A/B switch between the IC-7300 and K3S with all controls set flat, stock and same. Bandwidth 450 Hz. Identical speakers. Antenna switched between rigs.
I recently bought an IC-7300 and agree that it is a very competent rig! It has more features, and receives better with more dynamic range than my vintage rigs, and also better than my not so vintage Icom and JRC rigs. Sherwood Engineering has it way up ahead of many much more expensive rigs in their dynamic range testing. I was able to buy my IC-7300 for just under $1000 brand new from DX Engineering so I am amazed at the performance Icom is delivering at this price point. It's easy to use to with the touch screen. All my other rigs will soon be worth no more than $200 on the used market...
Based on the audio provided the 7300 is the clear winner. If you take in to account the price difference the 7300 is a slam dunk. Thanks for the comparison, I too would like to see a similar comparison with a stronger signal.
Your reply in the comments of 4 years ago. "Once the close-in dynamic range reaches the mid 80s there are few occasions where higher would help. The 7300 is at 94 vs the K3s at 106. The only way to experience the difference in real life would be during Field Day where you might have someone a few feet away or such. Too much attention to Dynamic range is given while ignoring actual demodulation. What you hear in your headphones is much more relevant. This is something that instrumentation based testing fails to reveal. It won't be long before the K3s is replaced with a K4. Elecraft will have to catch up. Just watch!" "It won't be long before the K3s is replaced by a K4"..
Nice test! Speaks for itself. So, the only comeback the K3S folks can make is its contest performance is much better. So, if you don't contest, you can save thousands and hear better! Seems pretty clear to me.
My ears say it's a toss up!! Great video. Now, let's see you put up your 7300 versus your wonderful Drake 2B/2BQ or Drake 2C/2CQ!! We'll see which one wins that battle!! Hi Hi 73, Jack
The receive bandwidth sounds narrower on the 7300, and the IF sounds like it was shifted lower on the 7300. The S/N ratio appears to be better on the 7300, but with the IF shifted and the apparent narrower bandwidth on the 7300, it's hard to say this was a 1:1 comparison.
The perceived receiver S/N ratio changes radically as the camera is pointed in different directions during the video. Have a listen at 6:08 to 6:20 and listen to how the K3s receiver seems to spring to life as the camera direction changes and points at the speaker instead of the radio.
+N1EU The Samsung Galaxy's mic is on the bottom of the phone but the phone is turned sideways. That way when it's aimed at the speakers both get the same amount of pickup but if I swing the phone 90 degrees it aims at either one or the other speaker give the perception one is stronger than the other so assume that when it's looking directly at those 2 speakers you are hearing what my ears here. That's about all I can do.
Most modern radios have more than enough sensitivity, the "acid test" would be picking out a weak station in a huge CW contest pileup, with a couple of nearby big guns calling cq just outside of the filter passband. It will be interesting to see what Rob Sherwood comes up with on his evaluation of the radio. Maybe it'll set "a new bar" for the mid-priced transceiver market.
I do not understand how did you figured out that Icom is clear winner?! If you will listen it carefuly then you have to hear that K3 more smooth. Not big difference but it is... Btw the sig is not weak so the test is not so useful mainly if both receivers are evidentl overgained on RF...
It really sounds like the passbands are different, the 7300 has a lower cutoff on the high end of the filter skirt, the K3 is a bit higher (or the skirts are set differently.) It also sounds to my ear like they have different center frequencies so that the signal sits in a different part of the passband for each one. At this filter width, I imagine 10 or so Hz can make a difference.
Much of the terrible filter noise can be removed from IC7300 by turning off the AGC, still wont be any more sensitive but a whole lot easier to listen to. Not sure if K3s quiets down so nicely using this method.
Don't own either and to my ear the 7300 sounds way more clear with less noise. Reading comments and I can see K3 owners bias. I would be happy to own either.
I'm a K3 owner considering a 7300. It's not bias. Close in selectivity, the K3 can handle a 20 DB stronger signal before meltdown. It's just a fact. And because of roofing filters, theres never a situation where the ADC gets overloaded. And I think the 7300 is a wonderful rig that punches way above it's weight. I want one. But they aren' in the same performance class. The 7610 is a closer comparison but it also can suffer from ADC overload. Thats why the K4 from Elecraft has a direct sampling RX with a superhet option for maximum performance. Direct sampling and superhet are completely different animals.
Thanks for the excellent video. Very interesting and Elecraft along with Kenwood and Yaesu should take note. Steve, I have a request....can you create a similar video comparing the band scope on the 7300 vs the P3, please? From what I've seen so far, the 7300 has an excellent scope and lots of nice features, too. Having a side-by-side comparison will help me decide if I'm going to purchase a 7300 or not. Thanks again. Regards, Tom Kruczek; W1TXT; BTW, I own the K-Line.
The beacon has a low battery so the tone drops due to the load. I prefer the Icom 7300 to the K3. The have about equal sensitivity but the 7300 has much richer audio. 73's w5yb
Both have equal Sensitivity between the K3S and IC-7300. The 8-pole filters in the Elecraft gives the ringing pitch due ( sound between dits and dah in CW ). Hollow pitch, like listening thru acoustic hollow tube is the pass effects from the ringing in 8 pole filters, if done with fewer poles on the Elecraft, hollow pitch should disappear. More passive IMD due to 8-pole filter in K3S, but better blocking than typical SDR radio's like IC-7300 The 8 pole filters should give better blocking in a CQ contest like CQWW so there a tradeoff going o between the IC-7300 and K3S
Just to clarify: Both the KX3 and K3/K3S are SDRs. A major difference between these rigs and something like the IC-7300 or Flex 6xxx series is that our A-to-D converters (ADCs) are protected from wideband interference by a narrowband I.F. The K3/K3S uses crystal filters, while the KX3 uses precision, narrowband low-pass filters. In direct-sampling SDRs, the ADC is right at the front end of the radio, protected only by wideband LC filters. The result is typically 15-20 dB lower blocking dynamic range. More subtle is the effect of multiple signals, which can combine in phase to hit the limit of the ADC, resulting in unwanted images. It's a tradeoff; a direct-sampling SDR can allow you to look at multiple MHz of bandwidth on its spectrum display, if that's of interest.
+mikeatthebeach Check the Sherwood list. The 7300's narrow spaced dynamic range tested 12th in the list of radios, higher than the TS-990 and others with roofing filters. Also the ADC is protected from overload by use of the RF Gain control and attenuator. So yes, it is possible to overload the ADC if you allow that to happen. Things might get a bit tricky in close proximity stations such as Field Day or DXepeditions however.
All things considered they seemed to be about equal, if you close your eyes and listen closely like a blind man, at that point it comes down to tonal quality. Thanks for the comparison. I think it's been a great help in my decision making process. 73' Keep up the good work Rekindling The Reformation !!
The K3 always had a crappy audio section. Sensitivity and selectivity are excellent however. For what they are pricing the Icom at it seems like a deal as compared to the K3S. They aren't in the same ballpark as far as features and RX performance. If only they could make the K3S sound like my old Kenwood TS930!
this would be a better test using a fixed mic and the same speaker not two speakers. even identical speakers will sound different because of position relative to room conditions and mic position. This test shows that the IC does very well. but Id like to see the same test in a controlled lab and not using a cell phone to record the audio also this test only one aspect of the radio. if you take all the feature sets of both radios its not going to be a K3 killer. but thats not to say it wont be a very good reciever.
Steve - both of these make my ears bleed as compared to Corsair II. Turn on all the dsp features, okay now we can deal with the background noise but it all sounds artificial. On SSB, not a worry in the world, brilliant dsp radios.
Thanks for the upload, what great radios both. Hope it's OK to add that on a clean band like this, CW (and any other modes) reception is easy for any radio. I would expect the K3S though, with its much higher dynamic range, to receive much more on a busy band, with many more offending signals up and down the target station. Maybe if possible such a test could be run one day? TU es 73
Once the close-in dynamic range reaches the mid 80s there are few occasions where higher would help. The 7300 is at 94 vs the K3s at 106. The only way to experience the difference in real life would be during Field Day where you might have someone a few feet away or such. Too much attention to Dynamic range is given while ignoring actual demodulation. What you hear in your headphones is much more relevant. This is something that instrumentation based testing fails to reveal. It won't be long before the K3s is replaced with a K4. Elecraft will have to catch up. Just watch!
Possibly, let's see what the future will bring. Not interested in favoring either / any brand. But the Icom 7300s has no roofing filters capability. Unlike the K3 that does; and which can take several too! That's maybe what makes the difference in Blocking Dynamic Range, where the K3S is some 37 times (!) superior to the 7300 (150 vs 123 dB). And the 12 dB DR difference indisputably shows the Elecraft is by 15 times superior to the 7300 in this respect too. That's maybe also why 7300s are for now so far behind the pack, in the 12th place - source Sherwood Engineers Inc. I have both Elecrafts and Icoms, as well as a better DR valued radio than the 7300 (Perseus@99 dB) When it comes to congested bands, as I have found CW/FSK etc on the K3 (let alone even the much better k3S) gives a stellar copy, even with the auxiliary receiver. That's is the hands on experience here with the 250 Hz roofing filter (KFL3A-250) here. Maybe you don't have the roofing filters yet? But when you do you will find similar findings if you run a tight spaced copy on a *congested band*. That is why theory and practice go hand in hand in my professionally qualified experience. I have had several Icoms, I do love the brand. But when it comes to close up powerhouse stations obliterating QRPs in Manaus or Port Elizabeth, the K3 delivers. That's why I'm selling my Icoms and upgrading to higher end Elecraft gear. Maybe tomorrow it will be Icoms again - but they have much catch-up work to do. On the flip side, if top performance in DX is not the choosing criterion? Indeed the 7300 provides a compact package with an attractive built in scope and is very good value for money. But that's all you get - no upgrading capabilities at all.
I owned a K3 then K3s for 8 years and yes I had them loaded with those wonderful roofing filters. The term "Roofing Filter" is hype for "Crystal Filter" in the first IF stage. That is 1940's technology. The Hammarlund HQ-120 had one!. The K3 is simply a superhetrodyne receiver with a DSP demodulator. Crystal filters attenuate the signal which must be compensated for by extra stage gain which in turn generates noise and ringing. We are now beyond that. The 7300 uses "Direct Sampling" ...There are no "converters" and no "IF" chain. There is no place to put a crystal filter. Signals from the antenna pass through a bandpass filter and go directly to an analog to digital converter chip where large chunks of spectrum are sampled and digitized ...A crystal filter would corrupt this process. That is why the 7300 and Flex rigs can detect weak signals better. Once you've convinced yourself that you have the best rig around it's had to be objective. The 7300 is a cheap radio at $1400. My K3s package was around $6000. I could just refuse to admit that the 7300 hears better but I'm trying to be honest.
Yes, I hear what you are saying, and indeed the two radios are different class radios, both price wise but mainly performance and upgrade potential too (connection to an external monitor may be a saver one day for our aging sight). I am glad you call the xtal filters "wonderful", as they do make such a wonderful difference; again there can be little performance comparison between these radios, with all the due respect to the brand and its owners - that goes without saying. And yes about the known history of tighter roofing filters (thank you Orion!) of analogue vs digital architectures with most SDRs for now sadly employing only Direct Sampling, no IF stages. Hence no IF outputs either for the 7300. But wouldn't you agree that the lack of roofing filters is most DS architecture Achille's heel when it comes e.g. to QRP tightly enveloped in QRO? All evidence existing supports this. That is why the third way that Elecraft comes up with,impresses: a mixed design, to allow taking advantage of proved signal handling, xtal filters. You mention that the Flex Rigs can detect weak signals "better". In what sense though? Noise suppressing algorithms for "clearer" audio? They won't though dig the signal out of the noise, and here's why. Take, for example, Flex's latest 6700. Its MDS (minimum detectable signal) is again some 10dB weaker than the K3S. And it costs more than twice as much as the K3S ! (www.sherweng.com/table.html). If one can provide any solid evidence (QRP in QRO environment or objective lab measurement) to the contrary, with the 7300 please share the evidence, I'm eager to catch up (22 Aug 2016) and learn from fellow operators. And yes, although I love our lovely radio toys, there's no point being a brand "follower" or spend over-the-top. Suppose it all boils down to what the product user wants out of the radio - possibly including cosmetics. But although good looks may be subjective, evidence based performance measurement, cannot be denied - whoever does well, deserves the credit.
I won't agree that the lack of roofing filters is the Achille's heel in any DS architecture. Nope....The heel is ADC overflow. The cure is not crystal filters. That would be impossible since there is no intermediate frequency. The cure is better, faster, more expensive, ADC chips. MDS is a non issue. Radios have been sensitive enough since Armstrong invented the regenerative receiver in 1914. Naturally the Flex 6700's ADC is far better than the 7300's but as time goes on, the price will drop. Flex needs to develop a better AGC system though. It's pathetic and almost like not having one.
I thought that in fact Elecraft wins "hands in the pockets" i dont know the right term in English but in France we say "les mains dans les poches". In fact for an non genuine speaker its hard to say what receiver we hear. Elecraft is unkown in France but I would love the same comparison beetwen a 991a and a 7300 in USB
Six on the one hand and one-half dozen on the other hand, IMHO. K3 noise is a bit less tunnel-ie, and would be less fatiguing after some time, again, IMHO. I'll take the K3.
Check out the price of a K3 with external panadapter vs the ICOM 7300 with its built in panadapter and see which one you might consider the better deal.
+David Shelton Both have plenty of sensitivity and selectivity. The IC-7300 sets an all time record for relay and fan noise....You can hear it next door! QSK is fast and clean as long as you wear sound reduction headphones.
The whole premise of "above the noise floor" is mis understood. What you think is that the rig has a noise floor and every receiver does have one. AND it is INSIGNIFICANT in BOTH today's superhets and SDRs. BUT STOP! here is the problem: atmospheric noise IS a signal. It is just there. If you connect an antenna and the noise level increases, your receiver is sensitive enough. At that point, every receiver can "pull out" (another misnomer for another discussion) a signal. At this point, you need antenna gain and directivity to bring the desired signal higher than the atmospheric noise. Dynamic range is the important spec in a receiver.
However even though the DB level of residual noise might be the same on any two radios, the listener may still deem one noisier than the other. This can be due to AGC threshold levels or DSP algorithm variations. An example is the IC-756 proIII or the IC-7000 which seems to convert atmospheric static crashes into sharp noise spikes which totally drowns out weaker signals. I site this video as evidence. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6g0womtPda0.html
You are correct. I'll also add that most circuits these days are so quiet that the noise contribution should really be minimal. Most of the noise you hear on your radio is a real signal that even the most accurate spectrum analyzer would pick up. Between these two radios, they may have different filtering and different demodulation algorithms, not to mention different post-processing on the audio chain. Great video though!
Listened again. Again I hear about the same signals but prefer the tone of the noise in one over the other. All ears are different. Ears are not lab instruments, and they change with age, same as eyes. Get the one you prefer.
The 7300 is a great entry level rig. Maybe the best entry level rig out there, but apples and oranges. 7300 will overload whilst the K3S runs merrily along. Contesters even run two stations in same band at close proximity with the K3. The 7300 would turn into a puddle of goo. Theres a reason one is 4-5K and the other is 1300 bucks. Articulation of signals goes to the K3. Warm and full are not terms for intelligibility. :) You are talking a highly selective front end with roofing filters versus a wide open direct sampling design. The ADC in the 7300 is a 9 year old design. It will get swamped in a huge pileup.
It is well tested in the lab sir. Place a 20 over signal 2KHZ away from an S1 signal and watch the 7300 melt. The K3 will make strong station go away. Theres a reason the rigs have different price points. The K3S outperforms rigs twice the price. But people like pretty. You can't sell performance. But......the K3 has better guts. Its irrefutable. Even the Ham stores will say the same exact thing if you ask them. Not in the same league. These subjective audio comparisons are useless really. You can make any rig sound good if you set it up right.
Bet you a dollar... I would take home your dollar and save $4,000 on radios. Not a comparison but listening around shows there is a total lack of intermod and perfect selectivity. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-2HE7N3VhPg4.html
Steve Ellington Wow. I didn't think it had that good of a front end. Really nice radio actually. The big thing that would make me hesitate is the loud relay. Already have the K3. I do agree the weak signal sounds better on the 7300. I think Elecraft needs to come out with something new soon. The K3's are a bit long in the tooth
Yep. After having my K3 and K3s for 8 years I found it was gathering dust after getting the 7300. Sad but true. I sold the K3S and had change left over to buy 3 more 7300s. The dual receivers was nice and that's the only feature I miss. The IC-7610 will eventually take care of that. .... The relay noise is a problem and my fist and easy fix was to stuff a wad of poster putty around both relays. That makes it bearable. I then removed the amp keying relay and bypassed it so its driver transistor keys the amp directly. That eliminated 90% of the noise.
Unlike other radios, on a noisy band like 10 MHz, setting the K3S RF GAIN to MAX makes the rig sound worse, because all it does is make more noise. Back it off a bit and it will sound better with no loss of sensitivity. Second, the passbands and pitch settings do not sound equal at all; the K3 passband is hearing much higher tones than the IC-7300. To hear below 300 Hz in a stock K3S passband, you must go to the RX EQ audio equalizer screen and tap [0] until you see 0.1 displayed, which means the passband will now hear down to 100 Hz instead of cutting off at 300 Hz. The IF shift can also be used to make the passbands sound the same if you set CONFIG:PB CTRL to Shift=0.01 instead of the default Shift=0.05. I suggest applying these changes to the K3S, then repeating the test with weak 28 MHz CW beacon, 28.200 and above, with and without preamps, with and without Noise Reduction.
+RAWilsonTV Same is true for the 7300. That's why I set them for equal values. Certainly both rigs can be made to sound almost identical with a little tweeking but I was trying to be fair.
+Steve Ellington It's not really fair to make comparisons when the K3's RF GAIN is set to the worst possible value (max), and the passband is set (as it is by default) to cut off most low-frequency audio. In case you misunderstood, I'm not asking you to adjust the RX EQ values: you should keep it flat. Please just tap[0] until you see "0.1". You should hear how it makes the K3 audio sound much better.
+RAWilsonTV On the K3s with the bandwidth at 350hz changing from .3 to .1 makes no audible difference due to the width of the narrow filter. Changing the passband shift will of course alter the position of the center to a point....I can do the same thing with the 7300's PBT. I opted to leave both rigs at default. Too many of these "comparisons" cheat by tweaking their pet rig. Not me. Yes I am aware that the IMD is vastly better in the K3 but we are dealing with something I call "signal recovery" and that's often a function of DSP code or even the audio amplifier. I can make a $25 direct conversion receiver sound better than either of these on a cherry picked signal! It just wouldn't have all the glitz.
+Steve Ellington 350 Hz? Maybe that is a typo. In the video you say you are using a 450 Hz bandwidth in the IC-7300, and a 500 Hz "crystal filter" in the K3S with the bandwidth "set for for 450 Hz." Why did you choose that bandwidth instead of 500 Hz, which is standard for CW in both radios? I assume you are using the stock Elecraft 5-pole 500 Hz CW filter, not the much better Inrad 8-pole 500 Hz filter or Elecraft 8-pole 400 Hz Elecraft, which cost almost twice as much, for good reasons. Did you mean to type 250 Hz or 350 Hz? Yes, you can't hear any difference at 250 Hz, but you CAN hear a big difference with the bandwidth set at 500 Hz. What is Config FLx bandwidth set to? It affects when the filter kicks in. Try setting it to 500, not 450. Tapping [0] will reset the bandwidth to this value. Ideally, please try the 500 Hz CW bandwidth for both radios, with the .1 kHz setting in the K3, set CW Pitch at 500 Hz in both to center the passband, and create another video (after backing off RF Gain to about 9 O'clock in the K3S or both).
+RAWilsonTV Yes....450 hz....I used that bandwidth because that is where my 400 Hz roofing filter kicks in on the K3s. That should give the K3s an advantage unless filters degrade copyability. After all, we are comparing the technology invented in 1918 by Armstrong with modern direct sampling which has no mixers to generate noise and no crystal or mechanical filters to delay and distort. By all rights, the 7300 should sound better. If not then we are heading in the wrong direction.
+Francis Mayon The IC-7300 has "real" full break in but it does use a relay, not diodes, for switching. Yes it is loud however a small pinch of coax seal makes it much quieter so it is typical of most radios. The K3 is an exceptional radio in this regard.
+Steve Ellington I hope that you do not mean me...! Maybe you have different RST scale but this signal is not weak ;) During 35yrs on 160m I know what is really weak...believe me. In any case 7300 sounds not bad. It will be nice to hear your another comparison Steve. GL
+Steve Ellington I hope that you do not mean me...! Maybe you have different RST scale but this signal is not weak ;) During 35yrs on 160m I know what is really weak...believe me. In any case 7300 sounds not bad. It will be nice to hear your another comparison Steve. GL
It's easy to make a receiver sensitive. Selectivity is where the K3 will win. put a 20 DB over 9 signal 1KHZ away and copy that weak signal. That's where the rubber meets the road. Also if you aren't centered on the crystal filter, that will make a difference. Thanks for the comparison but a receiver evaluation this is not.
Hahaha stupid to say "wow 7300 is clear winner" ! No I will not explain why ... simply do the home work and study more about the performance of that radios on internet.
