Author Archive
2009 Wrap-Up
January 2nd, 2010 | 
Author: or: This Was The Decade That Was.
And with little fanfare I made my return to the HF bands in 2009. This, in keeping with the tradition I seem to have of always coming back to HF near the absolute ass end of a sunspot cycle after a prolonged absence during the peaks. The last time this happened was October 1995 when I went QRV at the tail end of Cycle 22 after being off the air for almost 6 years. Now I’m just in time to experience Cycle 24 which some predict will be the least active solar cycle in the history of this universe and all others, or some such. My lucky stars!
How long has it been this time? My logbook shows that other than sporadic activity (9 QSOs) between January 2001 and March 2002, I’ve been out of the game for over 10 years — my last contest from Closter, NJ was CQ WPX Phone in March 1999. Before that, my last spurt of activity lasted for 42 months (Oct. 95 to Mar. 99) during which time I worked a lot of mobile HF; discovered the joy of computerized logging during contests; discovered the further joy of losing copious amounts of computerized log data to the fickle whims of that third-rate, so-called “operating system” known as Windows (Win98, I believe it was that did my logs in….); I worked some CW contests for the first time; and got a new call, relegating that godawful N2HIE to the trash heap of bad-CW-call history. I was tanned, rested and ready for Cycle 23.
Then I got distracted — work took up more of my time, I got married, moved 4 times around northern New Jersey, got sidetracked by other hobbies (astronomy, photography, a brief and futile affair with model trains), spent 2+ years gutting and remodeling my mom’s house, then finally made the big move to Texas in August 2008.
Yet all during this time I never really let ham radio drift too far away. I may not have put a signal on the air but I had some or all of my radios set up at both my Bergenfield (2001) and Lake Wallkill (2002-2008) QTHs and did quite a bit of listening. Even had an FT-817 in my car for a spell and used to listen to 20m and 40m during my commute. I picked up a few key elements of my current station like a second NRD-515 receiver, a NCS Multi-RX audio mixer and a Heil Classic 5 mic; put an FT-7800 dual-bander in my Jeep; ordered and built my KX1 QRP transceiver; and got a new HF rig, the insanely great K3, in January 2008.
The only missing piece was an antenna and that came in June of this year in the unlikely form of a Tarheel screwdriver antenna (a hex beam or phased verticals being out of the question at the current QTH). And with that, on June 16th, WW2PT was back on HF. By the end of 2009 I had:
- Installed Ham Radio Deluxe and DM780 and set up (grudgingly…) a Windoze machine for logging and digi-modes.
- Deciphered the needlessly complex Logbook of the World registration process and got that up and running, and also joined up with eQSL to cover all the electronic verification bases.
- Started working PSK and several other digital modes.
- Started listening to more CW towards the end of the year (in preparation for Resolution #1, see previous post), but I only worked up the courage to touch the paddles for one QSO (HK1X).
- Played in a few contests — IARU HF, IOTA, CQ WWDX Phone, WAE RTTY, PSK DeathMatch.
…and just over 6 months later I had worked all 50 states, 78 DXCC countries and 25 CQ zones — that’s a whopping 103 DX Marathon points! (tnx AE5X for the reminder…) QSLs have been trickling in, too, giving me 47 countries and all states confirmed in 2009. The final tallies for the year (as of 31-Dec-09) are…
2009 DXCC:
2009 WAS:
2009 WAZ:
Bring on Cycle 24.
2010 Resolutions & Wishes
My 2010 New Year Resolutions
1. I will work CW: No, seriously. I really mean it this time — I can no longer take it when I hear people bragging about their QSO with Holyshite Reef, South Fubar Island, or Siddown & Shuddup Rocks on CW with only 10 watts and a coat hanger. I want in on this action!
So… I’ve been spending a lot of time listening down at the low end of the bands lately and have an iPod Shuffle loaded up with W1AW code practice MP3s, trying to get my speed up above my current retard level. I don’t phant’sy I shall ever achieve contester/DXer proficiency but I figure if I can recognize my own call sign and “5NN’ at 30-35 WPM I can fake the rest and blame QRM and QSB for all that I miss.
2. I will work QRP: This resolution closely related to the one immediately preceding. Time to break out the KX1, head out to Whiskey Hill with a 300′ roll of bell wire and see what happens. I might even try for WAS on PSK running only 5 watts.
3. I will concentrate on single-band WAS: All-band/all-mode WAS is in the bag, and I just need HI for the PSK endorsement. Only 5 QSLs left to complete WAS on 20m, then I swear to Baby Jesus I’m through with that infernal band (contests excepted). With solar conditions improving I expect to be spending a lot more time on 17m and 15m. And of course 40m is always a lot of fun even with only 100 watts. If I can finish 2010 with WAS on 40m and either 17m or 15m, I’ll be happy; if all three, I’ll be delirious.
4. I will upgrade to Extra: I’ve been putting this off for too long. Never did it because I never really needed the lower 25 kHz, but now that Resolution #1 is in effect…
5. I will buy an amp: Because even though QRP is fun, it ain’t gonna help me earn any awards on 80m or 40m. That ALS-1300 looks soooo nice.
6. I will build more equipment: Been itching to dig into another kit or two, perhaps a K1 or a SoftRock. If I can muster the dough, I’d love to build a K2 that I can dedicate to QRP CW and PSK31. At the very least I will build and install the 80m/30m option for my KX1 that I have in a box somewhere.
My 2010 Wish List
1. PSK ops will refrain from using RSID: I love automatic ID for oddball modes like Throb and MFSK, but do we really need it for garden-variety PSK31 transmissions? I end up turning RSID off after a few minutes.
2. PSK ops will develop some DXing skills: For God’s sake, people… stop sending “My Station” macros and weather reports when working DX. Unless the DX station starts chatting you up, work him like it’s a contest — people are waiting. And trust me, the DX doesn’t care what kind of radio or computer you’re using or when you were “created”. Try this macro instead:
hisCall TU 599 599 Name myName QTH myQTH BTU DE myCall
If the DX wants to know anything else, he’ll ask. Betcha’ a dollar he won’t.
When the DX station signs, just give a quick “73” and leave it at that. Wishing him and his family Merry Christmas in six different languages is not required; neither is informing him that “PSK31 QSO #261 has been logged at 0351 UTC on 12-December-2009”, nor that he can find more info about you on QRZ.com. And if the DX ends his last transmission to you with “QRZ?”, don’t say anything else — just log the QSO and move on. Remember: “QRZ?” is short for “OK, you’re in the log, now shut yer pie-hole and let me work someone else!”
This is all so “DXing 101” that I’m embarrassed to have to mention it, but the PSK band segments are clearly overpopulated with noobs who need some gentle Elmering. I’m here to help.
3. Sunspots will return: ‘Nuff said.
4. More hams will use LOTW: Yes, I know it sucks… but it’s really not that hard to figure out or that much of an inconvenience to sign and upload your logs — certainly much less hassle than filling out a couple hundred cards, stuffing them into envelopes, fixing stamps, etc. And a whole lot cheaper, too; this alone should appeal to the cheap bastards that all hams are known and well documented to be.
With that, I now sign off for 2009 wishing all a Happy New Year and all the best DX in 2010!
The Noisy K3
or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the RF Gain
The latest kerfuffle currently brewing on the Elecraft reflector concerns the “Noisy K3 receiver” and, predictably, the commenters have broken down into two opposing factions: the “Me Too!” group is posting comparisons with other receivers that supposedly have less background noise and less listening fatigue, and the “Not Here!” group which swears that their K3 is so quiet that they sometimes think it has been damaged.
Whether any or all of the complaints about background noise are valid, and/or whether these people have radios that are somehow defective or simply misadjusted is beyond my ability to discern. I’m not picking sides here, the guys who think their K3s are noisy may have real issues, and if so I’m confident Elecraft will address these issues as they have done with all others in the past. Perhaps we’ll all end up with better, quieter K3s in a few weeks as a result of this discussion.
That said, what really fascinates me is that some of my fellow amateurs apparently believe the RF Gain control to be an archaic, vestigial appendage left over from ancient days of vacuum tubes, and that it has no place or purpose in a modern receiver. To wit:
“Bill has linked to and quoted Eric’s paper which quite frankly seems way too complicated to me. IMHO, a modern DSP, microprocessor-controlled receiver should figure all of this stuff out automatically and do it for me … If the receiver has a properly designed AGC system then there are only two variables that are potentially the operator’s responsibility: 1) Preamp On/Off and 2) Attenuator On/Off. With the smarts built into modern radios, why can’t the radio do, for example upon band switching, a little routine of turning each of these on and off and measuring the resulting SNR and then setting them accordingly?” — N7WS
And:
“I’m used to leaving the RF gain wide open on the MkV, leaving the audio gain pretty much alone, and maybe switching between SLOW and FAST occasionally. I don’t seem to have any trouble hearing the weak ones under the strong ones. Now I have to fiddle with the RF gain (a small knob hidden amongst the others) while running a pileup. Not enough hands (or enough brains).” — VE7XF
Seriously? Not enough hands? No offense intended to these guys, fine gentlemen both, but we’ve long suffered complaints about how the K3 doesn’t have the all front panel controls one “needs” at his fingertips to tweak a signal to perfection. Now, a single RF Gain knob is too many controls to tweak in order to deliver a good sounding signal? And what N7WS is asking for falls under the general category of “Artificial Intelligence” — I think we’re going to have to wait a few more decades before we start seeing that offered in consumer electronics products!
The fact is, if you run the K3 or any other radio with RF Gain flat out, the result will be a higher level of background noise than if you “ride” the RF Gain. Whether analog or digital, a receiver’s AGC cannot magically discriminate a desired signal from noise. Instead, it will adjust the gain of the IF stages in response to the entirety of what it detects — that is, signal and noise. The purpose of the RF Gain control is to allow the operator to limit the range of the AGC to some degree in order to compensate for this lack of intelligence. RF Gain is like a transmission in a car, and just as an automatic transmission may work well some or perhaps even most of the time, it doesn’t always put the car in the right gear for every road condition. Similarly, the AGC doesn’t — and cannot — always deliver the optimum results under all band conditions. The RF Gain control is the radio’s stick shift. Use it.
Advancements in DSP technology have made it somewhat possible for a processor to detect speech or CW from random noise and perform the requisite voodoo to pass the wanted signal and suppress all else, but this technology still isn’t perfect. I don’t pretend to understand it all, but lot of math is employed to come up with what is still essentially a “best guess” as to what is, or isn’t, wanted. In my experience, it doesn’t always guess correctly; operator input is still required. The reason there are so many different possible settings for the Noise Reduction (NR) on the K3 is so you can choose what works best for you. But if you can’t be bothered riding the RF Gain a little bit, you surely won’t want to mess with the NR parameters.
Is my K3 unusually “noisy?” Honestly, I don’t know for sure. I don’t think it is; when I first got it I did comparisons with the JST-245, a rig which had a pretty damn quiet receiver. At the time I thought the K3 compared quite favorably. However, these tests were not scientific and the antennas used at the time were fairly crappy. Now I have a slightly better antenna… but alas, no more JST-245.
I did a brief A/B test with one of my NRD-515s on 40m SSB switching between both radios with the same antenna, each feeding identical NVA-515 speakers. It was a hands-down win for the K3 even with NR and AFX turned off. Tweaking both radios for best results, the difference in signal quality and intelligibility was pretty significant. Not exactly a fair fight, though… the NRD-515 is a 25 year old design.
Maybe I’d notice this perceived noisiness more if I had a quiet antenna and QTH. Unfortunately, I contend with a constant S7-8 background noise that I attribute to environmental factors (the QRN of suburban hell) and the fact that I have a vertical antenna, by nature more susceptible to electrical noise. In any case, I’ve never experienced how the K3 behaves on a quiet band. Under my typical conditions I can tweak the RF Gain, AF Gain and NR to maximize the quality of signals at or above the high noise level while reducing the background hash to a very acceptable level, but there is no single setting of controls that works on all signals. If I optimize for a relatively strong signal, I can reduce the background noise to practically nil but then weaker signals then become much less readable. Tweaking to separate the weakest signals from the noise is possible but that brings up the background noise as well — all the more so the weaker the signal and the closer it is to the noise floor. Every situation is different, so I’m constantly adjusting RF Gain and other controls to match the conditions much the same way I must downshift my Jeep when I climb a hill or drive through the twisties, or upshift when I reach cruising speed on a highway — no one gear works well all the time.
Once I find the best RF Gain setting for a particular signal, any noise that is still bothering me is handled extremely well by the NR (which, it cannot be overstated, is the whole purpose of having a NR function in the first place!). The K3’s NR has been greatly improved since trusty ol’ #216 arrived on my doorstep in January 2008. The original NR worked well for me as an SSB op, but the CW guys were not satisfied; so Elecraft changed the DSP voodoo to accommodate them. All of a sudden, I (and many others) found the NR didn’t work as well on SSB as it did in previous firmware versions, it made the output sound too hollow. So after we bitched and moaned about this, the boys in Aptos doubled the number of NR settings from 16 to 32, restoring the SSB-optimized NR settings and giving operators enough variety in NR level and aggression to satisfy everyone. I generally prefer very light NR, so I most often use the least aggressive setting in the 8-1 to 8-3 range to make copy comfortable to my ears; rarely do I use 8-4, but occasionally I will try the 7-x range on stronger signals. With the K3’s exceptional noise reduction I find myself adjusting NR more and RF and AF Gain less than I did in the pre-NR days with my JST-245, JST-135 and TS-930.
I hadn’t touched the AGC characteristic settings since the K3 was delivered, but today I decided to experiment with the AGC Slope and Threshold parameters just to see what effects they have. I found that the threshold (AGC THR) parameter makes a big difference in the amount of background noise amplified by AGC during periods of no signal. After a few hours of playing around the settings I ultimately settled on (for now) are:
- AGC DCY: SOFT
- AGC HLD: 0.20
- AGC PLS: NOR (default)
- AGC SLP: 012 (default)
- AGC THR: 002
- AGF-F: 100
- AGC-S: 020 (default)
Thus configured, and with noise reduction off, AGC set to Fast, and both AF and RF Gain controls set to 12 o’clock position, I’ve found my sweet spot for tuning around under typical conditions. When find a station, I may switch on NR and/or adjust the AF or RF Gain until what I hear sounds right to my ears.
What it all boils down to is, using the RF Gain isn’t a burden, nor is it rocket science — it’s how I’ve always operated a receiver. Along with NR, Notch, Width and Shift, it’s simply another tool at my disposal to recover the most intelligibility out of a signal. Reaching for the RF Gain comes as naturally to me as it does for the AF Gain or VFO. The idea that some ops feel put out by having to tweak the RF Gain control is beyond incredible to me.
Why Are Radios Horizontal?
This thought has been keeping me awake at night. Yes, I know I probably need psychiatric help… but that still doesn’t answer the question, now does it?
Radio manufacturers appear to be locked into a belief that radios must be horizontally oriented. I don’t get it — this takes up more desk space and offers no discernible advantage over a vertically-oriented rig. Why not flip radios on their side?
The closest thing we’ve got to vertical radios are some commercial rack-mounted systems, but even then, each of the individual components in the rack are horizontal. The cubish Flex-5000A comes close, it is almost as tall as it is wide, but is still technically a horizontal rig. (Actually, it has no knobs so it’s not a real radio anyway. Never mind.)
Desktop PCs used to come in horizontal cases; now they are all happily ensconced in tidy, attractive vertical towers. Has anyone complained? I don’t think so…
Tallness projects power and demands respect — you never hear people marveling over the world’s widest building, do you? I believe the first radio maker who ventures out into this brave, new design direction will come to rule the market.
You heard it here first, folks.
LOTW vs. eQSL: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics
Came across some interesting observations out in the blogosphere re: LOTW, whether its worth the hassle and such, by VE3OIJ and KB6NU. I shared some thoughts a few months ago not long after I got LOTW working. Some time has passed so I did some logbook analysis on my contacts since getting back on the air (16 June through the 30 November) to see if things got better or worse.
Every QSO in my logbook for this time period (379 total) has been uploaded to both eQSL.cc and LOTW. Here’s what I got for my trouble:
- Confirmations via eQSL: 118 (31.1% return rate)
- Confirmations via LOTW: 113 (29.8% return rate)
- QSOs confirmed via both eQSL and LOTW: 55
- QSOs confirmed via eQSL but not LOTW: 25
- QSOs confirmed via LOTW but not eQSL: 58
- DXCC entities confirmed by both eQSL and LOTW: 16
- DXCC entities confirmed via eQSL but not LOTW: 10
- DXCC entities confirmed via LOTW but not eQSL: 14
So what does this prove? Nothing, really, except that more than two thirds of the stations I’ve worked in the past 6 months don’t use either method of electronic QSLing, or simply haven’t bothered to upload their logs yet. As for those who do QSL electronically, just under half use both LOTW and eQSL. Unless and until more logging software integrates automatic uploading, I don’t see how electronic QSLing will be a viable replacement for the analog method.
I’m sure more electronic QSLs will trickle in over the next few months, but in my experience I’ve found that most people who use eQSL and/or LOTW will upload their logs pretty soon after the QSO. Therefore, I don’t expect the percentages to skew drastically either way. Whether my experience is in any way representative of reality, I can’t say. I’m curious to know how other hams are faring. Is my 30% return rate typical?
Meanwhile, I’m sitting on a pile of cards ready to go out to DX stations but I haven’t had a burning desire to cough up the $150+ for postage (including the return postage that most DX stations ask for), nor have I sent off any cards to the outgoing bureau. I’ve been happy thus far to sit back and watch the LOTW verifications trickle in and my DXCC and WAS totals slowly increase.
In a perfect world, the ARRL would accept eQSL as a legitimate confirmation method. But in reality, this would net me very few “new ones” since many of those 10 eQSL-only countries were already verified when I was QRV from New Jersey, years before either LOTW or eQSL.cc were a gleam in their programmers’ eyes.
November 2009 Wrap-Up
The hunt for WAS and DXCC continues…: Got back to the shack this month (actually, late October) to work a few contests and return to my WAS quest. I worked Maine three times, leaving only Delaware unworked; QSLs still needed from AL, DE, ME and NV.
Now I’m turning my attention to filling in the grids on individual bands with an eye towards an eventual 5-Band WAS. As of now I have 42 states confirmed on 20m and 16 states on 40m. On the 80, 30m, 15m and 17m bands my counts are in the single digits, though the cards are trickling in and the number of states worked is increasing as I spend more time on 40m at night, 17m and 15m during the day, and avoid the lure of 20m as best I can unless something good pops up on the cluster. Even made a few QSOs on 80m the other night — the Tarheel doesn’t deliver an SWR better than 2.5:1 but my signal made it into the midwest for KS, MO and IL. Unfortunately 12m and 10m operations will have to wait as my Tarheel won’t tune those bands (need to get it closer to the ground, I’m told).
FWIW, I now have 39 states confirmed on eQSL.cc, so their eWAS won’t be far behind the “official” WAS award from ARRL. As for other eQSL awards, I have 17 zones and 36 countries confirmed.
On the DXCC front, I worked 7 new countries in Oct/Nov and received confirmations from 8 new ones. Now just 17 QSLs away from all-band DXCC…
Misc. QRM: I had my first MT63 QSO with N1GKE in Rhode Island on 17m — saw his RSID pop up in DM780 and gave it a try. Neat mode — not sure if it’s as error-free and fade-resistant as Olivia, but close.
October/November 2009 Stats (To-Date Confirmed/Worked):
27 DXCC Entities (83/124)
18 CQ Zones (27/30)
26 States (46/49)
160 Total QSOs
27 DXCC Entities (83/124)
18 CQ Zones (27/30)
26 States (46/49)
160 Total QSOs
