft K3's lowest pitch setting is 300 Hz but
>have learned to "live with it".
>
>73, Bill W4ZV

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Bill W4ZV
drewko wrote
If you want to go lower than 300 Hz for your preferred cw pitch you
could offset the RIT for the lower tone then compensate with SHIFT to
bring it back to the center of the filter. A keyswitch macro could do
this automatically if you hve a set pitch in mind, say 270.
That doesn't work if you're using APF, which I always use for weak signals.  APF is linked to the actual PITCH setting.  I also use 200 Hz filters in diversity and 30 Hz away from their center would attenuate signals.

73,  Bill
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

RobertG
Bill...
Every time I attempt to use APF I encounter so much ringing that it's
more or less unusable. I'd appreciate any hint that you might have about
"taming" this feature for use. Thanks.
...robert

On 10/23/2013 15:29, Bill W4ZV wrote:

> drewko wrote
>> If you want to go lower than 300 Hz for your preferred cw pitch you
>> could offset the RIT for the lower tone then compensate with SHIFT to
>> bring it back to the center of the filter. A keyswitch macro could do
>> this automatically if you hve a set pitch in mind, say 270.
>
> That doesn't work if you're using APF, which I always use for weak signals.
> APF is linked to the actual PITCH setting.  I also use 200 Hz filters in
> diversity and 30 Hz away from their center would attenuate signals.
>
> 73,  Bill
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/CW-Pitch-Resolution-tp7579837p7580087.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:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

--
Robert G Strickland, PhD ABPH - KE2WY
[hidden email]
Syracuse, New York, USA
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Bill W4ZV
RobertG wrote
Bill...
Every time I attempt to use APF I encounter so much ringing that it's
more or less unusable. I'd appreciate any hint that you might have about
"taming" this feature for use. Thanks.
Hi Robert,

Reduce the gain and narrow the XFIL/DSP bandwidth such that the desired signal pops out of the noise.  I generally don't use APF unless all signals in the passband are relatively weak.  Ideally you don't want anything in the passband except band noise and the signal of interest.  This may sound counterintuitive but IF QRM ALLOWS, try a relatively wide XFIL/DSP bandwidth (e.g. 400 Hz).  I find this helps your brain/ears have better discrimination between the signal and noise.  If you narrow XFIL/DSP too much, you may magnify ringing.

Contrary to what I thought when I first tried APF, I now use it most of the time, but I hasten to add that "most of the time" I'm listening to very weak signals (e.g. 160m DX or QRP SOTA ops on higher bands).  When I activate SOTA summits, I *REALLY* miss APF on my K2 and this feature alone may eventually push me over the edge to a KX3.

73,  Bill
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

drewko
In reply to this post by Bill W4ZV
Guess I don't follow... When APF is engaged, SHIFT will change the APF
center frequency. If you dial SHIFT for 270, RIT for -30 Hz, then
SHIFT APF to 270 (assuming your PITCH is 300 Hz), signal will be
centerd with a 270 Hz tone.

73,
Drew
AF2Z



On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 08:29:44 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:

>drewko wrote
>> If you want to go lower than 300 Hz for your preferred cw pitch you
>> could offset the RIT for the lower tone then compensate with SHIFT to
>> bring it back to the center of the filter. A keyswitch macro could do
>> this automatically if you hve a set pitch in mind, say 270.
>
>That doesn't work if you're using APF, which I always use for weak signals.
>APF is linked to the actual PITCH setting.  I also use 200 Hz filters in
>diversity and 30 Hz away from their center would attenuate signals.
>
>73,  Bill

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Gary Hinson
In reply to this post by alorona
> The next thing you know, someone somewhere is going to claim that Elecraft
> radios soldered with 63/37 solder sound superior to those soldered with a
> different blend.

I used silver solder in the audio section, of course, but now I'm concerned.
Should I have used it in the RF sections too?

My LV leads are oxygen-free (although the high vacuum pump can be a bit of a
pain) and the mains cables are carefully laid true N-S to minimize the
distortion caused by the interaction of the Earth's magnetic field with the
AC.  

73
Gary  ZL2iFB



--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Phillip Lontz
But dude... Are your wires made of silver? And laid in organic cotton sleeves by pure virgins on a full moon just after a mercury retrograde?


A wise man once said nothing....


On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:29 PM, Gary Hinson <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> The next thing you know, someone somewhere is going to claim that Elecraft
>> radios soldered with 63/37 solder sound superior to those soldered with a
>> different blend.
>
> I used silver solder in the audio section, of course, but now I'm concerned.
> Should I have used it in the RF sections too?
>
> My LV leads are oxygen-free (although the high vacuum pump can be a bit of a
> pain) and the mains cables are carefully laid true N-S to minimize the
> distortion caused by the interaction of the Earth's magnetic field with the
> AC.  
>
> 73
> Gary  ZL2iFB
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> 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:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CW Pitch Resolution

Art Hejduk
Wow!  Is this thread still going?


On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Philip Townsend Lontz <[hidden email]>wrote:

> But dude... Are your wires made of silver? And laid in organic cotton
> sleeves by pure virgins on a full moon just after a mercury retrograde?
>
>
> A wise man once said nothing....
>
>
> On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:29 PM, Gary Hinson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >> The next thing you know, someone somewhere is going to claim that
> Elecraft
> >> radios soldered with 63/37 solder sound superior to those soldered with
> a
> >> different blend.
> >
> > I used silver solder in the audio section, of course, but now I'm
> concerned.
> > Should I have used it in the RF sections too?
> >
> > My LV leads are oxygen-free (although the high vacuum pump can be a bit
> of a
> > pain) and the mains cables are carefully laid true N-S to minimize the
> > distortion caused by the interaction of the Earth's magnetic field with
> the
> > AC.
> >
> > 73
> > Gary  ZL2iFB
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> > believed to be clean.
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Elecraft mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:[hidden email]
> >
> > 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:[hidden email]
>
> 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:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
12