[Top] [All Lists]

[TenTec] re QST ad

To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: [TenTec] re QST ad
From: "Merle Bone" <merlebone@charter.net>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 14:09:30 -0600
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Rob - K5UJ said:
"Some hams obsess about BDR etc. beyond what 95% of hams give a flip about.  
For those 95%, whether a rig is 
"good" or "bad" boils down to what I call the pleasure rating:  on a scale from 
1 to 10, how much fun is it to operate; how much pleasure do you derive from 
the experience?  Factors affecting this can range from audio quality, to heft 
(does it move on the table when i plug in cans?) and build quality, as well as 
drift, f.p. layout, PA power, blah blah with the rx down there 
somewhere in the priority list.  Oh, it has to be able to hear--don't get me 
wrong, but if the AGC pumps at times, it's not the end of the world. " 
I don't think any one technical specification "makes a really good receiver." 
However, it clearly appears, to me, that the HF radio manufacturers are putting 
more time and effort into building much better receivers that take advantage of 
new technologies. TenTec's use of roofing filters, as an example, has clearly 
spilled forward and backward - although not quite as effective in earlier model 
transceivers. My FT1000MP is a much better receiver with the INRAD roofing 
filter then it was without it - more FUN! But it is not nearly as good as my 
Orion. Nothing is "the end of the world." However, it seems - based on what 
manufacturers are building and people buying - that many amateurs, in the new 
HF radio market,  are paying attention to "real receiver performance." I think 
that is good for TenTec because of their historically  strong commitment to 
excellent radio performance. ......................Just another assertion - 
like yours. 
Merle - W0EWM 
TenTec mailing list

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