TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits

To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
From: Duane A Calvin <ac5aa@juno.com>
Reply-to: tentec@contesting.com
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 13:23:22 -0500
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
That's only because the K1/K3 don't do weight properly.  Weight should be
the ratio between the dit and dah length, not "on vs off" time in each
element.  

        73,  Duane


On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 12:49:16 -0400 "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com> writes:
> This is really so simple and the K3 propaganda has folks confused.
> Simply put. Some rigs chop dits. Your keyer makes a nice heavy dit 
> and the
> rig shortens it.
> There is a cure....Increase the weight of your keying.
> You can do this with most any elcheapo MFJ keyer.
> Idiot Press's K3 not only has a weight setting but what they call a 
> "keying
> compensation" adjustment. They are blowing smoke about the "delay" 
> issue
> just to make you think their keyer has something that others don't.
> Here is proof to the doubters.
> Listen to yourself on another receiver. Try changing the weight and
> compensation and LISTEN. You will see that they do EXACTLY the same 
> thing to
> your signal. They are duplicate controls.
> The only difference is in the sidetone of the K3 keyer. The sidetone 
> will
> follow the weight control but not the compensation setting.
> People gobble up this compensation talk like it's the final cure for 
> their
> QSK ills and rate the K3 very high while all along it has no 
> advantage to
> other keyers and in fact, I found the timing of their "mode B" to 
> be
> slightly different than a real Curtis chip and am able to key with 
> less
> errors on the real thing. 73
> Steve N4LQ
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>
> To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 11:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
> 
> 
> > It must be Sunday because my brain cell just can not tell the 
> difference
> > between increasing the key-on time and decreasing the key-off 
> time, and
> > changing the weight ratio of a character.
> >
> > If you delay the key closure, you are not keying anything, so how 
> does
> that
> > increase something that has not started yet?
> >
> > If you delay the key closure to "decrease the keying-off  time", 
> how can
> you
> > decrease the off time of something that has not started?
> >
> > Maybe this is one of those things that are much harder to explain 
> the to
> > actually do? The radio is not going to (obviously) start producing 
> RF
> until
> > the key is closed, so if your delaying the time before you close 
> the key,
> > the radio is just sitting there staring at you, until you actually 
> close
> the
> > key.
> >
> > I think I need a beer. At least it's something to ponder for the 
> rest of
> the
> > day. Make that two beers!
> >
> > Tom - W4BQF
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Don Watters" <ve1bn@eastlink.ca>
> > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 9:45 AM
> > Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
> >
> >
> > > Steve -
> > >
> > > You asked   "How does the rig know it's "make" is being delayed 
> by a
> > keyer?"
> > >
> > > It's the reverse,  the key closure is delayed to increase key-on 
> time,
> or
> > > decrease
> > > keying-off time,  by the amount of mS you set to match the rig's 
> on
> delay.
> > > The
> > > adjustment is independent of speed and is used to correct 
> keying
> > distortion
> > > of
> > > various transceivers.
> > >
> > > You will note that ARRL tests of key closure versus signal 
> transmit
> delay
> > of
> > > different rigs are shown.   I measured the mS needed to 
> compensate my
> > > rigs from those test pix.  The Paragon II was "dead on" using 
> the
> Paragon
> > > (1)
> > > test results.  Saved a lot of fussin".
> > >
> > > 73 -  Don   VE1BN@eastlinbk.ca
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com>
> > > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 9:17 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes sir. I had a K3 Super Duper CMOS here for some time. I 
> sold it
> > because
> > > I
> > > > didn't like the mode B emulation. Other than that, it's ok. 
> Listening
> to
> > > the
> > > > weight vs. "keying compensation" adjustment in another 
> receiver,  they
> > > seem
> > > > to do exactly the same thing which is to increase the length 
> of the
> > > > characters. The only difference is that the "keying 
> compensation"
> > doesn't
> > > > affect the K3's racus sidetone.
> > > > Now I have a question about one of your statements.
> > > >
> > > >  "Keying compensation allows the make to be delayed so that 
> the start
> of
> > > the
> > > > > rig's
> > > > > keying envelope matches the keyer.   The weight control is
> different."
> > > >
> > > >  How does the rig know it's "make" is being delayed by a 
> keyer?
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, for some rigs, especially ICOMS, when used in QSK 
> mode, extra
> > > weight
> > > > is needed. When I use my MFJ 407 with the PROII in QSK mode, I 
> simply
> > > crank
> > > > up the weight control about 30%. In Semi-bkin mode, I turn it 
> back to
> > > > normal. The sidetone in the PROII reflects this change and 
> sounds
> rather
> > > > heavy. When using the K3 keyer, you get the same exact effect 
> when
> > > > increasing either the "weight" or "compensation". If you can 
> stand to
> > > listen
> > > > to the sick duck sidetone of the K3, the weight of the 
> sidetone is
> > > preserved
> > > > by increasing the "compensation" instead of the "weight". So 
> basically
> > the
> > > > "compensation" adjustment is a gimmick.
> > > > Most TenTec rigs do not seem to require additional weight but 
> las Tom
> > > > mentioned, the Omni 6+ does need a little help over about 45 
> WPM. The
> > > Orion
> > > > seems to be rather unpredictable in this reguard. Mine was 
> choppy at
> > first
> > > > then I upgraded the software and it sounded much better but my 
> QSK
> > became
> > > > slow. Maybe there's a relation!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Steve N4LQ
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Don Watters" <ve1bn@eastlink.ca>
> > > > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 7:45 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Whatever, Steve.  Please don't  take me for a fool.  Guess I 
> am just
> a
> > > > lucky
> > > > > fellow
> > > > > with a CMOS Superkeyer 3 which can compensate keying in 
> various
> rigs.
> > > > Ever
> > > > >  try one?  Was a cmcl op, used a bug for 40 years from early 
> ham
> days
> > in
> > > > > 1946
> > > > > until I sold my little Zephyr 5 years ago. I've used the 
> CMOS for
> the
> > > past
> > > > > 9.
> > > > >
> > > > > Guess I'm a true blue CW op too!!     I know you don't 
> tighten the
> > dits
> > > up
> > > > > on a bug
> > > > > as close as suggested.
> > > > >
> > > > > Keying compensation allows the make to be delayed so that 
> the start
> of
> > > the
> > > > > rig's
> > > > > keying envelope matches the keyer.   The weight control is
> different.
> > > It
> > > > > shortens
> > > > > the spacing of characters, sort of runs them together if too 
> much
> > weight
> > > > is
> > > > > set.  Big
> > > > > difference.  These are heard in the Ten-Tec sidetones.
> > > > >
> > > > > Was just suggesting a possible solution, but forget it OM,  
> you
> > > apparently
> > > > > already
> > > > > have the answers....
> > > > >
> > > > > By the way, no offence taken or meant.
> > > > >
> > > > > 73 -  Don  VE1BN@eastlink.com
> > > > >
> > > > > Gosh. just seems to do the job.      ----- Original Message 
> -----
> > > > > From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com>
> > > > > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 8:06 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Keying compensation? Delay? Sounds like a line from the K3 
> manual.
> I
> > > > > suppose
> > > > > > if he had a  keyer he could crank up the weight  but I'm 
> not sure
> > the
> > > > ole
> > > > > > boy owns one. He's a true, blue cw op! Bug only! BTW: That 
> "keying
> > > > > > compensation" is just another weight control. The only 
> difference
> in
> > > > that
> > > > > > and a regular weight control on a Curtis keyer is the fact 
> that it
> > > > doesn't
> > > > > > affect the sidetone (which few people use anyway).
> > > > > > Steve N4LQ
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Don Watters" <ve1bn@eastlink.ca>
> > > > > > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 6:19 PM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Steve -
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Any way he can set the keying compensation?   I found my 
> Paragon
> > II
> > > > > needed
> > > > > > > about 15 mS delay to give a smooth keying 
> characteristic. No
> > > shortened
> > > > > > makes
> > > > > > > or clicks.  Worth a try if he can set it up.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 73 -  Don,  VE1BN@eastlink.ca
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com>
> > > > > > > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 6:30 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: [TenTec] omni v short dits
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A friend of mine has an Omni V and he is trying to use a 
> bug
> > however
> > > > the
> > > > > > > dits are being chopped so badly that he can't use it. 
> I've never
> > had
> > > a
> > > > > > > TenTec rig that chopped dits like this one. I've hear 
> him on the
> > air
> > > > and
> > > > > > > even with his dit weight screwed to almost touching, he 
> sounds
> > > > horrible.
> > > > > > > It's like something is wrong in the keying circuit. Has 
> anyone
> > > > > experienced
> > > > > > > this?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Steve N4LQ
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TenTec mailing list
> > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> 
> 


--------------------------------------
Duane Calvin, AC5AA
Austin, Texas

http://home.austin.rr.com/ac5aa
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>