I haven't had the opportunity to use many new radios; however, it is hard for
me to imagine another radio offering a much better balance of receiver
performance and ease of use than the Omni VI+. I used my 10 year old Omni VI+
in this weekend's ARRL 160m contest as I have most of this century. I find it
to be a very comfortable, very capable radio to use.
I believe the 160m CW contests provide a real test of receiver performance
because of the very wide range of signal levels only hundreds, or tens, of
Hertz from each other. It is only a matter of selecting the best filter
combination, pass-band tuning and signal attenuation to separate the signals.
One might question attenuation, but I find that running with the -20dB
attenuate during the 160m contest helps keep the super strong signals from
swamping the very weak signals; dynamic range, AGC, etc, performance. Having
the attenuate turned on seems to have little effect on my ability to hear the
very weak signal. Often there were situations where a big gun station was only
a few hundred Hertz from a near-noise level station and I was able to set up
the receiver and work the weak one. Even though this can be accomplished with
other transceivers it is easy with the Omni's receiver capabilities.
The only complaints I have with my Omni VI+ is I find the audio derived DSP and
the noise blanker ineffective. Although the DSP seems to work pretty well for
SSB (a mode I seldom use) it has been useless for CW most of the time. The
noise blanker is often ineffective on the kinds of noise I need reduced. What
that boils down to is I just don't use them very often.
Maybe if I actually did have the opportunity to try and become familiar with a
more modern, high performance transceiver I would understand why I should
replace the Omni VI+. But until I find some feature of the radio that doesn't
meet my needs I'll likely stay with what I have.
My 2-cents worth!
'73, Thomas - AC7A
---- Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net> wrote:
> You can have my Omni VI+ when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]
> On Behalf Of Rick - NJ0IP / DJ0IP
> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 12:30 PM
> To: 'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Eagle Comparison
>
> Come on Dave... it's easy to part with an OMNI VI+..... I've done it four or
> five times!
> (always bought another one not long after that)
>
> HOWEVER, I can tell you that I would not trade my Eagle for 2 OMNI VI+'s.
>
> 73
> Rick
> PS> FULLY agree with the external VFO knob point.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]
> On Behalf Of d.e.warnick@comcast.net
> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 11:25 AM
> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Eagle Comparison
>
>
>
> Terry, I'm glad it's not just me. The remote tuning knob is the single
> reason that my next rig will be an Omni VII, rather than an Eagle. Seems
> trite, but my rigs are on a shelf, 8" above the desk top. With a tuning knob
> left of the keyboard and a paddle and straight key to its right, I'm hooked
> on that setup. Just my preference. I just haven't been able to part with
> either Omni VI+. They're far more capable than my ears or I are
>
>
>
> Dave
>
> WA3F
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Terry L. Zivney" <00tlzivney@bsu.edu>
> To: tentec@contesting.com
> Sent: Saturday, December 4, 2010 12:08:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Eagle Comparison
>
> I was looking at the Eagle as a possible substitute for my Omni VI+ for a
> backup radio for my two Orions. I know TenTec has posted a mod to
> add an external receiver antenna for the Eagle. But, for my purposes,
> the lack of the remote tuning knob/pod is a big deal. I have grown
> extremely fond of the TenTec remote knobs over the years and would
> hate to give it up.
>
> Also, what is the logging software interface situation? For example,
> it took a while after the Orion was introduced before the contesting
> programs caught up with it. And, the Jupiter (not in the same class,
> but an example) is still not supported by many contesting programs.
> A nice feature of the Omni VI series was using an existing
> (competitors) computer communications commands as the basis,
> so that new adopters of the rig could immediately use it in a
> contest situation. So, does the Eagle look like a subset/superset
> of the Orion to a logging program, or not?
>
> Terry Zivney, N4TZ/9
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|