eHam

eHam Forums => Station Building => Topic started by: KD2CJJ on April 11, 2013, 08:06:01 PM



Title: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 11, 2013, 08:06:01 PM
Any opinions?


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: ZENKI on April 13, 2013, 08:42:54 PM
The K3 will be the winner especially with the P3.

The QST review of the FTDX3000 produced mixed results for receiver transmitter performance.

Disappointments were the poor transmitter IMD and the poor transmitter composite noise figures. If the FTDX3000 uses the same design techniques as the FT5000 its hard to understand why the composite
noise figure is so bad.

The other receiver numbers look good on the FTDX3000 which why the composite noise figure is such a mystery. Whether this matters to you depends on your location, noise floor, antennas and operating styles.

P3 PAN adapter is a  very useful piece of kit. The resolution bandwidth and general performance is unequaled  at the moment.  Its hard to imagine why Yaesu put in such a lousy small screen on the FTDX3000 and one has to shake ones head about the crap bandscope on the FTDX5000.

If Elecraft introduced the K4 with 200 watts and a built in big screen pan adapter that would be the radio for me. Yaesu and Icom seem good at producing crippled radios rather than delivering excellent performance in all aspects of their designs.

Why not consider the TS990S? HaHa







Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 14, 2013, 10:10:08 AM
I almost pulled the trigger last week on the k3...

Then I saw the price difference.   It's tough to justify the difference IMO....

I know performance wise the k3 is in another class...but feature for feature vs price I think the yaesu is a better value.

Tough decision...
The K3 will be the winner especially with the P3.

The QST review of the FTDX3000 produced mixed results for receiver transmitter performance.

Disappointments were the poor transmitter IMD and the poor transmitter composite noise figures. If the FTDX3000 uses the same design techniques as the FT5000 its hard to understand why the composite
noise figure is so bad.

The other receiver numbers look good on the FTDX3000 which why the composite noise figure is such a mystery. Whether this matters to you depends on your location, noise floor, antennas and operating styles.

P3 PAN adapter is a  very useful piece of kit. The resolution bandwidth and general performance is unequaled  at the moment.  Its hard to imagine why Yaesu put in such a lousy small screen on the FTDX3000 and one has to shake ones head about the crap bandscope on the FTDX5000.

If Elecraft introduced the K4 with 200 watts and a built in big screen pan adapter that would be the radio for me. Yaesu and Icom seem good at producing crippled radios rather than delivering excellent performance in all aspects of their designs.

Why not consider the TS990S? HaHa








Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W9GB on April 16, 2013, 06:39:22 AM
I compare the size and weight.  The Japanese still like to build aircraft carrier sized radios.
The FT3000 is the follow-on to the troubled FT-2000 (1st IF design).
http://ac0c.com/main/page_ft2k_roofing_filters_project_overview.html

Personally, I would wait to see if they exercised the FT-2000 demons.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W8GP on April 16, 2013, 10:01:41 AM
Yes, the '3000 is a good value and I think it will sell well. It's on my wish list to replace my FT-950 but I'm going to wait a while to see how it plays out.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: K8GU on April 17, 2013, 10:16:57 AM
On the surface, this seems like a fair comparison, but these are two fundamentally different radios in completely different operating classes.  If you like one, you probably won't like the other.  The K3 is engineered for raw performance under very specific (crowded) conditions in a portable package.  The fit and finish is not the same as the JA radios (although I really like the ergonomics of my K3).  It's smaller and lighter than the FTDX-3000 in addition to the difference in performance numbers.  For me, the K3 was a no-brainer even versus the very similar and very competitively-priced TS-590S.  I would never use the bells and whistles ("features" you called them) of the FTDX-3000. 


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: K7KEY on April 20, 2013, 07:34:12 AM
I don't know the FTDX3000, but I am happy with my K3.  The small size and light-weight feel of the K3 might be an objection for some people.  It sure isn't as robust feeling as a big Yeasu radio.

P3 PAN adapter is a  very useful piece of kit. The resolution bandwidth and general performance is unequaled  at the moment.  Its hard to imagine why Yaesu put in such a lousy small screen on the FTDX3000 and one has to shake ones head about the crap bandscope on the FTDX5000.

I agree that the P3 is a nice addition, but IMHO performance of the P3 is EXCEEDED if you include consideration of PC-based spectrum scopes.  I considered the P3 seriously, but ended up buying the LP-PAN2 unit instead.  All in, it cost $380 (not counting the investment in a PC), compared to $700 plus shipping for the P3.  The result is a stunningly beautiful and detailed display, as large as your monitor, with many rig control function now enabled by mouse clicks.  The much faster frame update rate of the LP-PAN2 is also significant.  Of course, it isn't as "plug-n-play" and the P3, but setup was not difficult.  It's a great value, and better performance. It's hard to appreciate the difference that the larger display makes until you see it.

However, as the P3 is not crystal controlled, it does have the advantage in ability to connect to different receivers (though still only one at a time).  The LP-PAN has slots for two crystals, and those crystals are not easy to find for all radios.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 28, 2013, 06:01:50 AM
I ended up getting the yaesu... It really just boiled down to price / feature / performance.  The yaesu had more friendly features, with relative similar performance for my needs and was considerably less in cost equally equipped.   I am astonished how much better the rig is over my ic7000.  I also can't believe how quiet it is and can pill in signals with such little rf gain!  The noise reduction is also amazing.  The only feature I am disappointed in is the noise blanketer.  It's just about useless for aggressive electrical noise like high power lines which I have near me.  Honestly the ic7000 NB is far superior.... Everything else I love...

I probably would have went with the k3 if all was equal but I understand the k3 is a true contesting rig with no frills and what was important to me was not equal thus the yaesu won out for me...  To each is own..


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W4OP on April 28, 2013, 10:42:34 AM
The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: K8AC on April 28, 2013, 01:30:29 PM
Have to agree with Dale on that.  I owned a K3 and just didn't like the compact physical design of the unit and replaced it with an FTDX-5000.  Typical of Yaesu rigs in recent years, it had some serious problems when sending CW (variable length dits, and a couple of other things).  After some time, Yaesu offered a fix but that required you to pay shipping both ways to the west coast.  One fellow who had Yaesu fix his 5000 then reported that you could no longer operate QSK above 20 wpm after the fix was applied.  If you're considering the Yaesu 3000, and will ever operate CW with it, I'd suggest that you first listen to the 3000's CW signal on a separate receiver (do NOT trust what you hear in the sidetone) and make sure the keying is what it should be.  That's best seen on a scope or capture of the monitor receiver audio so that you can examine spacing and duration of code elements with an audio file editor. 

On the other hand, an early problem I experienced with the K3 resulted in them sending me a replacement card which fixed the problem at very little cost to me.  Same with my current Tentec transceiver. 


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on April 29, 2013, 03:45:02 AM
The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP

Give the guy a break.  So he didn't pick your favorite rig and validate your decision.  No need to give him a hard time about that.  Hams like you have such fragile egos that if someone does not pick YOUR favorite rig, you then trash everyone else's decision.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W8JX on April 29, 2013, 12:38:35 PM
The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP

Give the guy a break.  So he didn't pick your favorite rig and validate your decision.  No need to give him a hard time about that.  Hams like you have such fragile egos that if someone does not pick YOUR favorite rig, you then trash everyone else's decision.

Yes, ergonomics (look and fell) are important to many as well. K3 does look pretty plain. I  personally have no had a chance to play with a 3000 yet so jury is still out with me.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on May 06, 2013, 07:12:45 AM
While I do not own a FT-3000 I had a FT-2000 before I purchased my K3. The 2000 was a wonderful SSB rig. I was a terrible CW rig. I have heard hat the CW capabilities of the 3000 is only marginally better.

The K3 is an expensive rig and quite frankly the external package looks like it should cost less than $500.  However that's the beauty of it, it just plain works. And works better than any other rig on the market.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: K8AG on May 12, 2013, 08:06:21 AM
The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP
I have to agree here.  I have been running Elecraft since I bought my second hand K2 a couple of years ago.  They simply have the parts and support.  The K2 had a couple of significant issues (disclosed by the seller).  With the docs and the available parts it now has been repaired and upgraded.  This caused me to go K3 and now KX1.  The K3 was a kit, but no soldering was necessary.  Still nice to know the pieces are available.

Its a box, true.  But a really fun one.  Enjoy the Yaesu.

73, JP, K8AG


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KH6DC on May 12, 2013, 10:34:33 PM
K3 and K4 in the future.  Had my K3 for 1-1/2 years now and still loving it.  Sold my Icoms 756 Pro III and 7600 for the K3, P3 and KPA-500.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on May 13, 2013, 08:30:34 AM
K3 and K4 in the future.  Had my K3 for 1-1/2 years now and still loving it.  Sold my Icoms 756 Pro III and 7600 for the K3, P3 and KPA-500.

Any new rumors on when and what the K4 will be?


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE2TR on May 15, 2013, 07:14:18 PM
Hi Mike, between the K3 and the Yaesu it boils down to what radio your gonna like to operate, no matter how good the lab tests on the K3 IMO its a drag to et around there funky front panel controls. I went from a FT1KMP to the 590 which was a good radio but missed allot of what the MP did like having true RF clipping which drove the amp better and its audio on TX was alway much better. Yes the 590 had a slighly better RX but I got dragged into the lab test numbers on that rig but there is more than great number's that makes up a good all around rig. The numbers on the FT3K are very good, some better and some a little lower but I reall dont think your gonna see this even on a very busy band. As far as the TX noise on transmit, I know what the numbers in the arrl lab were but the ham down the street 1/4 mile away has told me that he only nows I am on the band when he gets closer than 5Khz away. Both the MP and the 590 he could hear me out 10-15khz away so go figure, maybe Yaesu changed some things in the firmware but this baby is cone of the cleanest TX sections I have had at my qth. I find the RX and TX both to have some of the best audio of many of the rigs I have tryed or used at other ham's shacks, even the FTDX5K or IC7800 that I have used, the RX audio is that good. The roofing filter's work and so does the DSP, even the digital NR work faster than the one on the 590 that was slow compared to to Icoms NR dsp. On CW the tone is excellent, I am not a cw buff but this radio sounds soo good that I find myself getting back into cw again, my code speed sucks but its getting better and no ringging even when the dsp is set to 50Hz, I can only say that with the 300Hz filter installed it would be the cats nuts. The display is great and the band scope works as well, yea its not the size of Icom's but work well fore plus the FFT audio scope is aa nice bonus. All the controls are well laid out and all work well, the only con is that the notch takes a while nto tune, I wish they had a faster manual notch position but I can tell ya its deep, 70+db will notch amost anything. The AGC system is also one of the best I have seen, you can adjust it so that static crashes dont overide the front end. Having a seperte RX out that's after the bandpass filter,ATT,Pre amps is a cool way to go, maybe they will come out with a sub RX which will slave with the 3K, who know's and 9Mhz IF out is a real plus. Yaesu hit a homerun IMO with this rig, its present price point is right on the money, I trust you will enjoy the new rig.
Jim


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on May 16, 2013, 07:56:55 AM
I would be suspect of any rig that had the narrowest roofing filter at 3kHz. And if it is anything like its older brother the FT-2000, the 3kHz is more like 7kHz wide at -6db.

People claim this is a lab test and has no real world impact either is not being honest with themselves or never operates in even remotely crowded bands.

The narrow spaced dynamic range for the FTDX is 82db while on the K3 it is 101db. These are indeed lab numbers in a controlled environment, but during the CQWW 160m CW contest, I know which reciever I want to try and get that ATNO with. 

As far as ergonomics,the K3 is the clear looser. Even as much of a zealot for Elecraft products as I am, it's obvious. However there are great ways to computer control most anything you would want to do. Not great with computers? It's ok. The reflector group is truly amazing. As is the technical support team at Elecraft.

Honestly if you can afford a K3, make sure you carefully pick the options that are meaningful to you. You can spend a lot of money on things you will never use.

Look my email address up on QRZ, if you have any questions on the K3.  I would be glad to help.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: ZENKI on May 20, 2013, 05:00:09 AM
Without a high performance transmitter your receiver performance hardly matters. The IMD performance of most ham rigs are so bad you can never possibly realize the full receiver potential. Everybody only talks about receiver numbers.

The most important issue today is the quality of transmitters. Its safe to say that all current ham transceivers have transmitters that are dismal in performance. Unless someone does something about this sad state of affairs
you only kidding yourself about the importance of receiver numbers.

Look at the TS990S 8000 dollar radio and the radio has like -24db 3rd order IMD on the higher bands. Thats poor, and with a radio operating nextdoor to your frequency you will never realize the excellent dynamic range of radios like the K3 and others. The K3 could have been the best all round radio if its transmitter IMD performance was better.   Talking about transmitter performance seems not to be a cool subject and matter and it seems bragging about
receiver numbers is a better PR and marketing exercise for manufacturers. Hams really need to wake up to this point and should asking the manufacturers why their transmitters are so filthy.  $8000 dollar radio with poor IMD  transmitters and uncalibrated S-meters what a joke.

So blah blah blah about this rig versus that rig. It does not matter while most hams spew out garbage from the  expensive receivers/cheap transmitter radios. The smart guys are the ones who are buying the Icom 718 and such radios, because they missing nothing in the real world of dirty signals. NASA's million dollar optical telescopes and radio astronomy systems cant look or hear through the garbage such light and other RF pollution. Having a million dollar super receiver will not help the average ham because of the pollution  from hams transmitters. Maybe some day hams will wake up and get it, at the moment  they not thinking all that well ranting and raving about receiver numbers and this radio versus that radio. Its an exercise in futility because of the laws of physics.

I would be suspect of any rig that had the narrowest roofing filter at 3kHz. And if it is anything like its older brother the FT-2000, the 3kHz is more like 7kHz wide at -6db.

People claim this is a lab test and has no real world impact either is not being honest with themselves or never operates in even remotely crowded bands.

The narrow spaced dynamic range for the FTDX is 82db while on the K3 it is 101db. These are indeed lab numbers in a controlled environment, but during the CQWW 160m CW contest, I know which reciever I want to try and get that ATNO with. 

As far as ergonomics,the K3 is the clear looser. Even as much of a zealot for Elecraft products as I am, it's obvious. However there are great ways to computer control most anything you would want to do. Not great with computers? It's ok. The reflector group is truly amazing. As is the technical support team at Elecraft.

Honestly if you can afford a K3, make sure you carefully pick the options that are meaningful to you. You can spend a lot of money on things you will never use.

Look my email address up on QRZ, if you have any questions on the K3.  I would be glad to help.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on May 20, 2013, 05:33:28 AM
Without a high performance transmitter your receiver performance hardly matters. The IMD performance of most ham rigs are so bad you can never possibly realize the full receiver potential. Everybody only talks about receiver numbers.

The most important issue today is the quality of transmitters. Its safe to say that all current ham transceivers have transmitters that are dismal in performance. Unless someone does something about this sad state of affairs
you only kidding yourself about the importance of receiver numbers.

Look at the TS990S 8000 dollar radio and the radio has like -24db 3rd order IMD on the higher bands. Thats poor, and with a radio operating nextdoor to your frequency you will never realize the excellent dynamic range of radios like the K3 and others. The K3 could have been the best all round radio if its transmitter IMD performance was better.   Talking about transmitter performance seems not to be a cool subject and matter and it seems bragging about
receiver numbers is a better PR and marketing exercise for manufacturers. Hams really need to wake up to this point and should asking the manufacturers why their transmitters are so filthy.  $8000 dollar radio with poor IMD  transmitters and uncalibrated S-meters what a joke.

So blah blah blah about this rig versus that rig. It does not matter while most hams spew out garbage from the  expensive receivers/cheap transmitter radios. The smart guys are the ones who are buying the Icom 718 and such radios, because they missing nothing in the real world of dirty signals. NASA's million dollar optical telescopes and radio astronomy systems cant look or hear through the garbage such light and other RF pollution. Having a million dollar super receiver will not help the average ham because of the pollution  from hams transmitters. Maybe some day hams will wake up and get it, at the moment  they not thinking all that well ranting and raving about receiver numbers and this radio versus that radio. Its an exercise in futility because of the laws of physics.

I would be suspect of any rig that had the narrowest roofing filter at 3kHz. And if it is anything like its older brother the FT-2000, the 3kHz is more like 7kHz wide at -6db.

People claim this is a lab test and has no real world impact either is not being honest with themselves or never operates in even remotely crowded bands.

The narrow spaced dynamic range for the FTDX is 82db while on the K3 it is 101db. These are indeed lab numbers in a controlled environment, but during the CQWW 160m CW contest, I know which reciever I want to try and get that ATNO with. 

As far as ergonomics,the K3 is the clear looser. Even as much of a zealot for Elecraft products as I am, it's obvious. However there are great ways to computer control most anything you would want to do. Not great with computers? It's ok. The reflector group is truly amazing. As is the technical support team at Elecraft.

Honestly if you can afford a K3, make sure you carefully pick the options that are meaningful to you. You can spend a lot of money on things you will never use.

Look my email address up on QRZ, if you have any questions on the K3.  I would be glad to help.



So essentially your thoughts are, all radio transmitters suck, so by a radio with a crapy receiver? 


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on May 20, 2013, 09:48:35 AM
I've got an idea,how about a good seperate receiver and a nice seperate homebrew xtmr.?Maybe someone could design a special switch so you could use both on the same antenna,I heard a few hams use to operate with this type of set up a few years back.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: K9RJ on May 20, 2013, 08:29:31 PM
"Yes, ergonomics (look and fell) are important to many as well. K3 does look pretty plain. I  personally have no had a chance to play with a 3000 yet so jury is still out with me."

I added the 73 CNC knobs. Now my K3 looks cool and I can spin up and down the bands in no time! Performance is outstanding with the P3.
Harris. K9RJ


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on May 21, 2013, 05:52:10 PM
"Yes, ergonomics (look and fell) are important to many as well. K3 does look pretty plain. I  personally have no had a chance to play with a 3000 yet so jury is still out with me."

I added the 73 CNC knobs. Now my K3 looks cool and I can spin up and down the bands in no time! Performance is outstanding with the P3.
Harris. K9RJ

I really want to get a set of those. They look sweet.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KH6AQ on May 22, 2013, 02:05:13 PM
How to test a receiver: Participate in the ARRL 160 meter contest.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on May 23, 2013, 06:43:21 PM
The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP

Give the guy a break.  So he didn't pick your favorite rig and validate your decision.  No need to give him a hard time about that.  Hams like you have such fragile egos that if someone does not pick YOUR favorite rig, you then trash everyone else's decision.

So is it your contention that Yaesu's service and support is as good as Elecraft's?  I don't think you'll find many people here who are willing to accept this, especially people who have experienced both companies' support systems for themselves.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AA9G on May 24, 2013, 07:24:44 PM
I shopped the K3, DX3k, the Flex 3k and 5k. 5k is disco but I still considered buying one used. K3 gets my money/vote. Some reasons:
1) It's American.
2) It's a VERY good radio...go look at the Sherwood evals.
3) Some people ding it for its small size. This I do not get. I live on the Gulf Coast, portability means a lot here.  ;D
4) Pan Adapter. Nuff said.
5) I'm going to assemble mine. This is a priceless experience.
6) 2 meter upgrade.
7) Great service/support reputation


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on May 26, 2013, 09:39:41 PM
How to test a receiver: Participate in the ARRL 160 meter contest.

Yep. That's why I sold my FT-2000D. The thing even with the AC0C filter was less than remarkable.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8OPI on May 30, 2013, 09:33:48 PM
They're both great, but with the K-3 you can start cheap (relatively) and add as you go.  I had a minor problem with my K3 when it first arrived, spoke to the engineer on the phone about it (tell me how often you've been able to do that), and shipped it to them, and they not only fixed it but went through the entire rig testing and tuning it up.  Impressive service, especially considering how cranky hams are!  IMHO, get the base K3 with maybe only 1 additional filter for cw or digital, (but do get the 2.8khz for SSB).  P3, second receiver, additional filters, amplifiers - all of that can wait; and you still get incredible performance from this simple rig.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KH6DC on May 30, 2013, 10:04:05 PM
Nothing heard yet.  All I see are rumors on the Elecraft reflector.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AA9G on June 02, 2013, 04:49:50 PM
Nothing heard yet.  All I see are rumors on the Elecraft reflector.

If this is in regard to a 'K4' design, Wayne killed that idea in March.
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html (http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html)


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: ZENKI on June 03, 2013, 02:34:27 AM
They might try and deny it but its a reality thats going to happen. The K3 is already a SDR so they  have the skill set to build a direct sampling/DUC transceiver.

Closing off the possibility when in the long run this is the way forward into future seems silly. Who knows what next year is going to deliver. It may well be possible next year to build incredible low
phase noise synthesizers  and SDR receivers that kill the performance of the K3.  Look at the funcube dongle, a 200 dollar SDR receiver.  Saying that  its going to be  impossible to
build a direct sampling transceiver that  cant outperform a K3 is arrogance at its best and I am sure it will be words that the folks at Elecraft will be forced to eat.

Besides who cares if its Elecraft? If you noticed how the direct sampling market has developed, you noticed that its mostly non ham companies doing the innovation. The current ham companies are tired and seem to lack innovation.
They also cant  seem to see the potential that this technology  can bring to the ham radio service. Its then no surprise to see the traditional ham radio companies and this includes Elecraft being so closed minded about what is after all in all our futures. The dynamic range limit  of  SDR designs  will be broken its only a matter of when. If you look how SDR receivers are performing at the moment why would anyone want  such old hat technology?  Besides there is a silly game being  played about receiver numbers, numbers that we dont need and cant possibly realize. Hams are being played for suckers when it comes to the receiver numbers game.  I prefer a clean transmitter, good ergonomics and a good sounding  receiver with low inband IMD than a radio with high numbers that cant be used for anything but bragging rights.

What we need more of is SDR technology to deliver things like better noise blankers, beam steering/forming and  direction finding. These adaptive DSP  methods will open new worlds for us in antenna technology, propagation and antenna designs. We all need DUC technology with things like pre-distortion to clean up transmitters so we can use the receivers we have now with incredible dynamic range numbers, numbers we cant use because other hams transmitters are so dirty.

Besides the only way Elecraft can compete with a radio like the TS990S is  too produce a direct competitor using SDR/DUC technology. They cant beat the might of JVC Kenwood in producing  a radio like the TS990S which surely
is affecting their sales.If Elecraft produced a radio like the TS990S  it would cost double the cost of what the Kenwood sold for today. A direct sampling/DUC K4 could do all  of what the TS990S will do and   much more for far less money.

If Elecraft did not want to produce a direct sampling K4, they would silly if they did not build an improved K3 thats an all in one box. The K3/P3 with a 200 watt clean MOSFET amp with a big front panel would be a top selling radio.
This would fix up the K3's lack of appeal  for many other operators. Most operators that use my pair of K3's always say "nice but too small" They all want a big radio with big knob, a real hams radio.. Most of them have ordered the TS990S which is no surprise because it offers what most hams want. The minor advantage of receiver numbers in favor of the K3 is really inconsequential in the real world. So yes a all in one K3/P3 with a big box might be Elecrafts next  release rather than a direct sampling K4. But who cares, some other ham manufacturer will probably deliver a direct sampling /duc radio fairly shortly. If I had to take a bet I would say that manufacturer would be  Icom.  A direct sampling transceiver from Icom will deliver enough performance  margin over its current product range and deliver real world performance that is equivalent with the K3.

Its disappointing that  elecraft has shut the door on such a radio. Maybe Elecraft should negotiate and buy the ADAT transceiver rights and manufacture the ADAT radio with a 100 watt or 200 watt PA. I am sure that would be popular as
well. ADAT seems to be a  company thats not interested in broadening its marketing program. This is a shame because it would quickly convince a greater part of the amateur community to the advantages of direct sampling technology. Radio like the Flex6000 are overly expensive and dont meet the  needs of hams who want a box with knobs. If Flexradio produced a  Flex6000 in a box with a front panel it would be the most popular ham company on the planet. Unfortunately just like Elecraft is a  company that has a QRP/portable/small radio image and Flexradio a computer radio image they will always remain niche market players rather than main stream ham radio manufacturers. They will always remain so rightly or wrongly because they fail to understand  that the majority of ham radio operators are emotionally wedded to a big box sitting on their desks with knobs. Just as computer driven test instruments have failed to  attract engineers  so too  will ham radio companies fail if they persist trying to force hams down the path of forcing one to use a PC  to enable  you to use a ham transceiver. The PC should always be a useful accessory not the main interface to the box. I dont think I will be eating my words anytime soon, its just the ham radio market is and will always be.




Nothing heard yet.  All I see are rumors on the Elecraft reflector.

If this is in regard to a 'K4' design, Wayne killed that idea in March.
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html (http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html)


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: NO2A on June 03, 2013, 12:04:06 PM
How to test a receiver: Participate in the ARRL 160 meter contest.
Especially if you`ll be operating anywhere near a strong local am broadcast tower.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on June 08, 2013, 05:55:52 AM
Nothing heard yet.  All I see are rumors on the Elecraft reflector.

If this is in regard to a 'K4' design, Wayne killed that idea in March.
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html (http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html)

Wayne's statement about DDC/DUC architecture has much more to do with Wayne's ignorance of DDC/DUC architecture than reality.   Let's take a look at the Sherwood test results.  The K3 only exceeds the Perseus (a DDC receiver) in 2 kHz blocking when a 200 Hz filter is used in the K3.  For filters wider than 200 Hz, the K3 is INFERIOR.  Also look at the phase noise, which I consider much more important than the 2 kHz blocking.  The phase noise of the Perseus in far SUPERIOR to the K3.

I think some people will be surprised when the Flex 6000 is tested by Sherwood.  If Flex has designed a very low phase noise oscillator in the 6000, then the numbers with be far superior to the K3.  Years ago Flex stated that their QSD/Tayloe design was superior to the DDC architecture.  This was shown not to be true by the Perseus Sherwood test.  The Perseus was superior to all Flex products at the time.  Flex was smart to abandon their ignorant marketing driven bad mouthing of the DDC/DUC architecture and instead embrace it for their 6000 series.  Flex had to hire engineers because they did not have the in house expertise to do a DDC/DUC design themselves.  It obviously is the same issue with Elecraft.  They are stuck in past-think and make idiotic marketing driven comments like Wayne made about the inferiority of DDC/DUC designs.  Like Flex did in the past, Elecraft now has EGG ON THEIR FACES.

-robert


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on June 16, 2013, 05:42:34 PM
Nothing heard yet.  All I see are rumors on the Elecraft reflector.

If this is in regard to a 'K4' design, Wayne killed that idea in March.
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html (http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html)

Wayne's statement about DDC/DUC architecture has much more to do with Wayne's ignorance of DDC/DUC architecture than reality.   Let's take a look at the Sherwood test results.  The K3 only exceeds the Perseus (a DDC receiver) in 2 kHz blocking when a 200 Hz filter is used in the K3.  For filters wider than 200 Hz, the K3 is INFERIOR.  Also look at the phase noise, which I consider much more important than the 2 kHz blocking.  The phase noise of the Perseus in far SUPERIOR to the K3.

I think some people will be surprised when the Flex 6000 is tested by Sherwood.  If Flex has designed a very low phase noise oscillator in the 6000, then the numbers with be far superior to the K3.  Years ago Flex stated that their QSD/Tayloe design was superior to the DDC architecture.  This was shown not to be true by the Perseus Sherwood test.  The Perseus was superior to all Flex products at the time.  Flex was smart to abandon their ignorant marketing driven bad mouthing of the DDC/DUC architecture and instead embrace it for their 6000 series.  Flex had to hire engineers because they did not have the in house expertise to do a DDC/DUC design themselves.  It obviously is the same issue with Elecraft.  They are stuck in past-think and make idiotic marketing driven comments like Wayne made about the inferiority of DDC/DUC designs.  Like Flex did in the past, Elecraft now has EGG ON THEIR FACES.

-robert

I'd hope the Perseus does better than the K3, it costs almost 8x what the K3 does.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on June 18, 2013, 01:25:46 AM
Do some of you guys work in the PR departments of Japanese radio makers?   :o


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on June 18, 2013, 03:31:53 AM
Nothing heard yet.  All I see are rumors on the Elecraft reflector.

If this is in regard to a 'K4' design, Wayne killed that idea in March.
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html (http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Wait-For-The-K4-Direct-RF-Sampled-SDR-td7571211.html)

Wayne's statement about DDC/DUC architecture has much more to do with Wayne's ignorance of DDC/DUC architecture than reality.   Let's take a look at the Sherwood test results.  The K3 only exceeds the Perseus (a DDC receiver) in 2 kHz blocking when a 200 Hz filter is used in the K3.  For filters wider than 200 Hz, the K3 is INFERIOR.  Also look at the phase noise, which I consider much more important than the 2 kHz blocking.  The phase noise of the Perseus in far SUPERIOR to the K3.

I think some people will be surprised when the Flex 6000 is tested by Sherwood.  If Flex has designed a very low phase noise oscillator in the 6000, then the numbers with be far superior to the K3.  Years ago Flex stated that their QSD/Tayloe design was superior to the DDC architecture.  This was shown not to be true by the Perseus Sherwood test.  The Perseus was superior to all Flex products at the time.  Flex was smart to abandon their ignorant marketing driven bad mouthing of the DDC/DUC architecture and instead embrace it for their 6000 series.  Flex had to hire engineers because they did not have the in house expertise to do a DDC/DUC design themselves.  It obviously is the same issue with Elecraft.  They are stuck in past-think and make idiotic marketing driven comments like Wayne made about the inferiority of DDC/DUC designs.  Like Flex did in the past, Elecraft now has EGG ON THEIR FACES.

-robert

I'd hope the Perseus does better than the K3, it costs almost 8x what the K3 does.

Better put on your reading glasses, the Perseus costs much less than a K3.  The Perseus sells for $999.99.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on June 18, 2013, 03:33:38 AM
Do some of you guys work in the PR departments of Japanese radio makers?   :o

Do you work in the PR department of Elecraft?


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on June 18, 2013, 10:49:16 AM
Anytime you mention the K3 a bunch of owners descend to tell you why you should own one and why you will be sorry if you buy anything else.  Based on what the OP said he wanted in a radio he made the right choice. The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs with multiple button presses needed to access many of the regular features.  The K3 is also extremely expensive when you add up the price of all the little options that will make it equivalent to the Japan radios in that same league.  The K3 also has unremarkable TX audio and is not even close to a Kenwood or Icom. 

What the K3 does do really well is its RX section and that's great if that's priority one on your list if not look elsewhere for a radio.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on June 18, 2013, 10:54:09 AM
Anytime you mention the K3 a bunch of owners descend to tell you why you should own one and why you will be sorry if you buy anything else.  Based on what the OP said he wanted in a radio he made the right choice. The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs with multiple button presses needed to access many of the regular features.  The K3 is also extremely expensive when you add up the price of all the little options that will make it equivalent to the Japan radios in that same league.  The K3 also has unremarkable TX audio and is not even close to a Kenwood or Icom. 

What the K3 does do really well is its RX section and that's great if that's priority one on your list if not look elsewhere for a radio.


Elecraft accessories are also very expensive.  By the time you add all the other things you need, the K3 or KX3 skyrockets in price.  Not to mention that they are very ugly radios that look like they were assembled in some Ham's basement.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on June 20, 2013, 05:34:49 AM
Anytime you mention the K3 a bunch of owners descend to tell you why you should own one and why you will be sorry if you buy anything else.  Based on what the OP said he wanted in a radio he made the right choice. The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs with multiple button presses needed to access many of the regular features.  The K3 is also extremely expensive when you add up the price of all the little options that will make it equivalent to the Japan radios in that same league.  The K3 also has unremarkable TX audio and is not even close to a Kenwood or Icom. 

What the K3 does do really well is its RX section and that's great if that's priority one on your list if not look elsewhere for a radio.


The K3's audio isn't bad at all. I think it gets a bad wrap because DXpedition ops are not going to spend the time to tweak it. The EQ does a great job and I get good audio reports even with the stock hand mic.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AA9G on June 20, 2013, 06:46:46 PM


What the K3 does do really well is its RX section and that's great if that's priority one on your list if not look elsewhere for a radio.


The point exactly. You cannot work what you cannot hear. That's the whole reason I chose to buy one.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: PD2R on June 21, 2013, 01:20:12 AM
I have a K3 but I couldn't care less what transceiver you use, as long as you are happy with it.

What I can't understand is why so much radio amateurs keep supporting those incredible arrogant Japanese manufacturers like Icom and Yaesu? You buy a transceiver that will set you back several thousand dollars but one you have a problem then it's your problem.
The new Icom IC 9100 has very bad power spikes. Do you know what Icom had to say about that? "Too bad, you should get an Icom amplifier". Really!?! Icom doesn't even have an amp for the 23 cm band!
And what about taking orders for that rig when it still took them nearly two(!) years to get the thing finished.

There much more examples of this arrogant attitude from Yaesu and Icom. How can anyone ignore this attitude give them their hard earned money?

I'm not saying that Elecraft or Ten Tec are perfect but they have a far better track records for customer support.
Having said that, I couldn't care less were a radio is manufactured and usually I'm not that impressed with American made products so it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact they are American manufacturers. I do however care about the manufacturers attitude towards customers.
To me, that is a huge factor to consider when spending you hard earned money on a new transceiver.


 


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on June 21, 2013, 06:26:15 PM


What the K3 does do really well is its RX section and that's great if that's priority one on your list if not look elsewhere for a radio.


The point exactly. You cannot work what you cannot hear. That's the whole reason I chose to buy one.

What you are talking about with the receiver differences is so small that most hams will only find that difference paying off maybe once every couple of years.  On the other hand the ergonomics and the TX audio will be a problem every time you use the radio! Any slight gain the K3 may have in Rx can easily be debated but even if I give it the green flag it still cost so much more when you get so much less on everything else that your much better off spending the saved cash in a better antenna which will certainly make a much more profound difference in your Rx ability. 

On a Dxpedition that's getting a few free K3's to use I am sure its the perfect radio, it's compact it has a good Rx section and they don't give a crap about ergonomics when they are just planting the radio on one Freq for hours on end but for the home Dx enthusiast a broader set of considerations comes into play.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on June 21, 2013, 07:48:12 PM
I have a K3 but I couldn't care less what transceiver you use, as long as you are happy with it.

What I can't understand is why so much radio amateurs keep supporting those incredible arrogant Japanese manufacturers like Icom and Yaesu?
 

If it wasn't for Icom Yaesu and Kenwood and those "arrogant Japanese" where would Ham Radio be Today?    For the last 30 years who has been supplying us with 95% of the HF radios even when most large companies considered ham radio to be a dead hobby with no money making potential?  An who has been leading the charge in advancing the technology that we find in modern radios?

I have had no problems with Icom and service but of course not everyone has a positive experience.  My 7600 arrived in a dented box, the whole radio had slid forward out of the foam binding that held it centered and the tuning knob crashed through the card board of the inner box.  I checked out the Radio inside and out and everything was fine but I called Icom and let them know what had happened and emailed pictures.  They offered to exchange it if I wanted or they would double my warranty period and send me a new box.  I examined the radio again for hours and decided to take a new box and double warranty period.  I find that kind of service to be very good.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: PD2R on June 21, 2013, 11:38:13 PM
Having been the main supplier for the last 30 years is probably the what makes them so arrogant today.
Do you know that Yaesu don't give warranty on their radio's? The warranty you get comes from the dealer you buy it from.
Personally, if my radio is broken I couldn't care less who picks up the bill, as long as I don't have to do it. But what does this tell about the manufacturer and them backing up their products?

Yes, I agree that the Jappanese manufacturers have been leading the charge in advancing the technology we find in our modern transceivers today, at least for the most part. However, that does not make it OK as to how they treat their customers today.
Once they sold you the goods, your on your own. Unless you have a good dealer of course like you seem to have.

I bought my K3 just months before Icom announced the IC-7600. For a long time I regretted my decision to go with the K3. Then I had the chance to try an IC-7600 myself for a couple of days. As impressed that I was with the IC-7700, the IC-7600 didn't do it for me. Maybe I didn't spend enough time playing with the settings or maybe the one I got was bad, I don't know. I have been fortunate to use several different top notch transceivers over the last couple of years and after using them I was always glad to return to my K3. The only thing I hate about it is the crapy looks of the thing and the feel of the knobs. Ergonomics are personal. You say Elecraft ergonomics suck, I personally like them a lot and find them very intuitive. Now try to change the power of your FTdx-3000 on sideband.
I do however see why a lot of people can't get used to the Elecrafts ergonomics. I love the ergonomics of some of the larger Yaesu products. The FTdx-5000 on that aspect really shines.
Coming from that the K3 can drive you crazy.

Fortunately their still are a couple of different manufacturers of amateur radio equipment so each and every one of us can choose whatever rig THEY find best.       

Have fun!


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on June 22, 2013, 11:42:40 AM
Do some of you guys work in the PR departments of Japanese radio makers?   :o

Do you work in the PR department of Elecraft?

While I have some criticisms for Icom and Yaesu, I have not made a career of making bizarre and unsupportable allegations of failure against them on this forum, like SOME PEOPLE have chosen to do regarding Elecraft.  I am merely a very satisfied customer who appreciates good service and good products.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on June 25, 2013, 05:40:09 PM
Do some of you guys work in the PR departments of Japanese radio makers?   :o

Do you work in the PR department of Elecraft?

Quote
While I have some criticisms for Icom and Yaesu, I have not made a career of making bizarre and unsupportable allegations of failure against them on this forum, like SOME PEOPLE have chosen to do regarding Elecraft. 

Like what?

Quote

 I am merely a very satisfied customer who appreciates good service and good products.


So are we but we don't go around saying an 857d is better than a K3.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 02, 2013, 09:41:57 PM
Do some of you guys work in the PR departments of Japanese radio makers?   :o

Do you work in the PR department of Elecraft?

Quote
While I have some criticisms for Icom and Yaesu, I have not made a career of making bizarre and unsupportable allegations of failure against them on this forum, like SOME PEOPLE have chosen to do regarding Elecraft. 

Like what?

Quote

 I am merely a very satisfied customer who appreciates good service and good products.


So are we but we don't go around saying an 857d is better than a K3.

Zenki has outright lied about the IMD figures of the Elecraft radios, was called out about it, and never corrected his error.  I suspect his job is reputation management and this is why he refuses to identify himself.

Anyway the difference between a person claiming that an 857d is better than a K3, and a person claiming that a K3 is better than a TS-990s  is that the Elecraft user is correct and the Yaesu user is not.  The figures are right there for the whole world to see.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on July 03, 2013, 02:26:48 AM
Why the debate between these two rigs? It only proves hams no longer need any operating/listening skills required with pre K3/ftdx3000 rigs in the past 50 yrs. or so to make a contact or attain such lofty goals as DXCC HR or placing high up in a major contest.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 03, 2013, 11:13:35 AM
Why the debate between these two rigs? It only proves hams no longer need any operating/listening skills required with pre K3/ftdx3000 rigs in the past 50 yrs. or so to make a contact or attain such lofty goals as DXCC HR or placing high up in a major contest.

As technology moves forward so do capabilities.  I'm sure the spark gap guys were just like you, complaining about those darn kids with their vacuum tubes.  Now I'll get off your lawn.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on July 03, 2013, 01:18:55 PM
Answered as expected ;)


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 03, 2013, 01:39:31 PM
Answered as expected ;)

So I guess your point is that you had no point.  Technology moves forward pops, your old tube powered boat anchors are now more or less average to low end, performance wise.  But you can still feel a bit ashamed, like you're cheating, compared to the spark gap and crystal set guys who clearly were much better operators than anybody who ever used tube rigs.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 03, 2013, 04:00:17 PM


So are we but we don't go around saying an 857d is better than a K3.
Anyway the difference between a person claiming that an 857d is better than a K3, and a person claiming that a K3 is better than a TS-990s  is that the Elecraft user is correct and the Yaesu user is not.  The figures are right there for the whole world to see.

LOL almost coughed up my lunch reading that.  So let me get this straight if I said to you that behind Door Number one is TS-990S and Behind Door Number 2 is a K3 you would pick door number 2?  ::)  If that’s the case can you PM me, I have some land in Florida you might want to buy. ;D

I have used a K3 and a K3 is a one trick Pony, it has a super narrow front end that makes it have an ever so slight advantage in CW reception when dealing with heavy QRM situations.   IMO Elecraft will always have that advantage because no other company is going to Narrow down their front end that much; because the price for that narrowing is really poor sounding SSB reception.  Elecraft does it because it’s the only trick that they can use to convince people to buy their products.

The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs, between it’s 3 layers of multi button pressing that requires a Nifty cheat sheet next to you 24/7 and it’s 1990’s looking LCD display that’s trying to display 50 things in the space of 25 plus it’s lack luster SSB Tx audio and really harsh and hard to understand SSB Rx audio my head is exploding at the thought that you could even compare the two radios. ???   Oh let me guess, those Sherwood numbers say the Elecraft is the best!  The guy has picked out one column of numbers and sorted the list based on that because he feels that’s the most important criteria to judge a Radio by ::)!  Pleez give me a freaking break!

 I could ask 100 blind folded Hams to choose between his number one ranked radio and his 50th and I would doubt that 10% of them could hear a difference even with CW in heavy QRM!  Much less tell the the difference between any of the top 20.  On the other hand I bet all 100 would tell you to get the dam headphones off of them when you start playing some SSB audio from the K3.
 
For those thinking of buying a K3 I highly suggest you watch the whole of this video from a guy who loves his K3 and is just demonstrating how to use it.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv_on_k447E

 If you can deal with all those key presses to do the most basic of things plus deal with a counter intuitive button layout and an old style LCD that shows important info for just a few seconds and then reverts back to something else and Lastly deal with menus that look like something from a HT and you ONLY do CW then the K3 is definitely your Radio.

I will spare you my thoughts on the look and feel of this luxury product and it's use of the worlds finest plastics, not to mention the amazingly low price you can get the whole system for or maybe I will talk about the K3 price in another post.

I hate bashing anybodys radio but when I read crap BS like a K3 is better than a 990S I cant help but say something.

BTW I also suggest you look up some videos on the K3 doing Phone versus another radio.  Your ear drums feel like they are going to explode when using the K3 for any length of time.   Listening fatigue with the K3 is a 10 out of 10 and the multi button presses become so daunting that you never try to do certain things because each and every time it’s a pain in the butt to figure them out without getting out a booklet.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 03, 2013, 09:56:11 PM


So are we but we don't go around saying an 857d is better than a K3.
Anyway the difference between a person claiming that an 857d is better than a K3, and a person claiming that a K3 is better than a TS-990s  is that the Elecraft user is correct and the Yaesu user is not.  The figures are right there for the whole world to see.

LOL almost coughed up my lunch reading that.  So let me get this straight if I said to you that behind Door Number one is TS-990S and Behind Door Number 2 is a K3 you would pick door number 2?  ::)  If that’s the case can you PM me, I have some land in Florida you might want to buy. ;D

I have used a K3 and a K3 is a one trick Pony, it has a super narrow front end that makes it have an ever so slight advantage in CW reception when dealing with heavy QRM situations.   IMO Elecraft will always have that advantage because no other company is going to Narrow down their front end that much; because the price for that narrowing is really poor sounding SSB reception.  Elecraft does it because it’s the only trick that they can use to convince people to buy their products.

The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs, between it’s 3 layers of multi button pressing that requires a Nifty cheat sheet next to you 24/7 and it’s 1990’s looking LCD display that’s trying to display 50 things in the space of 25 plus it’s lack luster SSB Tx audio and really harsh and hard to understand SSB Rx audio my head is exploding at the thought that you could even compare the two radios. ???   Oh let me guess, those Sherwood numbers say the Elecraft is the best!  The guy has picked out one column of numbers and sorted the list based on that because he feels that’s the most important criteria to judge a Radio by ::)!  Pleez give me a freaking break!

 I could ask 100 blind folded Hams to choose between his number one ranked radio and his 50th and I would doubt that 10% of them could hear a difference even with CW in heavy QRM!  Much less tell the the difference between any of the top 20.  On the other hand I bet all 100 would tell you to get the dam headphones off of them when you start playing some SSB audio from the K3.
 
For those thinking of buying a K3 I highly suggest you watch the whole of this video from a guy who loves his K3 and is just demonstrating how to use it.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv_on_k447E

 If you can deal with all those key presses to do the most basic of things plus deal with a counter intuitive button layout and an old style LCD that shows important info for just a few seconds and then reverts back to something else and Lastly deal with menus that look like something from a HT and you ONLY do CW then the K3 is definitely your Radio.

I will spare you my thoughts on the look and feel of this luxury product and it's use of the worlds finest plastics, not to mention the amazingly low price you can get the whole system for or maybe I will talk about the K3 price in another post.

I hate bashing anybodys radio but when I read crap BS like a K3 is better than a 990S I cant help but say something.

BTW I also suggest you look up some videos on the K3 doing Phone versus another radio.  Your ear drums feel like they are going to explode when using the K3 for any length of time.   Listening fatigue with the K3 is a 10 out of 10 and the multi button presses become so daunting that you never try to do certain things because each and every time it’s a pain in the butt to figure them out without getting out a booklet.


Of course I would choose the K3.  Can you imagine what it might cost to repair a 990?  It'd cost half a K3 just to mail it in, and you'd probably have to wait about 3 months to get it fixed.

I sat around at the local HRO and played with the TS-990 for a while just last week.  Oh it's big and fancy, but I didn't really feel like I would get anything done with it that I couldn't with a K3, and the current draw is very high even without any signal.  There are lots of buttons, but I didn't feel like it helped to create a nice user interface.  More like the flight deck of the SR-71.  Also the cutesey kitchy skeuomorphic old timey VFO dial on the LCD screen was just awful.  Heck, I could run a K3 off a battery for a day or two, and the 990 would suck that battery dry in an hour or two WITHOUT IT EVEN TRANSMITTING.

I bet you couldn't understand somebody who'd rather have a Vanagon than a Hummer, too.

The SSB sounds great on my KX3 (even narrower than the K3!) as long as you hook the unit up to a nice proper external speaker.  On transmit I have had several unsolicited compliments.  Perhaps the users you have heard never bothered to read the manual and figure out how to adjust the SSB TX EQ.

The KX3 uses almost the same exact UI as the K3 and I don't have any problems with it.  All the buttons are clearly labeled, and the commonly used functions are readily accessible.

Elecraft radios are designed to be fixed by the user.  They even include their own basic test equipment and signal generators.

No, I've no desire to get into a gigantic Japanese radio that costs as much as a small car, will only be serviced by the manufacturer for a few years, and which sucks down more electricity than an average middle-class household.

In almost every test measurement the K3 (and the KX3) beat or even BLOW AWAY the 990.  I know it's tough to hear, especially if you're 8 grand deep into Kenwood (I'd hope they give you a few dizen shares of stock with your radio purchase!) but it's the truth.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on July 04, 2013, 12:05:26 PM


So are we but we don't go around saying an 857d is better than a K3.
Anyway the difference between a person claiming that an 857d is better than a K3, and a person claiming that a K3 is better than a TS-990s  is that the Elecraft user is correct and the Yaesu user is not.  The figures are right there for the whole world to see.

LOL almost coughed up my lunch reading that.  So let me get this straight if I said to you that behind Door Number one is TS-990S and Behind Door Number 2 is a K3 you would pick door number 2?  ::)  If that’s the case can you PM me, I have some land in Florida you might want to buy. ;D

I have used a K3 and a K3 is a one trick Pony, it has a super narrow front end that makes it have an ever so slight advantage in CW reception when dealing with heavy QRM situations.   IMO Elecraft will always have that advantage because no other company is going to Narrow down their front end that much; because the price for that narrowing is really poor sounding SSB reception.  Elecraft does it because it’s the only trick that they can use to convince people to buy their products.

The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs, between it’s 3 layers of multi button pressing that requires a Nifty cheat sheet next to you 24/7 and it’s 1990’s looking LCD display that’s trying to display 50 things in the space of 25 plus it’s lack luster SSB Tx audio and really harsh and hard to understand SSB Rx audio my head is exploding at the thought that you could even compare the two radios. ???   Oh let me guess, those Sherwood numbers say the Elecraft is the best!  The guy has picked out one column of numbers and sorted the list based on that because he feels that’s the most important criteria to judge a Radio by ::)!  Pleez give me a freaking break!

 I could ask 100 blind folded Hams to choose between his number one ranked radio and his 50th and I would doubt that 10% of them could hear a difference even with CW in heavy QRM!  Much less tell the the difference between any of the top 20.  On the other hand I bet all 100 would tell you to get the dam headphones off of them when you start playing some SSB audio from the K3.
 
For those thinking of buying a K3 I highly suggest you watch the whole of this video from a guy who loves his K3 and is just demonstrating how to use it.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv_on_k447E

 If you can deal with all those key presses to do the most basic of things plus deal with a counter intuitive button layout and an old style LCD that shows important info for just a few seconds and then reverts back to something else and Lastly deal with menus that look like something from a HT and you ONLY do CW then the K3 is definitely your Radio.

I will spare you my thoughts on the look and feel of this luxury product and it's use of the worlds finest plastics, not to mention the amazingly low price you can get the whole system for or maybe I will talk about the K3 price in another post.

I hate bashing anybodys radio but when I read crap BS like a K3 is better than a 990S I cant help but say something.

BTW I also suggest you look up some videos on the K3 doing Phone versus another radio.  Your ear drums feel like they are going to explode when using the K3 for any length of time.   Listening fatigue with the K3 is a 10 out of 10 and the multi button presses become so daunting that you never try to do certain things because each and every time it’s a pain in the butt to figure them out without getting out a booklet.


Of course I would choose the K3.  Can you imagine what it might cost to repair a 990?  It'd cost half a K3 just to mail it in, and you'd probably have to wait about 3 months to get it fixed.

I sat around at the local HRO and played with the TS-990 for a while just last week.  Oh it's big and fancy, but I didn't really feel like I would get anything done with it that I couldn't with a K3, and the current draw is very high even without any signal.  There are lots of buttons, but I didn't feel like it helped to create a nice user interface.  More like the flight deck of the SR-71.  Also the cutesey kitchy skeuomorphic old timey VFO dial on the LCD screen was just awful.  Heck, I could run a K3 off a battery for a day or two, and the 990 would suck that battery dry in an hour or two WITHOUT IT EVEN TRANSMITTING.

I bet you couldn't understand somebody who'd rather have a Vanagon than a Hummer, too.

The SSB sounds great on my KX3 (even narrower than the K3!) as long as you hook the unit up to a nice proper external speaker.  On transmit I have had several unsolicited compliments.  Perhaps the users you have heard never bothered to read the manual and figure out how to adjust the SSB TX EQ.

The KX3 uses almost the same exact UI as the K3 and I don't have any problems with it.  All the buttons are clearly labeled, and the commonly used functions are readily accessible.

Elecraft radios are designed to be fixed by the user.  They even include their own basic test equipment and signal generators.

No, I've no desire to get into a gigantic Japanese radio that costs as much as a small car, will only be serviced by the manufacturer for a few years, and which sucks down more electricity than an average middle-class household.

In almost every test measurement the K3 (and the KX3) beat or even BLOW AWAY the 990.  I know it's tough to hear, especially if you're 8 grand deep into Kenwood (I'd hope they give you a few dizen shares of stock with your radio purchase!) but it's the truth.

The K3 is an ergonomic nightmare.  The receive audio is tiring to listen to for any length of time.  The transmit audio is "contesty".  It looks like it was designed in some guy's garage back in the 1980's.  I would choose the TS-990s over 10 K3's.  The Kenwood looks and plays like a real radio, not some tiring old looking and frustrating cracker box(K3).


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 04, 2013, 04:55:30 PM


So are we but we don't go around saying an 857d is better than a K3.
Anyway the difference between a person claiming that an 857d is better than a K3, and a person claiming that a K3 is better than a TS-990s  is that the Elecraft user is correct and the Yaesu user is not.  The figures are right there for the whole world to see.

LOL almost coughed up my lunch reading that.  So let me get this straight if I said to you that behind Door Number one is TS-990S and Behind Door Number 2 is a K3 you would pick door number 2?  ::)  If that’s the case can you PM me, I have some land in Florida you might want to buy. ;D

I have used a K3 and a K3 is a one trick Pony, it has a super narrow front end that makes it have an ever so slight advantage in CW reception when dealing with heavy QRM situations.   IMO Elecraft will always have that advantage because no other company is going to Narrow down their front end that much; because the price for that narrowing is really poor sounding SSB reception.  Elecraft does it because it’s the only trick that they can use to convince people to buy their products.

The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs, between it’s 3 layers of multi button pressing that requires a Nifty cheat sheet next to you 24/7 and it’s 1990’s looking LCD display that’s trying to display 50 things in the space of 25 plus it’s lack luster SSB Tx audio and really harsh and hard to understand SSB Rx audio my head is exploding at the thought that you could even compare the two radios. ???   Oh let me guess, those Sherwood numbers say the Elecraft is the best!  The guy has picked out one column of numbers and sorted the list based on that because he feels that’s the most important criteria to judge a Radio by ::)!  Pleez give me a freaking break!

 I could ask 100 blind folded Hams to choose between his number one ranked radio and his 50th and I would doubt that 10% of them could hear a difference even with CW in heavy QRM!  Much less tell the the difference between any of the top 20.  On the other hand I bet all 100 would tell you to get the dam headphones off of them when you start playing some SSB audio from the K3.
 
For those thinking of buying a K3 I highly suggest you watch the whole of this video from a guy who loves his K3 and is just demonstrating how to use it.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv_on_k447E

 If you can deal with all those key presses to do the most basic of things plus deal with a counter intuitive button layout and an old style LCD that shows important info for just a few seconds and then reverts back to something else and Lastly deal with menus that look like something from a HT and you ONLY do CW then the K3 is definitely your Radio.

I will spare you my thoughts on the look and feel of this luxury product and it's use of the worlds finest plastics, not to mention the amazingly low price you can get the whole system for or maybe I will talk about the K3 price in another post.

I hate bashing anybodys radio but when I read crap BS like a K3 is better than a 990S I cant help but say something.

BTW I also suggest you look up some videos on the K3 doing Phone versus another radio.  Your ear drums feel like they are going to explode when using the K3 for any length of time.   Listening fatigue with the K3 is a 10 out of 10 and the multi button presses become so daunting that you never try to do certain things because each and every time it’s a pain in the butt to figure them out without getting out a booklet.


Of course I would choose the K3.  Can you imagine what it might cost to repair a 990?  It'd cost half a K3 just to mail it in, and you'd probably have to wait about 3 months to get it fixed.

I sat around at the local HRO and played with the TS-990 for a while just last week.  Oh it's big and fancy, but I didn't really feel like I would get anything done with it that I couldn't with a K3, and the current draw is very high even without any signal.  There are lots of buttons, but I didn't feel like it helped to create a nice user interface.  More like the flight deck of the SR-71.  Also the cutesey kitchy skeuomorphic old timey VFO dial on the LCD screen was just awful.  Heck, I could run a K3 off a battery for a day or two, and the 990 would suck that battery dry in an hour or two WITHOUT IT EVEN TRANSMITTING.

I bet you couldn't understand somebody who'd rather have a Vanagon than a Hummer, too.

The SSB sounds great on my KX3 (even narrower than the K3!) as long as you hook the unit up to a nice proper external speaker.  On transmit I have had several unsolicited compliments.  Perhaps the users you have heard never bothered to read the manual and figure out how to adjust the SSB TX EQ.

The KX3 uses almost the same exact UI as the K3 and I don't have any problems with it.  All the buttons are clearly labeled, and the commonly used functions are readily accessible.

Elecraft radios are designed to be fixed by the user.  They even include their own basic test equipment and signal generators.

No, I've no desire to get into a gigantic Japanese radio that costs as much as a small car, will only be serviced by the manufacturer for a few years, and which sucks down more electricity than an average middle-class household.

In almost every test measurement the K3 (and the KX3) beat or even BLOW AWAY the 990.  I know it's tough to hear, especially if you're 8 grand deep into Kenwood (I'd hope they give you a few dizen shares of stock with your radio purchase!) but it's the truth.


From reading your post I can see that you’re a total Elecraft Fanatic, so there is no point going any further.

I would like to see all these Test measurements where the K3 and KX3 blow away the 990.  Can you show us some of those test measurements?

And BTW I think the Guy who spent $4000 to get a loaded K3 is the one who got ripped off, not the guy who spent $8000 on a 990, but hey that’s my opinion.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 05, 2013, 03:26:15 PM


So are we but we don't go around saying an 857d is better than a K3.
Anyway the difference between a person claiming that an 857d is better than a K3, and a person claiming that a K3 is better than a TS-990s  is that the Elecraft user is correct and the Yaesu user is not.  The figures are right there for the whole world to see.

LOL almost coughed up my lunch reading that.  So let me get this straight if I said to you that behind Door Number one is TS-990S and Behind Door Number 2 is a K3 you would pick door number 2?  ::)  If that’s the case can you PM me, I have some land in Florida you might want to buy. ;D

I have used a K3 and a K3 is a one trick Pony, it has a super narrow front end that makes it have an ever so slight advantage in CW reception when dealing with heavy QRM situations.   IMO Elecraft will always have that advantage because no other company is going to Narrow down their front end that much; because the price for that narrowing is really poor sounding SSB reception.  Elecraft does it because it’s the only trick that they can use to convince people to buy their products.

The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs, between it’s 3 layers of multi button pressing that requires a Nifty cheat sheet next to you 24/7 and it’s 1990’s looking LCD display that’s trying to display 50 things in the space of 25 plus it’s lack luster SSB Tx audio and really harsh and hard to understand SSB Rx audio my head is exploding at the thought that you could even compare the two radios. ???   Oh let me guess, those Sherwood numbers say the Elecraft is the best!  The guy has picked out one column of numbers and sorted the list based on that because he feels that’s the most important criteria to judge a Radio by ::)!  Pleez give me a freaking break!

 I could ask 100 blind folded Hams to choose between his number one ranked radio and his 50th and I would doubt that 10% of them could hear a difference even with CW in heavy QRM!  Much less tell the the difference between any of the top 20.  On the other hand I bet all 100 would tell you to get the dam headphones off of them when you start playing some SSB audio from the K3.
 
For those thinking of buying a K3 I highly suggest you watch the whole of this video from a guy who loves his K3 and is just demonstrating how to use it.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv_on_k447E

 If you can deal with all those key presses to do the most basic of things plus deal with a counter intuitive button layout and an old style LCD that shows important info for just a few seconds and then reverts back to something else and Lastly deal with menus that look like something from a HT and you ONLY do CW then the K3 is definitely your Radio.

I will spare you my thoughts on the look and feel of this luxury product and it's use of the worlds finest plastics, not to mention the amazingly low price you can get the whole system for or maybe I will talk about the K3 price in another post.

I hate bashing anybodys radio but when I read crap BS like a K3 is better than a 990S I cant help but say something.

BTW I also suggest you look up some videos on the K3 doing Phone versus another radio.  Your ear drums feel like they are going to explode when using the K3 for any length of time.   Listening fatigue with the K3 is a 10 out of 10 and the multi button presses become so daunting that you never try to do certain things because each and every time it’s a pain in the butt to figure them out without getting out a booklet.


Of course I would choose the K3.  Can you imagine what it might cost to repair a 990?  It'd cost half a K3 just to mail it in, and you'd probably have to wait about 3 months to get it fixed.

I sat around at the local HRO and played with the TS-990 for a while just last week.  Oh it's big and fancy, but I didn't really feel like I would get anything done with it that I couldn't with a K3, and the current draw is very high even without any signal.  There are lots of buttons, but I didn't feel like it helped to create a nice user interface.  More like the flight deck of the SR-71.  Also the cutesey kitchy skeuomorphic old timey VFO dial on the LCD screen was just awful.  Heck, I could run a K3 off a battery for a day or two, and the 990 would suck that battery dry in an hour or two WITHOUT IT EVEN TRANSMITTING.

I bet you couldn't understand somebody who'd rather have a Vanagon than a Hummer, too.

The SSB sounds great on my KX3 (even narrower than the K3!) as long as you hook the unit up to a nice proper external speaker.  On transmit I have had several unsolicited compliments.  Perhaps the users you have heard never bothered to read the manual and figure out how to adjust the SSB TX EQ.

The KX3 uses almost the same exact UI as the K3 and I don't have any problems with it.  All the buttons are clearly labeled, and the commonly used functions are readily accessible.

Elecraft radios are designed to be fixed by the user.  They even include their own basic test equipment and signal generators.

No, I've no desire to get into a gigantic Japanese radio that costs as much as a small car, will only be serviced by the manufacturer for a few years, and which sucks down more electricity than an average middle-class household.

In almost every test measurement the K3 (and the KX3) beat or even BLOW AWAY the 990.  I know it's tough to hear, especially if you're 8 grand deep into Kenwood (I'd hope they give you a few dizen shares of stock with your radio purchase!) but it's the truth.

The K3 is an ergonomic nightmare.  The receive audio is tiring to listen to for any length of time.  The transmit audio is "contesty".  It looks like it was designed in some guy's garage back in the 1980's.  I would choose the TS-990s over 10 K3's.  The Kenwood looks and plays like a real radio, not some tiring old looking and frustrating cracker box(K3).


Your opinion on the matter is your own, but I would hesitate to give it any credibility.  Are you even an amateur radio operator?

For those of us who don't want to spend almost ten grand on a radio, who intend to operate remotely, who wish to be able to diagnose, repair and align our radios, the Kenwood has absolutely no place in our shacks.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 05, 2013, 03:32:29 PM


So are we but we don't go around saying an 857d is better than a K3.
Anyway the difference between a person claiming that an 857d is better than a K3, and a person claiming that a K3 is better than a TS-990s  is that the Elecraft user is correct and the Yaesu user is not.  The figures are right there for the whole world to see.

LOL almost coughed up my lunch reading that.  So let me get this straight if I said to you that behind Door Number one is TS-990S and Behind Door Number 2 is a K3 you would pick door number 2?  ::)  If that’s the case can you PM me, I have some land in Florida you might want to buy. ;D

I have used a K3 and a K3 is a one trick Pony, it has a super narrow front end that makes it have an ever so slight advantage in CW reception when dealing with heavy QRM situations.   IMO Elecraft will always have that advantage because no other company is going to Narrow down their front end that much; because the price for that narrowing is really poor sounding SSB reception.  Elecraft does it because it’s the only trick that they can use to convince people to buy their products.

The K3 has one of the worst ergonomic designs, between it’s 3 layers of multi button pressing that requires a Nifty cheat sheet next to you 24/7 and it’s 1990’s looking LCD display that’s trying to display 50 things in the space of 25 plus it’s lack luster SSB Tx audio and really harsh and hard to understand SSB Rx audio my head is exploding at the thought that you could even compare the two radios. ???   Oh let me guess, those Sherwood numbers say the Elecraft is the best!  The guy has picked out one column of numbers and sorted the list based on that because he feels that’s the most important criteria to judge a Radio by ::)!  Pleez give me a freaking break!

 I could ask 100 blind folded Hams to choose between his number one ranked radio and his 50th and I would doubt that 10% of them could hear a difference even with CW in heavy QRM!  Much less tell the the difference between any of the top 20.  On the other hand I bet all 100 would tell you to get the dam headphones off of them when you start playing some SSB audio from the K3.
 
For those thinking of buying a K3 I highly suggest you watch the whole of this video from a guy who loves his K3 and is just demonstrating how to use it.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv_on_k447E

 If you can deal with all those key presses to do the most basic of things plus deal with a counter intuitive button layout and an old style LCD that shows important info for just a few seconds and then reverts back to something else and Lastly deal with menus that look like something from a HT and you ONLY do CW then the K3 is definitely your Radio.

I will spare you my thoughts on the look and feel of this luxury product and it's use of the worlds finest plastics, not to mention the amazingly low price you can get the whole system for or maybe I will talk about the K3 price in another post.

I hate bashing anybodys radio but when I read crap BS like a K3 is better than a 990S I cant help but say something.

BTW I also suggest you look up some videos on the K3 doing Phone versus another radio.  Your ear drums feel like they are going to explode when using the K3 for any length of time.   Listening fatigue with the K3 is a 10 out of 10 and the multi button presses become so daunting that you never try to do certain things because each and every time it’s a pain in the butt to figure them out without getting out a booklet.


Of course I would choose the K3.  Can you imagine what it might cost to repair a 990?  It'd cost half a K3 just to mail it in, and you'd probably have to wait about 3 months to get it fixed.

I sat around at the local HRO and played with the TS-990 for a while just last week.  Oh it's big and fancy, but I didn't really feel like I would get anything done with it that I couldn't with a K3, and the current draw is very high even without any signal.  There are lots of buttons, but I didn't feel like it helped to create a nice user interface.  More like the flight deck of the SR-71.  Also the cutesey kitchy skeuomorphic old timey VFO dial on the LCD screen was just awful.  Heck, I could run a K3 off a battery for a day or two, and the 990 would suck that battery dry in an hour or two WITHOUT IT EVEN TRANSMITTING.

I bet you couldn't understand somebody who'd rather have a Vanagon than a Hummer, too.

The SSB sounds great on my KX3 (even narrower than the K3!) as long as you hook the unit up to a nice proper external speaker.  On transmit I have had several unsolicited compliments.  Perhaps the users you have heard never bothered to read the manual and figure out how to adjust the SSB TX EQ.

The KX3 uses almost the same exact UI as the K3 and I don't have any problems with it.  All the buttons are clearly labeled, and the commonly used functions are readily accessible.

Elecraft radios are designed to be fixed by the user.  They even include their own basic test equipment and signal generators.

No, I've no desire to get into a gigantic Japanese radio that costs as much as a small car, will only be serviced by the manufacturer for a few years, and which sucks down more electricity than an average middle-class household.

In almost every test measurement the K3 (and the KX3) beat or even BLOW AWAY the 990.  I know it's tough to hear, especially if you're 8 grand deep into Kenwood (I'd hope they give you a few dizen shares of stock with your radio purchase!) but it's the truth.


From reading your post I can see that you’re a total Elecraft Fanatic, so there is no point going any further.

I would like to see all these Test measurements where the K3 and KX3 blow away the 990.  Can you show us some of those test measurements?

And BTW I think the Guy who spent $4000 to get a loaded K3 is the one who got ripped off, not the guy who spent $8000 on a 990, but hey that’s my opinion.


I own four Yaesu radios, two Icoms, and one Elecraft.  To call me a fanatic is a bit of a stretch.  I still think the FT-817ND is one of the most brilliant pieces of technology that I have had the pleasure to own, even if it is quite long in the tooth at this point.  I could never bring myself to sell it even though it has been supplanted in my use by the KX3.

The guy who spent $4k on a loaded K3 has a better performing radio in every important way.  Sure, he will have to use a few extra button presses to get at some functions, but his investment is sound, the company he bought his radio from will look after him, and he can count on parts and service being available for a very long time.  Did you know that Elecraft still sells the first radio they ever offered, way back in 1999 and offers replacement parts and upgrades for it too?  This is a track record that Japanese radio companies are not able to match.

I suppose if you are comfortable with blowing $8-12k every half decade or so to stay on top of the Japanese gigantic radio game, this is a fine thing for you and the Japanese economy.  However, don't mistake the fancy flight deck UI of the TS-990 for high performance in the RF domain.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: PD2R on July 06, 2013, 12:06:20 AM
Are you guys serious? The way you guys have been bickering I wouldn't be supprized that there isn't anybody left who cares what either of you has to say. And what's with all that quoting? We are perfectly capable of reading what the other guy said right above your post.

If you guys are trying to make fools out of yourselves then I guess both of you are on the right track.

Pick your transceiver and stop trying to convince the rest of the world to use the same. Let them use whatever transceiver the like and save yourself een ulser in the process.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on July 06, 2013, 05:09:59 AM
Re: PD2R

Apparently they are serious with short memories to boot.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 06, 2013, 10:00:56 PM
Re: PD2R

Apparently they are serious with short memories to boot.

Arguing about mundane stuff on the Internet is a time honored tradition.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on July 07, 2013, 01:54:02 AM
Re:KE7TMA

And a tradition worth upholding, especially when the bands are down and nothing but summer repeats on the tube. In the mean time I'm still up in the air about the best rig and value between a RockMite with a QRPME Texas Tuna Amp vs. an MFJ Cub running bare foot, any input?


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AC4RD on July 07, 2013, 05:48:33 AM
Arguing about mundane stuff on the Internet is a time honored tradition.

NO IT ISN'T!!!      ;)  ;)  ;)  ;)  ;)  ;)  ;)  ;)  ;)  ;)


And we were doing it before the web, via Fidonet, and then usenet, too.  :-)




Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: NZ0T on July 07, 2013, 06:42:46 AM
The K3 has excellent audio, both TX and RX, if one actually takes the time to read and understand how to use it and set it up.  The beauty of the K3 is that it is easily customized to fit each amateur's needs both with hardware and and settings.  The support is superb and building one's rig is a great way to understand how it works and how to repair it if needed.  The rig is light and easy to move and doesn't take up space in my shack that is better used for other rigs and accessories.  For me the choice of a K3 over an overpriced, unnecessarily huge, poorly supported Japanese rig was easy.  Same reason I bought a Ford Fusion instead of an overpriced Honda Accord or Toyota Camry.  Too many people just make the assumption that Japanese products are always better.  Many times they are but often there are American made products that are just as good or better.

And, as a businessman I applaud the success of a start-up, American company like Elecraft especially in these tough economic times.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on July 07, 2013, 10:15:30 AM
DISCLAMER: I own a K3 and I think it may be the finest radio in the world.


Straight out of the box, the Kenwood TS-990 blows the K3 out of the water... However if you spend time actually setting up the K3 for your ear and your voice, it will out perform the Kenwood in every way. Look at the Sherwood test information. The Kenwood isn't even consistent band to band. Dynamic range narrow spaced varies from 85db (awful) to 95db (very good) where as the K3 is 101db with a $90 optional filter. Remember every 3db is double the dynamic range.

As far as aesthetics go, the K3 does look home brew and there are far better looking on the market. To my eyes, the Icom 7800 and the Yaesu FT 9000 contest are the two most attractive radios on the market. The TS-990 looks odd to me. The small center screen is too narrow for my liking and the simulated analog "dial" looks cartoonish at best. I do like the touch screen Panadapter and think that it is the wave of the future. But I can get the P3 for my K3 and use the VGA output for it and attach it to a touchscreen and save a few grand.

So if money grew on trees or if I played and won the lottery, I would still run a K3. The reason being, raw performance. Yes, I am giving up on aesthetics and some extra buttons would help, but there is no other rig out there that has the raw performance, repair-ability  and customer service Elecraft offers.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W8JX on July 07, 2013, 10:47:10 AM
DISCLAMER: I own a K3 and I think it may be the finest radio in the world.


Straight out of the box, the Kenwood TS-990 blows the K3 out of the water... However if you spend time actually setting up the K3 for your ear and your voice, it will out perform the Kenwood in every way. Look at the Sherwood test information. The Kenwood isn't even consistent band to band. Dynamic range narrow spaced varies from 85db (awful) to 95db (very good) where as the K3 is 101db with a $90 optional filter. Remember every 3db is double the dynamic range.

As far as aesthetics go, the K3 does look home brew and there are far better looking on the market. To my eyes, the Icom 7800 and the Yaesu FT 9000 contest are the two most attractive radios on the market. The TS-990 looks odd to me. The small center screen is too narrow for my liking and the simulated analog "dial" looks cartoonish at best. I do like the touch screen Panadapter and think that it is the wave of the future. But I can get the P3 for my K3 and use the VGA output for it and attach it to a touchscreen and save a few grand.

So if money grew on trees or if I played and won the lottery, I would still run a K3. The reason being, raw performance. Yes, I am giving up on aesthetics and some extra buttons would help, but there is no other rig out there that has the raw performance, repair-ability  and customer service Elecraft offers.

I think some one said we would soon hear it was best rig on planet too. Man the "s" is getting real deep. 


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on July 07, 2013, 11:01:39 AM
I did it on purpose. However, the remainder of my statement holds true.

It really comes down to priorities. If looks and ease of operation is your highest priority, look elsewhere. If raw performance, digging out the weak ones during the CQWW 160m CW contest is your priority the K3 is hard to beat.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W8JX on July 07, 2013, 11:50:08 AM
I did it on purpose. However, the remainder of my statement holds true.

It really comes down to priorities. If looks and ease of operation is your highest priority, look elsewhere. If raw performance, digging out the weak ones during the CQWW 160m CW contest is your priority the K3 is hard to beat.

There is no question that K3 is a competent CW rig, as far as best there is that is a matter of personal needs but the K3 is not a world class SSB rig and more operators run SSB than CW too.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on July 07, 2013, 12:04:48 PM
I did it on purpose. However, the remainder of my statement holds true.

It really comes down to priorities. If looks and ease of operation is your highest priority, look elsewhere. If raw performance, digging out the weak ones during the CQWW 160m CW contest is your priority the K3 is hard to beat.

There is no question that K3 is a competent CW rig, as far as best there is that is a matter of personal needs but the K3 is not a world class SSB rig and more operators run SSB than CW too.

I don't do much SSB, I primarily chase DX and only do SSB for contests and one 160m net with some local friends. So I don't really see the shortcomings on voice. I did spend considerable time getting the TX and RX EQ just "right" and am very happy with both. The internal speaker on the K3 is a joke but that's the case for most radios. I would love to see Elecraft so what Ten Tec has and design a speaker/power supply because the audio is very pleasant IF you use the EQ. I am currently using the Yaesu SP-2000 that I used with my old Yaesu FT-2000D. I put poly fill for stuffed animals in the cavity and its a very good speaker for the limited range that Single  Sideband offers.

I truly think that the K3 gets its bad rap on SSB quality on DXpeditions, where multiple ops use the same radio and no one really cares about the sound quality. If that is the only sample of K3 audio you ever hear, it's totally understandable that people think it sounds like a tin can.

Quite honestly we live in a great era of ham radio! There are really no terrible radios being produced anymore. They all sound decent and all have good receivers.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 07, 2013, 06:35:57 PM
Re:KE7TMA

And a tradition worth upholding, especially when the bands are down and nothing but summer repeats on the tube. In the mean time I'm still up in the air about the best rig and value between a RockMite with a QRPME Texas Tuna Amp vs. an MFJ Cub running bare foot, any input?

I am new to CW myself, but what's your power budget?  To me this is probably the #1 consideration when considering these particular radios, followed by sensitivity and selectivity.

I will say those QRPME kits are pretty cute!


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 07, 2013, 06:45:14 PM
DISCLAMER: I own a K3 and I think it may be the finest radio in the world.
--- Snip ---
there is no other rig out there that has the raw performance, repair-ability  and customer service Elecraft offers.
 

I think some one said we would soon hear it was best rig on planet too. Man the "s" is getting real deep.  

 So Deep that for the last few day I have been standing at the shore line waiting for the "s" to recede ;) but unfortunately it seems to be getting higher.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 07, 2013, 06:54:13 PM
DISCLAMER: I own a K3 and I think it may be the finest radio in the world.


Straight out of the box, the Kenwood TS-990 blows the K3 out of the water... However if you spend time actually setting up the K3 for your ear and your voice, it will out perform the Kenwood in every way. Look at the Sherwood test information. The Kenwood isn't even consistent band to band. Dynamic range narrow spaced varies from 85db (awful) to 95db (very good) where as the K3 is 101db with a $90 optional filter. Remember every 3db is double the dynamic range.

As far as aesthetics go, the K3 does look home brew and there are far better looking on the market. To my eyes, the Icom 7800 and the Yaesu FT 9000 contest are the two most attractive radios on the market. The TS-990 looks odd to me. The small center screen is too narrow for my liking and the simulated analog "dial" looks cartoonish at best. I do like the touch screen Panadapter and think that it is the wave of the future. But I can get the P3 for my K3 and use the VGA output for it and attach it to a touchscreen and save a few grand.

So if money grew on trees or if I played and won the lottery, I would still run a K3. The reason being, raw performance. Yes, I am giving up on aesthetics and some extra buttons would help, but there is no other rig out there that has the raw performance, repair-ability  and customer service Elecraft offers.

The AGC fine tuning on the KX3 (I'm assuming it's nearly identical on the K3) is just the most amazing thing ever.  No more does one have to choose merely between slow, fast, and off.  The AGC slope control in particular is mind blowing.  I'm not aware of any other radios which have this feature.  While I was always impressed with the sensitivity and selectivity of the KX3, now that I have adjusted the AGC to my liking this radio pulls even further ahead of my other rigs.

Actually the more one looks into the KX3 (and by looking at the manual, the K3 as well) the more one is stunned by the adjustability.  I'm not aware of any other radios that allow such fine-tuning.

I am also impressed, as is NZ0T, at this American company's technical and customer service achievements, which are both at the top of the industry and their customer care should be a model for every other company, no matter the business.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 07, 2013, 06:57:09 PM
I think some one said we would soon hear it was best rig on planet too. Man the "s" is getting real deep. 

Is it really though?  Would you dispute the performance data the has been published in reviews, all of which agrees with (or even exceeds!) that published by Elecraft?

I guess it comes down to what is important to you when you ponder which radio is the "best."  Size and impressiveness, or TX/RX performance?


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 07, 2013, 07:28:19 PM
There is no question that K3 is a competent CW rig, as far as best there is that is a matter of personal needs but the K3 is not a world class SSB rig and more operators run SSB than CW too.

 Will you stop it with the all this Logical talk!! ???  This thread has become the Fantasy place where Sheep gobble up Lions and world peace reigns.  ;) :D

John Lennon Might have sung the K3 Kool-aid song the best with "Imagine".

Imagine all the people... using K3s all the time
No need for huge antennas
or amplifiers of any kind.
Its easy if you use Elecraft....because its Gods Gift to mankind... Ya ha ah ha.
You may say I'm a dreamer,
but I'm not the only one
I hope some day you will join us
And the world will live as one.




Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 07, 2013, 08:54:39 PM
There is no question that K3 is a competent CW rig, as far as best there is that is a matter of personal needs but the K3 is not a world class SSB rig and more operators run SSB than CW too.

 Will you stop it with the all this Logical talk!! ???  This thread has become the Fantasy place where Sheep gobble up Lions and world peace reigns.  ;) :D

John Lennon Might have sung the K3 Kool-aid song the best with "Imagine".

Imagine all the people... using K3s all the time
No need for huge antennas
or amplifiers of any kind.
Its easy if you use Elecraft....because its Gods Gift to mankind... Ya ha ah ha.
You may say I'm a dreamer,
but I'm not the only one
I hope some day you will join us
And the world will live as one.




What's interesting is that all the complaints about the K3's "terrible SSB performance" have merely been fluff, without much if any data to back them up.  Upon what have people been basing these opinions?

The K3 has perfectly respectable SSB TX figures according to the published reviews.  In another thread on this site one of the two unidentified posters in this thread made claims as to the K3's low SSB performance, citing figures that were far below the actual lab tests.  When confronted with his lies, the poster chose to slink away rather than being honorable and correcting his error.  This same poster has been here in this thread, making bizarre claims that can't actually be supported by data, and appealing to emotion.

Look at the figures and make up your mind.  The actual figures, not those being pushed on this board by unidentified reputation managers.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on July 08, 2013, 03:52:04 AM
According to OP KD2CJJ's last post (reply#7) and his QRZ bio/pic he is apparently satisfied with his choice of the Yaesu and has actually made one or two contacts with it, imagine that! I suspect the reason we have not heard from him again is because he is mostly on the air playing ham radio with his new rig rather than spending his time looking for his hip waders to replace his knee boots as the  tide of BS (previously indicated) continues to rise. Long live the eham forum TRADITION.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on July 08, 2013, 05:19:54 AM
It troubles me that some members seem to think it is BS that some of us K3 owners are thrilled with our radios. If you are happy with your rig regardless of what it is, I am happy for you.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 09, 2013, 01:30:46 PM
Being thrilled with your K3 is fine, I think everyone can respect that!   I am thrilled with my Icom 7600 but the difference between some of you K3 guys and everyone else is that you honestly think you have the Best Radios on the Planet when everyone that has not been drinking from the Elecraft Kool-aid knows that's complete BS.

I stopped posting serious replies to this thread when the talk became that the K3 was better than the 990.  I mean come on folks give Kenwood their time in the Sun and stop the BS!  Kenwood enthusiasts have waited for 10+ years for Kenwood to make a really good modern Rig and now that they come out with the 590 and the 990 you guys are going to rain on their parade with BS talk about the K3 being better than a 990.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 09, 2013, 03:22:15 PM

What's interesting is that all the complaints about the K3's "terrible SSB performance" have merely been fluff, without much if any data to back them up.  Upon what have people been basing these opinions?

The K3 has perfectly respectable SSB TX figures according to the published reviews.  In another thread on this site one of the two unidentified posters in this thread made claims as to the K3's low SSB performance, citing figures that were far below the actual lab tests.  When confronted with his lies, the poster chose to slink away rather than being honorable and correcting his error.  This same poster has been here in this thread, making bizarre claims that can't actually be supported by data, and appealing to emotion.

Look at the figures and make up your mind.  The actual figures, not those being pushed on this board by unidentified reputation managers.

I was hoping not to revist this but I realize you are trying to make one last point in order to sway any future newbies that you actually had a point, so they go out and get a K3.


The “terrible SSB performance of the K3” does not need to be based on numbers it’s based on my EARS and many other peoples ears!   What’s so hard to understand about that?  People listen to a K3 receiving SSB and they know it sucks based on what they are hearing.  And yes I have adjusted the hell out of everything that I could find in the Labyrinthine of settings and it still was really poor sounding very Harsh SSB.

As for the SSB TX Audio, as I stated before its “Unremarkable” it has no punch or anything great about it. (and once again Yes I adjusted the Radio)

Lastly, you constantly talk about the figures but I think you really have no clue what the Figures mean in the real world and neither do I.

Since this is the Station Building section of the Forum I figure there are a lot of new Hams hanging around here so it seems appropriate to give an example they will appreciate.

Almost every new Ham Operator at some point or the other hears a really loud station and hears “I am running 1500 watts” and then the new Ham gets the Notion in his heads and thinks “Wow wouldn’t it be fantastic to have a 6000 Watt Amp”.  This idea sounds so good even after you hear that 6Kw is just 6db better than a 1.5Kw Amp.
The dream of what the 6KW amp can do suddenly comes to a sudden death when some Ham informs you that 6db = 1 S-Unit and all it truly means is that with 6Kw you will get a 1 S-Unit increase in signal.  So wow my signal goes from 57 to 58 over in Japan!!!  That doesn’t sound like much and suddenly all interest dies because you just know how impractical the whole thing would be, assuming it was even legal to do.

The use of dB’s can be very misleading, especially when used in the negative quantity.  First of all it’s very hard to accurately measure the numbers and the even harder to know what a few dB’s of change actually mean in the real world especially when you factor in noise floor and a whole bunch of other factors.

Look at these examples.

The Sherwood Numbers Aka The Gospel according to Elecraft.
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

Now compare them to Numbers from QST
http://www.remeeus.eu/hamradio/pa1hr/productreview.htm

Both charts are sorted by the 2Khz Dynamic Range but notice the huge differences.

I personally don’t give any of these charts much credence because I don’t have a clue as to how accurate the equipment is that took the measurements and when it was last Calibrated and who did the calibration.  So both these numbers can be off wildly.
They are certainly wildly off from each other. ;)

Secondly Bob who publishes the Sherwood numbers is only interested in one specific thing and that’s how well a Radio operates in super big tightly packed CW Pileups.  Everything else for him is secondary hence why he sorts the list with the 2Khz spacing.  In fact IMO he should be sorting it by Overall filter numbers (Filter Ultimate Column)
That’s much more relevant for judging how a radio will perform.

 I have run some informal tests while trying to break through large CW pileups and IMO more important than anything else is the Speed that you can send at.  Yep it sounds strange but I have proven it on a number of occasions.
If you think about it from the view point of a operator on a rare Dxpedition the question is do you answer the guy who is saying “K…..D…..8…..M……J……R” at 18 WPM or the guy who is sending it at 35 WPM (Half the time).  I don’t have this ability but I can use my Icom RS-BA1 software which sends perfect CW.   In tests I have run during huge DXpedition pileups the operators almost never reply when I send at slower than 20 WPM and they almost always respond when I go up to 30WPM.  

 It makes sense, the CW Dxpedition operators are some of the best on the planet they are very comfortable talking at 35-40+ WPM and they hate it when some one is taking forever to bang out something at 20WPM.   So while you are putting out your call at 20 they are hearing a guy in the background zipping in at 35 WPM and before you even finish they have already started replying to him.

Anyway my point of this long winded post is that after you look at all the numbers for the K3 and if you believe them, the fact is that all it’s saying is that the K3 is really good at rejecting adjacent CW signals in large pileups and IMO that’s like saying this model car has a really Good AC system. If you want to buy a car based on that or say it’s the best based on that then go ahead.

IMO when picking a radio you need to first think of what you want to do with it and then look at the features the Radio has to offer that help you accomplish that goal.  If your need is simply to be waiting around for that really rare one to appear on CW and you are very proficient at CW then the K3 is your radio. If not look for something that does not compromise all the other aspects just to do one thing well.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: NZ0T on July 09, 2013, 04:20:33 PM

What's interesting is that all the complaints about the K3's "terrible SSB performance" have merely been fluff, without much if any data to back them up.  Upon what have people been basing these opinions?

The K3 has perfectly respectable SSB TX figures according to the published reviews.  In another thread on this site one of the two unidentified posters in this thread made claims as to the K3's low SSB performance, citing figures that were far below the actual lab tests.  When confronted with his lies, the poster chose to slink away rather than being honorable and correcting his error.  This same poster has been here in this thread, making bizarre claims that can't actually be supported by data, and appealing to emotion.

Look at the figures and make up your mind.  The actual figures, not those being pushed on this board by unidentified reputation managers.

I was hoping not to revist this but I realize you are trying to make one last point in order to sway any future newbies that you actually had a point, so they go out and get a K3.


The “terrible SSB performance of the K3” does not need to be based on numbers it’s based on my EARS and many other peoples ears!   What’s so hard to understand about that?  People listen to a K3 receiving SSB and they know it sucks based on what they are hearing.  And yes I have adjusted the hell out of everything that I could find in the Labyrinthine of settings and it still was really poor sounding very Harsh SSB.

As for the SSB TX Audio, as I stated before its “Unremarkable” it has no punch or anything great about it. (and once again Yes I adjusted the Radio)

Lastly, you constantly talk about the figures but I think you really have no clue what the Figures mean in the real world and neither do I.

Since this is the Station Building section of the Forum I figure there are a lot of new Hams hanging around here so it seems appropriate to give an example they will appreciate.

Almost every new Ham Operator at some point or the other hears a really loud station and hears “I am running 1500 watts” and then the new Ham gets the Notion in his heads and thinks “Wow wouldn’t it be fantastic to have a 6000 Watt Amp”.  This idea sounds so good even after you hear that 6Kw is just 6db better than a 1.5Kw Amp.
The dream of what the 6KW amp can do suddenly comes to a sudden death when some Ham informs you that 6db = 1 S-Unit and all it truly means is that with 6Kw you will get a 1 S-Unit increase in signal.  So wow my signal goes from 57 to 58 over in Japan!!!  That doesn’t sound like much and suddenly all interest dies because you just know how impractical the whole thing would be, assuming it was even legal to do.

The use of dB’s can be very misleading, especially when used in the negative quantity.  First of all it’s very hard to accurately measure the numbers and the even harder to know what a few dB’s of change actually mean in the real world especially when you factor in noise floor and a whole bunch of other factors.

Look at these examples.

The Sherwood Numbers Aka The Gospel according to Elecraft.
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

Now compare them to Numbers from QST
http://www.remeeus.eu/hamradio/pa1hr/productreview.htm

Both charts are sorted by the 2Khz Dynamic Range but notice the huge differences.

I personally don’t give any of these charts much credence because I don’t have a clue as to how accurate the equipment is that took the measurements and when it was last Calibrated and who did the calibration.  So both these numbers can be off wildly.
They are certainly wildly off from each other. ;)

Secondly Bob who publishes the Sherwood numbers is only interested in one specific thing and that’s how well a Radio operates in super big tightly packed CW Pileups.  Everything else for him is secondary hence why he sorts the list with the 2Khz spacing.  In fact IMO he should be sorting it by Overall filter numbers (Filter Ultimate Column)
That’s much more relevant for judging how a radio will perform.

 I have run some informal tests while trying to break through large CW pileups and IMO more important than anything else is the Speed that you can send at.  Yep it sounds strange but I have proven it on a number of occasions.
If you think about it from the view point of a operator on a rare Dxpedition the question is do you answer the guy who is saying “K…..D…..8…..M……J……R” at 18 WPM or the guy who is sending it at 35 WPM (Half the time).  I don’t have this ability but I can use my Icom RS-BA1 software which sends perfect CW.   In tests I have run during huge DXpedition pileups the operators almost never reply when I send at slower than 20 WPM and they almost always respond when I go up to 30WPM.  

 It makes sense, the CW Dxpedition operators are some of the best on the planet they are very comfortable talking at 35-40+ WPM and they hate it when some one is taking forever to bang out something at 20WPM.   So while you are putting out your call at 20 they are hearing a guy in the background zipping in at 35 WPM and before you even finish they have already started replying to him.

Anyway my point of this long winded post is that after you look at all the numbers for the K3 and if you believe them, the fact is that all it’s saying is that the K3 is really good at rejecting adjacent CW signals in large pileups and IMO that’s like saying this model car has a really Good AC system. If you want to buy a car based on that or say it’s the best based on that then go ahead.

IMO when picking a radio you need to first think of what you want to do with it and then look at the features the Radio has to offer that help you accomplish that goal.  If your need is simply to be waiting around for that really rare one to appear on CW and you are very proficient at CW then the K3 is your radio. If not look for something that does not compromise all the other aspects just to do one thing well.


Why so much hate?  You don't like the K3, we get that!  Don't buy one, OK?  Thousands of satisfied amateurs have bought and enjoy the K3.  It's OK if you don't like the K3 but your one man crusade against Elecraft products is beyond tiresome. 


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 09, 2013, 04:55:10 PM
Why so much hate?  You don't like the K3, we get that!  Don't buy one, OK?  Thousands of satisfied amateurs have bought and enjoy the K3.  It's OK if you don't like the K3 but your one man crusade against Elecraft products is beyond tiresome.  

Have you read the whole of this thread before posting?
If you did you would realize this has nothing to do with me Hating the K3 it has to do with the argument that some K3 owners have been using that the K3 is the Best Radio Made Period.
My argument along with many others is that it's a very good CW rig and thats about it.  

NZ0T Since you made your posistion clear in post #59 with the statment: "For me the choice of a K3 over an overpriced, unnecessarily huge, poorly supported Japanese rig was easy".
I think it's easy to see why you would think my post is tiresome.  May I suggest if your tired of the argument that you just stop reading this thread and move on?


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 10, 2013, 01:24:26 AM
Being thrilled with your K3 is fine, I think everyone can respect that!   I am thrilled with my Icom 7600 but the difference between some of you K3 guys and everyone else is that you honestly think you have the Best Radios on the Planet when everyone that has not been drinking from the Elecraft Kool-aid knows that's complete BS.

I stopped posting serious replies to this thread when the talk became that the K3 was better than the 990.  I mean come on folks give Kenwood their time in the Sun and stop the BS!  Kenwood enthusiasts have waited for 10+ years for Kenwood to make a really good modern Rig and now that they come out with the 590 and the 990 you guys are going to rain on their parade with BS talk about the K3 being better than a 990.

The numbers don't lie, your ears do.  Hard test data beats anecdotes any time - this is why rockets are built using math and science and not hunches.

Still, your fancy Japanese rigs have more buttons, and weigh a lot more, I'll give you that.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on July 10, 2013, 03:00:50 AM
If or when the debate ends please post date/time of poll booth opening.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 10, 2013, 11:40:16 AM
The numbers don't lie, your ears do.  Hard test data beats anecdotes any time - this is why rockets are built using math and science and not hunches.

Still, your fancy Japanese rigs have more buttons, and weigh a lot more, I'll give you that.

Yes I think your right that's why I always believe the unemployment numbers the housing numbers and all the numbers that the government and companies put out.

BTW which one of these numbers are the truth?

The Sherwood
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

or the QST numbers?
http://www.remeeus.eu/hamradio/pa1hr/productreview.htm

My Lying ears need to know which one they can believe ::)


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on July 10, 2013, 03:00:21 PM
The numbers don't lie, your ears do.  Hard test data beats anecdotes any time - this is why rockets are built using math and science and not hunches.

Still, your fancy Japanese rigs have more buttons, and weigh a lot more, I'll give you that.

Yes I think your right that's why I always believe the unemployment numbers the housing numbers and all the numbers that the government and companies put out.

BTW which one of these numbers are the truth?

The Sherwood
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

or the QST numbers?
http://www.remeeus.eu/hamradio/pa1hr/productreview.htm

My Lying ears need to know which one they can believe ::)


What numbers are you seeing big differences in?


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on July 10, 2013, 03:11:30 PM
The numbers don't lie, your ears do.  Hard test data beats anecdotes any time - this is why rockets are built using math and science and not hunches.

Still, your fancy Japanese rigs have more buttons, and weigh a lot more, I'll give you that.

Yes I think your right that's why I always believe the unemployment numbers the housing numbers and all the numbers that the government and companies put out.

BTW which one of these numbers are the truth?

The Sherwood
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

or the QST numbers?
http://www.remeeus.eu/hamradio/pa1hr/productreview.htm

My Lying ears need to know which one they can believe ::)


I trust Sherwood's numbers more than I trust the ARRL's.  The ARRL is used to that fat advertising cash from the Japanese rig makers (1/2 the pages in any given magazine are ads from Japanese rig makers) and Sherwood has offered much criticism of the ARRL's testing methodology, exposing the flaws in their tests and eventually forcing them to modernize lest they not be taken seriously at all.  He's serious, and he doesn't need any advertising money - after all he makes most of his cash selling mods for the Drake R4C.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on July 10, 2013, 04:52:50 PM
I would agree that Bob's testing methods are a bit more refined and unbiased than the ARRLs.  And I would say that regardless of the rig that I own. 


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on July 10, 2013, 04:55:00 PM
What numbers are you seeing big differences in?

Lots of the numbers are different. Just look!

Anyway folks as I said these tests mean nothing, as your other friend pointed out he trusts Sherwood more than Arrl even though there is no reason to trust either of them since they don't show the Certificates of calibration for any of their equipment and I am yet to even see what equipment they are using to run these tests.  That's a must if your going to publish these kinds of tests for the public to see.
And as I said before even if by some miracle one of the lists is accurate, it does not translate into anything much in the real world just like a 6Kw amp is not much different than a 1.5Kw amp.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD2CJJ on August 04, 2013, 06:48:59 AM
LoL.... I actually have been!!!!  I love the radio!   I am amazed how sensitive and quiet the receiver is.  I get frequent compliments on the audio also.  Since this post I have 50 new countries... The toughest and for sure I would not have captured with without this receiver was South Sudan.  It was a S3 barely audible with the local noise floor but very copyable.   Generally I have no complaints.  I have a few gripes but are all focus on the controls...none on performance or configurability.  I am also avid worker of digital  and love the simple integration with the computer and lastly love the IF out with my pan adapter.. The band scope adds a nice touch...the rig band scope is not completely useless but close to it..it needs work.

I am very happy with the purchase..

I had a chance to play with a friends K3...though its great quality I see why some comments on audio quality for ssb aren't favorable.. Very tinny ear piercing...the ftdx is very natural sounding..I suspect though it could be the k3 speaker or placement of the speaker.




According to OP KD2CJJ's last post (reply#7) and his QRZ bio/pic he is apparently satisfied with his choice of the Yaesu and has actually made one or two contacts with it, imagine that! I suspect the reason we have not heard from him again is because he is mostly on the air playing ham radio with his new rig rather than spending his time looking for his hip waders to replace his knee boots as the  tide of BS (previously indicated) continues to rise. Long live the eham forum TRADITION.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on August 04, 2013, 01:18:47 PM

What's interesting is that all the complaints about the K3's "terrible SSB performance" have merely been fluff, without much if any data to back them up.  Upon what have people been basing these opinions?

The K3 has perfectly respectable SSB TX figures according to the published reviews.  In another thread on this site one of the two unidentified posters in this thread made claims as to the K3's low SSB performance, citing figures that were far below the actual lab tests.  When confronted with his lies, the poster chose to slink away rather than being honorable and correcting his error.  This same poster has been here in this thread, making bizarre claims that can't actually be supported by data, and appealing to emotion.

Look at the figures and make up your mind.  The actual figures, not those being pushed on this board by unidentified reputation managers.

I was hoping not to revist this but I realize you are trying to make one last point in order to sway any future newbies that you actually had a point, so they go out and get a K3.


The “terrible SSB performance of the K3” does not need to be based on numbers it’s based on my EARS and many other peoples ears!   What’s so hard to understand about that?  People listen to a K3 receiving SSB and they know it sucks based on what they are hearing.  And yes I have adjusted the hell out of everything that I could find in the Labyrinthine of settings and it still was really poor sounding very Harsh SSB.

As for the SSB TX Audio, as I stated before its “Unremarkable” it has no punch or anything great about it. (and once again Yes I adjusted the Radio)

Lastly, you constantly talk about the figures but I think you really have no clue what the Figures mean in the real world and neither do I.

Since this is the Station Building section of the Forum I figure there are a lot of new Hams hanging around here so it seems appropriate to give an example they will appreciate.

Almost every new Ham Operator at some point or the other hears a really loud station and hears “I am running 1500 watts” and then the new Ham gets the Notion in his heads and thinks “Wow wouldn’t it be fantastic to have a 6000 Watt Amp”.  This idea sounds so good even after you hear that 6Kw is just 6db better than a 1.5Kw Amp.
The dream of what the 6KW amp can do suddenly comes to a sudden death when some Ham informs you that 6db = 1 S-Unit and all it truly means is that with 6Kw you will get a 1 S-Unit increase in signal.  So wow my signal goes from 57 to 58 over in Japan!!!  That doesn’t sound like much and suddenly all interest dies because you just know how impractical the whole thing would be, assuming it was even legal to do.

The use of dB’s can be very misleading, especially when used in the negative quantity.  First of all it’s very hard to accurately measure the numbers and the even harder to know what a few dB’s of change actually mean in the real world especially when you factor in noise floor and a whole bunch of other factors.

Look at these examples.

The Sherwood Numbers Aka The Gospel according to Elecraft.
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

Now compare them to Numbers from QST
http://www.remeeus.eu/hamradio/pa1hr/productreview.htm

Both charts are sorted by the 2Khz Dynamic Range but notice the huge differences.

I personally don’t give any of these charts much credence because I don’t have a clue as to how accurate the equipment is that took the measurements and when it was last Calibrated and who did the calibration.  So both these numbers can be off wildly.
They are certainly wildly off from each other. ;)

Secondly Bob who publishes the Sherwood numbers is only interested in one specific thing and that’s how well a Radio operates in super big tightly packed CW Pileups.  Everything else for him is secondary hence why he sorts the list with the 2Khz spacing.  In fact IMO he should be sorting it by Overall filter numbers (Filter Ultimate Column)
That’s much more relevant for judging how a radio will perform.

 I have run some informal tests while trying to break through large CW pileups and IMO more important than anything else is the Speed that you can send at.  Yep it sounds strange but I have proven it on a number of occasions.
If you think about it from the view point of a operator on a rare Dxpedition the question is do you answer the guy who is saying “K…..D…..8…..M……J……R” at 18 WPM or the guy who is sending it at 35 WPM (Half the time).  I don’t have this ability but I can use my Icom RS-BA1 software which sends perfect CW.   In tests I have run during huge DXpedition pileups the operators almost never reply when I send at slower than 20 WPM and they almost always respond when I go up to 30WPM.  

 It makes sense, the CW Dxpedition operators are some of the best on the planet they are very comfortable talking at 35-40+ WPM and they hate it when some one is taking forever to bang out something at 20WPM.   So while you are putting out your call at 20 they are hearing a guy in the background zipping in at 35 WPM and before you even finish they have already started replying to him.

Anyway my point of this long winded post is that after you look at all the numbers for the K3 and if you believe them, the fact is that all it’s saying is that the K3 is really good at rejecting adjacent CW signals in large pileups and IMO that’s like saying this model car has a really Good AC system. If you want to buy a car based on that or say it’s the best based on that then go ahead.

IMO when picking a radio you need to first think of what you want to do with it and then look at the features the Radio has to offer that help you accomplish that goal.  If your need is simply to be waiting around for that really rare one to appear on CW and you are very proficient at CW then the K3 is your radio. If not look for something that does not compromise all the other aspects just to do one thing well.


Why so much hate?  You don't like the K3, we get that!  Don't buy one, OK?  Thousands of satisfied amateurs have bought and enjoy the K3.  It's OK if you don't like the K3 but your one man crusade against Elecraft products is beyond tiresome. 

I don't see one bit of hate in KD8MJR's post.  I see some well reasoned arguments.  IF ANYONE is spreading hate, its you NZ0T, to anyone who does not fawn all over the K3.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on August 04, 2013, 01:21:01 PM
Being thrilled with your K3 is fine, I think everyone can respect that!   I am thrilled with my Icom 7600 but the difference between some of you K3 guys and everyone else is that you honestly think you have the Best Radios on the Planet when everyone that has not been drinking from the Elecraft Kool-aid knows that's complete BS.

I stopped posting serious replies to this thread when the talk became that the K3 was better than the 990.  I mean come on folks give Kenwood their time in the Sun and stop the BS!  Kenwood enthusiasts have waited for 10+ years for Kenwood to make a really good modern Rig and now that they come out with the 590 and the 990 you guys are going to rain on their parade with BS talk about the K3 being better than a 990.

The numbers don't lie, your ears do.  Hard test data beats anecdotes any time - this is why rockets are built using math and science and not hunches.

Still, your fancy Japanese rigs have more buttons, and weigh a lot more, I'll give you that.

Numbers presented in such a way to favor one aspect that one tester finds personally important over other numbers that may be more significant to other users DO lie and distort.  Sherwood's myopic view of 2 kHz blocking dynamic range used in his sorting is an example.  Sort by another column and the order of radio from best to worst changes dramatically.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on August 04, 2013, 03:00:17 PM
Ah, still a few last gasps left in the topic and yet no one has admitted that he bought and still operates the worst of the two radios in question. Thank goodness this character named Sherwood is on the scene to make best rig buying decisions for hams that are otherwise unable to do so on their own.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on August 04, 2013, 08:08:32 PM
Yes and K3 owners cling to him like a baby to a Tit !!

 I am sure for you that his numbers make all the other short comings bearable and I also imagine that you have a poster sized copy of that chart on the wall in your shack for comfort.

  I can't help but find it amusing that someone would buy a radio based on a set of numbers that are extremely difficult to measure accurately even on high end commercial test equipment much less measured with the gear I see on his website. Then add into that the fact that he offers little detail into the methodology of how his measurements are done or when his equipment was calibrated and might I go further and add in the fact that he uses a single sample measurement which in the real world means the test are already invalid!  Then we add in the years between each different unit being tested on said accuracy unknown equipment and walla we end up with a chart that when sorted by one mans idea of the most important aspect of a Radio it makes you and some other people believe you have the best Radios in the world. LOL  ;D ;D

Sleep well my friend and keep that Nifty card close.

73's
Robert
KD8MJR


PS.
Did you ever read Mr Sherwoods Closing Comments about his Chart?
Here it is:

"Don’t get obsessed with minor variations of a few dB. Luckily most radios are not stressed most of the time we operate them. The worst stress is a CW pile up.
You also have to like operational aspects of a radio, not just its numbers.
As a ham, you will be sitting in front of a radio for hours each week over a period of years, thus ergonomics, ease of use, and listening fatigue should be taken into consideration. Personally I like big radios with big knobs, except mobile when small is good!
Comments are always appreciated.
73, Rob Sherwood, NC0B "


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KF7DS on August 04, 2013, 10:58:40 PM
This thread is very amusing. And, I will add to the entertainment.

I purchased a 3000 a month ago and have used it in several cw sprints and the naqp-cw this weekend. It was a pleasure to use and I could sneak between two very close signals and get the qso just as easily as I can with my k3. This Rx is very quiet as others have said and from a users perspective there is no difference in Rx sensitivity compared to my K3 - I will give a very slight nod to the k3 with respect to selectivity.

However, sitting for 3+ hours straight was considerably LESS fatiguing on the ears/head with the ftdx3000 than the k3. Sherwood should also capture "usability"


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: SWL2002 on August 05, 2013, 03:27:39 AM
This thread is very amusing. And, I will add to the entertainment.

I purchased a 3000 a month ago and have used it in several cw sprints and the naqp-cw this weekend. It was a pleasure to use and I could sneak between two very close signals and get the qso just as easily as I can with my k3. This Rx is very quiet as others have said and from a users perspective there is no difference in Rx sensitivity compared to my K3 - I will give a very slight nod to the k3 with respect to selectivity.

However, sitting for 3+ hours straight was considerably LESS fatiguing on the ears/head with the ftdx3000 than the k3. Sherwood should also capture "usability"

Sherwood specifically dislikes the Elecraft K3 because of its audio distortion on receive.  Elecraft tried to fix it after Sherwood commented on it many times, but even after the fix Sherwood still does not like it and still criticizes the K3 to the dismay of Elecraft.  It is interesting to note that Sherwood uses an ICOM IC-781 and modified Drakes.  Take a look where those radios fall on the list.  If his sorting is so important and determines how "good" a radio is, why does Sherwood not personally own any radios on the top 5 of that list?



Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: W1JKA on August 05, 2013, 04:20:30 AM
Re: KD8MJR reply #92

If the (you) in your response refers to me in my post please be advised that I only have a possible future interest in the two rigs mentioned. At present the closest thing I have to a K3 is a lowly K1 with no room on my shack wall for a poster sized chart anyway and the last thing I would do is take a trip to Sherwood Forest and see how it stacks up against a Weber Tri Bander. Some times it's worthwhile to read between the lines. ;)





Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: K8GU on August 07, 2013, 05:42:22 AM
Sherwood specifically dislikes the Elecraft K3 because of its audio distortion on receive.  Elecraft tried to fix it after Sherwood commented on it many times, but even after the fix Sherwood still does not like it and still criticizes the K3 to the dismay of Elecraft.  It is interesting to note that Sherwood uses an ICOM IC-781 and modified Drakes.  Take a look where those radios fall on the list.  If his sorting is so important and determines how "good" a radio is, why does Sherwood not personally own any radios on the top 5 of that list?

That's funny, isn't it?  I've tried to make this argument a half-dozen times and it always falls flat.  Hams like numbers.  They can point at them and justify spending the big bucks.

I also wrote way back on the first page that the K3 and the FTDX3000 are fundamentally different radios and that someone who liked one would be unlikely to like the other.  I stand by that assertion and point to this thread as anecdotal evidence in support.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on August 08, 2013, 06:04:31 PM
K8GU hopefully this K3 Rubbish is now finished, the K3 is what it is and nothing more.
It's certainly not even close to holding the title of the Best Radio ever made and anyone who believes that is just kidding themselves.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on August 08, 2013, 08:13:45 PM
K8GU hopefully this K3 Rubbish is now finished, the K3 is what it is and nothing more.
It's certainly not even close to holding the title of the Best Radio ever made and anyone who believes that is just kidding themselves.


It's closer than lots of rigs.  If you like lots of whizzy knobs and cute color LCD graphics, it's probably not your bag though.

However if you like to be able to configure, for example, your AGC beyond slow, fast, or off, it's probably your kind of radio.

Anyway the KX3 seems to be an even better performer than the K3.  The KX3, in addition to having some of the highest dynamic range figures tested, has the best sensitivity of any radio tested by Sherwood.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on August 08, 2013, 10:27:53 PM
I am pretty sure lots of Radios can configure the AGC beyond slow medium and fast.
My Icom 7600 allows me to customize the speed for each of those settings, so it's a safe bet that most of the other 7xxx models can do the same and probably so can most of the newer rigs from other companies.

As for Sherwood's numbers ehh let's not even go there again.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: NZ0T on August 09, 2013, 01:25:41 PM
I am pretty sure lots of Radios can configure the AGC beyond slow medium and fast.
My Icom 7600 allows me to customize the speed for each of those settings, so it's a safe bet that most of the other 7xxx models can do the same and probably so can most of the newer rigs from other companies.

As for Sherwood's numbers ehh let's not even go there again.

Pretty sure or do you know?  The K3 allows adjustment of AGC decay, hold, pulse, slope and threshold allowing the user to customize AGC in pretty much any way he/she would like.   I ask because from what I can tell through the use of Google the 7600 has some AGC adjustment available but nowhere near what the K3 has.

And, are "Radios" different than "radios"?    ;)


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on August 09, 2013, 01:47:41 PM
Nope it does not have all those adjustments but the real question is are all those adjustments really needed or is it another sales Gimmick or a real gimmick  ;)


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KE7TMA on August 09, 2013, 02:02:29 PM
Nope it does not have all those adjustments but the real question is are all those adjustments really needed or is it another sales Gimmick or a real gimmick  ;)

Nobody familiar with this technology would call it a gimmick.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD2CJJ on September 12, 2013, 06:37:20 AM
FYI you can make all those changes on the FTDX3000, some can be changed via the regular menu and some are in the service menu...   In either case they are both user accessible.

Of course those that are in the service menu you have to question why you would want to make those changes anyway... At that point your splitting hair.

I am pretty sure lots of Radios can configure the AGC beyond slow medium and fast.
My Icom 7600 allows me to customize the speed for each of those settings, so it's a safe bet that most of the other 7xxx models can do the same and probably so can most of the newer rigs from other companies.

As for Sherwood's numbers ehh let's not even go there again.

Pretty sure or do you know?  The K3 allows adjustment of AGC decay, hold, pulse, slope and threshold allowing the user to customize AGC in pretty much any way he/she would like.   I ask because from what I can tell through the use of Google the 7600 has some AGC adjustment available but nowhere near what the K3 has.

And, are "Radios" different than "radios"?    ;)


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AF5CC on September 12, 2013, 06:31:33 PM
The KX3, in addition to having some of the highest dynamic range figures tested, has the best sensitivity of any radio tested by Sherwood.

Unless you live in an extremely quite location (like with no neighbors within a few miles) and only run 10m or 6m, any radio made today is more than sensitive enough.  That extra sensitivity just comes through as extra noise.

John AF5CC


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD8MJR on September 13, 2013, 10:49:14 AM
You are 100% correct on that.  Sensitivity in modern radios is not even an issue anymore, it's now all about getting rid of the extra noise that comes with it.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on September 13, 2013, 01:42:07 PM
You are 100% correct on that.  Sensitivity in modern radios is not even an issue anymore, it's now all about getting rid of the extra noise that comes with it.

You can turn the preamp off too. Most of the time I find it completely unnecessary.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: KD2CJJ on September 13, 2013, 02:16:27 PM
I agree... I have actually started to play with combining Pre Amp with Attenuation!  Its an odd combination for me but I am finding that it helps with noise reduction.  I think this is where the ftdx3k really shines over the K3.

You are 100% correct on that.  Sensitivity in modern radios is not even an issue anymore, it's now all about getting rid of the extra noise that comes with it.

You can turn the preamp off too. Most of the time I find it completely unnecessary.


Title: RE: K3 or ftdx3000
Post by: AD9DX on September 13, 2013, 04:06:11 PM
The K3 isn't really noisy, you can turn down the gain to accommodate your local noise environment.  Like others have stated with the ACG settings on both radios also you can turn them in to less "noisy" radios if your environment needs it.