Re: K3S Comparison table finalized (link attached)

Rob Sherwood

This is true, as is the very high blocking value for the TS-890S. If I was at a typical Field Day event, without extremely good antenna isolation (Search on W3AO & info from W3LPL), I would consider the legacy superhet over a modern direct sampling IF there are 2 or more signals on the same band.

Otherwise, for most of us most of the time we are nowhere near blocking radios. If we have a neighboring ham a mile away, and we are both on 160 or 80m with good verticals, blocking can certainly be an issue, if transmitted phase noise doesn't get you first. (Or RMDR on most of the older radios.)

An FTdx-3000 in the foothills above Boulder, CO wipes out hams within at 5 to 10 mile radius with transmitted broadband noise.

Rob, NC0B

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of N6KR
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 6:17 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft-K3] K3S Comparison table finalized (link attached)

My two cents:

Rob wrote:

I would count the order differently if numbering is of interest. The radio at #1 cannot be reproduced with current software.
Clarified recently in footnote "y" of the RX performance table.

That makes the K3S #1 and the 7610 #9 if you want to count for some reason. The difference in 2 kHz dynamic range is 106 dB compared to 98 dB.
The table is sorted on 2 kHz IMDDR3. However, the table also shows dramatic differences in blocking dynamic range. For example, the K3S is 20 to 30 dB stronger in this regard than all of the direct-sampling radios in the table. This is due to the K3S having narrow-band filtering (crystal filters) ahead of the ADC. This can greatly reduce desense and other artifacts in any high-signal situation (Field Day, KW neighbor, multi-TX station, etc.).


If this email is spam, please report it to

Join to automatically receive all group messages.