[TenTec] omni v short dits
n4lq
n4lq at iglou.com
Mon Jul 26 12:41:48 EDT 2004
Bob:
I think what you're trying to say is: Compensation is consistent with
speed while weighting is not. I would have to see proof of this on a K3.
I disagree with your dot only comment.
Any keyer I've ever had will change both dot and dash weight when you
increase the weight control.
Furthermore. If I crank up the weight on a keyer, it sounds heavy no
matter how fast or slow I'm going however it does make copy more
difficult when going fast with lots of weight.
Now for a TenTec commercial just to keep it legal.
My first keyer was a TenTec KR40 back in 1974 or so. It cost $79 and that
seemed like a lot. However it was built like a tank, was Iambic, had
weight and speed controls, could key tube or ss rigs with it's internal
relay, built in paddles with magnetic springs etc. It was far ahead of
it's time.
Steve N4LQ
-----Original Message-----
From: "Bob Henderson" <bob at cytanet.com.cy>
To: <tentec at contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:12:49 -0000
Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
> I deduce from your mail that you're not overly impressed by Idiom Press
> and
> their K3 keyer! I don't own a K3 and have no relationship with Idiom
> Press.
> I do use a Samson ETM9 which is a Logikey circuit, similar I believe,
> to the
> K3. I point all of this out as I am now going to disagree with you
> pretty
> much 100%.
>
> There is a world of difference between weighting and keying
> compensation.
> Though at a given speed it is possible to adjust either for a similar
> sounding effect. It is the speed change that you make after the
> weighting
> adjustment that causes things to come apart at the seems.
>
> Weighting is the duty cycle of a string of dots. It is adjustable on
> most
> modern keyers in the range 25-75%. Good code is dot weighted at 50%.
>
> Keying compensation changes key down to key up time by a fixed number
> of mS
> completely independent of sending speed.
>
> Weighting was originally talked about when mechanical bugs were the
> norm.
> These keys frequently clipped dots and or made unclean breaks at the
> end of
> dots. All of these were mechanical problems. The rigs of the day had
> a
> different, though complementary tendency to extend character elements.
> Of
> course rigs then didn't have microprocessor control and tended to be
> either
> cathode or grid block keyed. Back in those days with cathode keyed
> rigs the
> steps you took to avoid key clicks were not only to remove the clicks
> caused
> by the rig but also by the unclean make and break tendency of the
> mechanical
> bugs contacts. In classic fashion the tendency was to soften the rise
> and
> fall of the carrier wave at the start and end of character elements.
> Sometimes this was done to what by today's standards, would be
> considered
> extreme ammounts. Didn't you ever set up a bug using an ohmeter so you
> could see it was producing 50% duty cycle but then find it sounded
> either
> heavy or scratchy when keying the rig? Scratchy because of the bug
> contacts
> or heavy because of the time constant added to get rid of the scratchy
> effect. Frequently, I would find that weighting would need to be set
> at
> 40-45% at the bug to produce 50% on air. (Elements extended through
> click
> reduction measures). The big problem was that weighting set at 25 wpm
> was
> no good at all if the speed was increased to 50 wpm. It's easy to see
> why.........
>
> Say for example, you have a dot length of 40mS with keyer weight set at
> 50%
> but that this sounds heavy because of your rigs wave shaping time
> constant.
> You reduce your weighting to 40% to restore a 50% weighted on air
> signal
> from the transmitter. Having done this, your keyer dot length would be
> 32mS
> to produce an on air 50% weighted 40mS dot. In this scenario your TX
> is
> extending character elements by 8mS. Quite common in the "Old days".
> Now
> you double your speed and half your keyer dot length to 20mS. What
> happens?
> Well your keying sounds heavy again. Why? Because your 40% weighting
> is
> shortening your dot by only 4mS to 16mS now but your TX is extending
> your
> dot by 8ms meaning that on air your dot is 24mS long. To restore an on
> air
> 50% weight you would have to reduce your keyer weighting to 30%.
>
> By now you can probably see that keying compensation is a much better
> scenario. If your rig extends by X mS you want your keyer to shorten
> your
> elements by X mS. On the other hand if your rig truncates character
> elements by X mS you will want your keyer to extend elements by X.
>
> Earlier firmware in the Orion truncated character elements by around
> 8-10mS.
> I got around that problem with my keyer which I programmed to extend
> character elements by 8mS. This fixed the problem regardless of
> sending
> speed. I could have achieved a similar result by adjusting weighting
> but I
> would have had to readjust it every time I changed keying speed. Not
> nearly
> as convenient.
>
> The 8-10mS element truncation on the Orion is now a thing of the past,
> so I
> have deleted the 8mS extension from my ETM9C programming. I believe
> Orion
> still truncates by around 2-3mS but that is not significant at the
> speeds I
> work. Never these days do I send above 50 wpm. If I did and I was
> concerned about it then it only takes a moment to program a 2 or 3mS
> delay
> into my ETM9C. I can do the same in Writelog for computer generated
> code
> for contesting. Interestingly the author of Writelog has confused
> matters
> somewhat by referring to what is a keying compensation adjustment in
> the
> program as a "Weighting " adjustment.
>
> So there you have it. If I have explained myself adequately, you will
> now
> understand the difference between weighting and keying compensation.
> Who
> knows you might even conclude the folks at Idiom are not quite the
> Idiots
> you thought. I guess the corollary is that if my explanation doesn't
> work
> for you then you'll just add me to the Idiom Asylum.
>
> Bob, 5B4AGN, P3F
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq at iglou.com>
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 4:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] omni v short dits
>
>
> > 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 at alltel.net>
> > To: <tentec at 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 at eastlink.ca>
> > > To: <tentec at 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 at eastlinbk.ca
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq at iglou.com>
> > > > To: <tentec at 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 at eastlink.ca>
> > > > > To: <tentec at 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 at eastlink.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gosh. just seems to do the job. ----- Original Message
> -----
> > > > > > From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq at iglou.com>
> > > > > > To: <tentec at 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 at eastlink.ca>
> > > > > > > To: <tentec at 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 at eastlink.ca
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq at iglou.com>
> > > > > > > > To: <tentec at 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 at contesting.com
> > > > > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > > > > TenTec at contesting.com
> > > > > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > > > TenTec at contesting.com
> > > > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > > TenTec at contesting.com
> > > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > > TenTec at contesting.com
> > > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > TenTec mailing list
> > > > TenTec at contesting.com
> > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TenTec mailing list
> > > TenTec at contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
More information about the TenTec
mailing list