TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

[TenTec] Jupiter Bashing/eHam Reviews

To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: [TenTec] Jupiter Bashing/eHam Reviews
From: wa3fiy@radioadv.com (WA3FIY)
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 11:33:12 -0400
On 30 Apr 2002 at 7:48, Tom Rauch wrote:

> 
> Perhaps the 9000 amplifier needed some distortion. Many people 
> actually like a little distortion in certain music passages.
> 
No, I don't think that was it.  We were not building guitar 
amps where some "fuzz" and other stuff is the norm.  We were 
building High Fidelity amplifiers where the company officials 
wanted the most faithful reproduction possible.  See below for 
more on this slightly off topic matter.

> Liking a certain "sound", however, is nothing like comparing dynamic
> range, signal-to-noise ratios, or selectivity in a communications
> system.
> 
What I said in my earlier post was  "...It seems to me that both 
measured and subjective observations are useful in evaluating a 
radio, IF the subjective observations are honest and 
qualified..."

A communications system is about communications.  In our case 
on CW, SSB, FM and AM, mostly by sound.   So sound is 
important.  Digital modes are another matter.  To me, a radio 
that sounds wonderful but collapses whenever another signal 
comes on the band is just as useless as one that holds up well 
on a crowded band but sounds horrible.  The dynamic range, 
selectivity, etc can be measured and do indeed provide useful 
information about a radio.  But the sound, the feel, yes, even 
the appearance of a radio......items that cannot be 
measured......also contribute to it's usefulness and users 
satisfaction.

As I've said before, I have over a dozen radios available to me.  
Many of them are not Ten Tec's, and most of them are more 
costly than my Pegasus and Jupiter.  But for some reason I 
cannot explain, I find myself almost always using either the 
Pegasus or the Jupiter.  And I think that is the ultimate 
verdict.   Put various radios at the disposal of a user and see 
which one he or she gravitates toward after becoming familiar 
with each, and that will tell you better than anything else how 
good that radio is for that person.

In the case of our Sherwood equipment, we had two major 
sources of independent analysis.  Consumer Union and Hirsch-
Houck Labs.  In both cases, the reviewers made meaningful 
measurements of the equipment being reviewed and they also 
made very good comments, subjective comments, as well.  
Although we did not always agree with the subjective 
comments, we considered them both honest and qualified to 
make such comments since they thoroughly understood the 
issues surrounding High Fidelity sound reproduction.

We are halfway there in amateur radio with the ARRL and 
RSGB measurements.  I think it would be useful if we could  
find some independent organization with the qualifications to 
do the subjective part.

-73-

-Lee-

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