MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Location: file:///C:/7069D122/NCC-1_VE1RGB.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Posted May 5, 2008

Posted May 5, 2008

 

The K3 is the best re= ceiver I have ever had the pleasure of using.  

 

By intelligent adjust= ment of all the tools on that rig that can help improve signal-to-noise ratio on we= ak signals*, I can hear nearly anything and everything.  Still, tonight, it took the additi= on of a 300 foot Beverage and the NCC-1 to pull YK9G out of forty meters on an late evening in mid-April.  I don't need it often, but sometim= es in this station the NCC-1 is the only thing that will finish the job.    

 

* That includes by ba= cking off the RF Gain, adding some attenuation, selecting and adjusting the Noise Reducer, selecting and adjusting the Noise Blanker, narrowing the filters a= nd using the DSP to its full capability.

 

    In my opinion, adding = the list of rig adjustments above* is a good thing to do because it reinforces = the message that, no matter how many bells and whistles the radio may have and = how good the DSP, that still won't be enough.&= nbsp; A station still needs the NCC-1 from time-to-time.

 

   And I know that my list of p= roper rig adjustments is correct because I can find a reference to an article in = CQ that described the proper procedure for improving SNR on weak signals.  That's where I learned it. 

 

So I guess what I'm s= aying is that I can defend my conclusions because I used my radio on something like a scientific basis.  And I also = tested the NCC-1 against the capability of a first-class receiver in the form of t= he K3 (if you have read the reviews), and when I say that the NCC-1 can improv= e on the performance of even the best receivers, there is the basis of compariso= n.

 

     The only "criticism" I might have isn't really a criticism, but more a cau= tion to the uninitiated:  you don't= just sit down and turn the NCC-1 ON and expect it to cure whatever problem that = you are trying to beat.  It takes = a heck of a lot of fiddling around and despite how often I use it, I still cannot identify a repeatable pattern of control adjustments (which, for all I know, may be the way to has to be because of the all the variables than govern any given situation).  The NCC-1 i= s NOT for the lazy operator.  I thin= k this is not everyone’s tool.  And I still don't have it correctly positioned in my station for easy access with= out tiring my left arm.

 

    I used the NCC-1 in a station with an Elecraft K3/100 #095, with the output of the NCC-1 connecte= d to the radio's dedicated RX input.  The K3 RX antenna selector switch is separate from the other antenna switch, wh= ich makes A/B comparisons quick and easy.  The K3/100 tuner will memorize the matches for two antennas on all b= ands so I always selected the best two of my three antennas during comparisons, = and that's how the antennas were configured during my tests against the NCC-1 a= nd its 300-foot DXE RBS-1 system.  The Beverage uses good quality 600 ohm ladder line at ten feet above ground, and with a direct wire connection along the ground between the grounds rods at = each end (a deviation from the recommended DXE configuration).

 

   I compared that system with = a 160M Inverted-Vee at 95 feet, and an 80M dipole at 75 feet -- both fed with ladd= er line -- and a SteppIR (BigIR) Vertical (40M through 6M; 5,000 feet of radia= ls) for several hours every night for part of November and all of December 2007, just to find out what the NCC-1 was capable of doing of so that, in the hea= t of battle, I would know when I could bring the NCC-1 into play and expect improvement, even if I had to invest a little more time.  I haven't had as much fun in years= , even sneaking down to the broadcast band to see what I could do.  Here's what I found I could achiev= e in my station (*only CW* was evaluated in the amateur bands)*:*

 

    1.  You can almost always reduce the crashing noises from electrical storms, from 160M through 40M, sometimes dramatically!;

 

     2.  You can frequently reduce generali= zed background noise and improve SNR beyond the capability of a good radio on Broadcast Band and on 160M through 20M, with the optimum band here being 80= M;

 

    3.  You can frequently selectively tun= e out point-sources of noise on every band from BC Band AM through 30M,  with 40M being the best band for t= hat phenomenon here; and

 

    4.  You can sometimes utilize it's front-to-back ratio to favour stations from some specific compass direction over competing signals from other compass directions, very useful in contesting.&nbs= p; That works well on 80M and even better on 40M here.

 

    I started keeping a re= cord of call signs but it soon became clear that sooner or later I would find a circumstance on any band from the Broadcast up to 20M, and very frequently = on 17M and 15M, where I could improve on the performance of the radio by using= the NCC to the point where noise became intelligible CW.  Not every time, but sooner or later.  Ta= kes patience and concentration, though.

 

     Having decided t= hat I would limit my little contesting station to 100W and omni-directional single-element antennas only, I had done everything possible (well, afforda= ble) to optimize my station and the only thing left was adding some kind of receiving antenna and ultimately a noise cancelling device.  I had so much success with the DXE= RBS that it wasn't difficult to gamble on the NCC and add it as the last step in the process, and it has well exceeded my expectations.  Seriously.  It's a good investment.  I 'd say it has added somewhere in= the range of 5 - 10% improvement in my contest scores, especially since I prefer the EU DX contests, taking advantage of this location (the only way I can w= in anything) and the NCC-1 is what gets me that extra few DX multipliers that = can do exciting things to a contest score.

 

    Here's a real-world ex= ample from the SP DXC Contest of a weekend ago.&= nbsp; You can see my score on the 3830 website.  I made 138 QSOs and 50 multipliers= .  I *had* to use the NCC-1 on at LEA= ST three of those multipliers, so by my math that added 3/47 =3D more than 6% = to my score. Three years ago that kind of score was good enough to win me the SPDX plaque for North America CW Low Power, and it's looking good for that again this year for the contest I just finished.=   So, yes, I like the NCC-1.

 

    The only thing you hav= e to fix is add the decal to the back to identify the correct input power requirements and change the plug from the one that is currently on your DXE 12VAC transformer so that people like me don't do dumb things.  Oh, and just check QC -- my unit c= ame with four falling-out-loose screws on the bottom.

 

     My thanks to DX Engineering and particularly the engineers therein.

 

    Gary, VE1RGB