Here are a few more variables to consider.
Why is it invalid to test several radios using a consistent test setup
(including microphone and room acoustics) for the purposes of
*comparing* these radios? Should we throw out the ARRL Lab's Product
Reviews just because we don't *believe* the data to be meaningful?
Whether we like it or not, our receivers normally have a loudspeaker
on the human end of the box, and as long as Gary doesn't try to assign
some figure of merit to his results, I for one am very interested to
see how an Omni VI, for example, looks like on his test setup *as
compared to* other high end transceivers on the market.
One of the aspects of Gary's tests that fascinates me is that he is
taking the whole radio into consideration, including the audio
amplifier chain right through to the speaker. That is exactly what I
am listening to when I use my radio, not to mention my hi-fi system.
And in my hi-fi system, as should be the case with amateur receivers,
the speaker/cabinet/room is most definitely part of the system.
Neglect of this hugely important point causes manufacturers to design
radios with marvelous RF and IF and DSP systems, then stuff the
results through horrible audio chains that would embarrass me if they
were found on a $4.99 pocket radio from the local drug store. We all
know these audio-deficient receivers are out there. Let's find out who
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com