Re: [TenTec] QSK

["Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>]

Hmmmm....good point Paul.

But that brings up the question, if you have proper 3:1 element 
lengths, why would you have to fiddle with the weighting?

Or , is it really correct that the 3:1 ratio is proper/correct 
elements? Isn't that a 'spec' that, like QSK, was developed back in 
the mechanical key era also?

To me, sidetone circuitry in just about every rig is designed 
completely incorrect. I think in most rigs, sidetone is generated by 
the keying pulses going TO the xmtr stages. I think it should be 
developed by the wave shape sampled in the SWR circuit. That way you 
would have a more true representation of how your own signal 
sounded. As it is now, you really have no true representation in 
sidetone, of how your signal actually sounds.

Any thoughts?

Tom - W4BQF

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "PHILLIP C FLORINE" <flor0045@metnet.edu>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 1:46 AM
Subject: [TenTec] QSK


> In addition to all the requirements discussed previously for 
> (good) QSK,
> how about transmitted element lengths being proper (3:1) whether 
> using an
> internal or external keyer without having to fiddle with weighting 
> or other
> controls?  The sidetone would, of course, reflect what's being 
> transmitted.
>
> No choppy CW allowed- at any speed.
>
> Phil,
>
> K0UBC
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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