CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Good microphones for contesting

Subject: [CQ-Contest] Good microphones for contesting
From: kk7gw@hotmail.com (David Jones)
Date: Wed Jan 7 17:54:45 1998
Well, the cheap $4 microphone I've had for the last couple years broke 
during Phone SS, and with NAQP and the Feb. Sprint coming up, I need a 
microphone.  I've been looking at the Heil Pro-Set, and would buy it in 
an instant, but I can't seem to find out if I can get a 4 pin mike 
connector for it (my radio is a fairly old Kenwood TS-530 that only 
takes the Kenwood style 4 pin connectors).

I could go to a hamfest (which I will if I can't find a mike soon), but 
the closest hamfest near my QTH is in early March (the Saturday during 
ARRL DX Phone) and I'd love to get a mike for NAQP and the Sprint.

So, any suggestions on good hand/boom/headset microphones for 
contesting?

73

David Jones, KK7GW   QRP-L #1350
kk7gw@hotmail.com


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

>From patd@wolfenet.com" <patd@wolfenet.com  Thu Jan  8 02:37:01 1998
From: patd@wolfenet.com" <patd@wolfenet.com (Patrick Dayshaw)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] "Worked Before" stupidities and Post Contest Actions
Message-ID: <01BD1B9B.428A90A0@patd@wolfenet.com>


Sorry, it wasn't my intent to "get anybody in trouble". I 
assumed if folks were willing to publish their techniques 
on the reflector as proposed "Solutions and/or Options" 
that it was something that was open for discussion. It 
occurred to me, having just re-read KR2Q's article, that 
maybe the solutions/options mentioned in the WRKB4 thread 
were considered generally acceptable in the contesting 
community.

KR2Q clearly stated in his article that: "I need to inform 
the readers that this article is my own creation, and 
should not be construed as anything official from the CQ 
Contest Committee (of which I'm a member)."  Since it 
wasn't an "official" interpretation of the intent of the 
rules, and was clearly stated as his opinion, I was 
interested in seeing if there was a significant disparity 
between his views and that of the contest community, (at 
least those that are on the reflector).

Despite his disclaimer, I have choosen to follow his 
guidelines as "THE way to do it", and therefore have a 
vested interest in understanding what everyone else is 
doing. If his views are not being embraced by the community 
in general then I'm essentially screwing myself by 
following his guidelines (even though his article is 
clearly THE quintessential representation of the "spirit of 
the law" concept.)

Further, considering there is always an on-going discussion 
about "the rules", how they are worded by the sponsors 
(text wise), what they are perceived to mean, and how they 
are practiced, before and after nearly every contest, I 
assumed it was fertile ground for further discussion. As a 
very little pistol I'm always intrigued at the variety of 
interpretation that appears in posts to the reflector, 
especially the differences between some of the better 
known, more experienced contesters. I thought my post might 
lead to an interesting discussion about how it is "supposed 
to work". KR2Q's closing sentence indicated that his 
article was meant to "provide a uniform understanding of 
the game" and that was the spirit of my question as well.

I guess I'll follow Scott, K9MA's suggestion, go checkout 
my dipoles and think about it. (I will however follow 
KR2Q's guidelines none the less.)

73 and CU in the NAQP

Patrick
WA7VNI

--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>