Carl's comments about the band stacking registers is true, but substituting
a readily available Giehl chip provides 585 with the same user interface and
band stacking registers as the 586. Of more importance is the change in
control language between the rigs. The original 585 Paragon used a unique
control language that was only supported by a couple of logging programs
while the 586 used a more common scheme.
=Vic=
WA4THR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Paragon Question
From: "Carl Moreschi" <n4py@arrl.net>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 22:12:56 -0400
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Ken,
The Paragon II has band registers and a much nicer user interface. It is
much closer to the Omni VI in operation than the Paragon. It also has a
quiter synthesizer.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
Franklinton, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Brown" <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 11:56 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Paragon Question
> Hi Bob,
>
> I too have both a 585 and a 586 on my desk. I had intended to carefully
> compare the two, and then decide which one of them to offer for sale. I
> never seem to find the time to make my careful comparison. So I expect
> that I'll be keeping the 586, because it has AM TX (actually SSB with
> reinserted carrier) capability and the 585 does not. Is there any other
> significant difference in capability or performance between the two
> rigs? If you had to choose between two 585s, or two 586s, or the
> combination that you do have, what pair would you choose, and why?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ken N6KB
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|