[Yaesu] Filter Improvements for FT-1000D

Mon May 9 16:08:53 EDT 2005

Dear Ed,
You will find my comments underneath yours.
BTW; nice callsign you have! You must have a lot of fun in your shack!
> Hi Hans -
>> Thank you very much for taking the time to comment!
>> I have interleaved some responses below, if you care
> to follow up.
>> 73, Ed, W6LOL ("WE6" in original post was a typo!)
>> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hans Remeeus" <hans at remeeus.nl>
> To: "Ed Senior" <eseniors at earthlink.net>; <yaesu at
> mailman.qth.net>; <List at inrad.net>
> Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 10:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [Yaesu] Filter Improvements for FT-1000D
>>>> Hello Ed,
>>>> E.g. in the Main Rx 2nd and 3rd IF:
>>>> 2800 Hz Inrad instead of the standard 2400 Hz Yaesu
>> 2100 Hz Inrad as optional SSB

> I take it you prefer leaning a bit more towards "high
> fidelity" audio, vs. maximizing selectivity.

Yes, I prefer the more high fidelity SSB-sound.
BTW; the 2800 Hz filters also effecting the transmitted SSB-signal! This 
really is a very significant improvement, so I hear from other stations.
>> 1000 Hz Inrad instead of the standard 500 Hz Yaesu
>> I am guessing you like the 1000 Hz filter because it fills the
> big gap between 2000 Hz and 500 Hz, and because tuning
> would be easier.

1000 Hz CW-filter is IMHO very useful during contest. I notice that a lot of 
stations - during contests - are not quite zero-beat. This 1000 Hz filter 
helps you to receive them much easier (faster).
>> 400/500 Hz Inrad as optional CW
>> I assume you feel the Inrad 400 outperforms the Yaesu
> 500; but another recent poster seems disappointed to
> find little difference.

The difference indeed is not significant.
Inrad has the 500 Hz - 455 kHz IF filter in its program and not the 500 Hz - 
8.2 MHz IF.
I use the combination 500 in the 455 kHz IF and 400 Hz in the 8.2 MHz IF.
> It appears that you think the standard CW bandwidths
> should be multiplied by two. I expect you're right on that,
> although it would bother me some to have incorrect labels
> on the BW buttons.

You are right.
In the FT-1000MP Mark-V Field I use this filter setup:
- 2800 Hz
- 2100 Hz
- 1000 Hz
- 400 Hz
There are no bandwidth labels on the Mark-V; just NOR-NAR1-NAR2.
In the FT-1000D I use this filter setup:
- 2800 Hz
- 2100 Hz
- 400/500 Hz
- 250 Hz
The labels remain correct.
>> Sub Rx:
>>>> 2800 Hz Inrad (wire-in) instead of the standard 2400 Hz Murata
>>> Is "higher fidelity audio again the concern?

Yes, however this difference is less significant than on the Main Rx. Reason 
for that is the not very steep slopes of the 2400 Hz Marata filter.
However I am very satisfied with the 2800 Hz Inrad filter.
Another good choice would be the 2100 Hz Inrad filter, instead of the 2400 
Hz Murata filter.
>> This filter setup could be qualified as "significantly".
>>> I thought I read somewhere that certain filter slots in the
> 1000D were not populated at all--at least in the sub-Rx.
> If so, I would think that populating them appropriately
> would have a high priority when spending more on filters.

I agree with you.
Good luck and 73,
Hans Remeeus (PA1HR)
http://www.remeeus.nl
Communication is about people, the rest is technology.