Wonder what that new TS-990 on the back of QST will cost, $10 grand like the
big Yeasu rigs? My Orion 2 is the most expensive rig in my shack, and there
are 25 of them, and I agonized for years before parting with that much
retirement money.
I put a separate filament transformer into my HQ-170, when I had it years
ago, for the mixer and oscillator tube if I remember right. Those were the
days when they touted some kind of heating element in the bottom of your rig
to keep it from mildewing and drifting.
What is " negative and negative " got me flummoxed with that one! I haven't
used a mike on the low bands in many years.
Walt K8CV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn" <wa4aos@aol.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Top receivers
> Isn't it funny though... How much we use to enjoy the hobby with our
> horrible Hammarlund, Hallicrafters, National, Heathkit, and other
> receivers before we all got in the habit of becoming OVERLY focused on
> specifications. I restore R 390 and 390A receivers and these are very
> sensitive units but are deficient in other areas; but they have
> personality and so do my other old boat anchors.
>
>
> My SECOND favorite CW position is a Johnson Valiant and R 390. FIRST
> place, for me, is one of my restored Ten Tec Corsair II's or an Omni 6+.
> followed closely by a Drake C line with Sherwood mods. Yes, first place is
> a big lot here; all are excellent in their own way. I have had 3) Omni 7's
> and like my K3, just never liked the audio.
>
>
> I also wonder about the guys who want the best of the best so they can
> check in to the nightly nets and say, "NEGATIVE AND NEGATIVE."
>
>
> The truth is almost everything on the market now is much more stable,
> sensitive and selective than our old big box radios were. I never minded
> chasing another signal on my HQ 170 because it drifted so bad, not to
> mention the other guy might be drifting but never in sync with my drift.
> I assumed that was part of the hobby and everyone had to do the same.
>
>
> Don't most of us remember when RIT showed up and FINALLY if we were on
> freq and the other guy was drifting we could keep up with him and not move
> our TX signal. Now, I may go a year and never use RIT and if I do it's
> because some fellow in Cuba is doing his best to be on the air with dried
> up filter caps and he's drifting and buzzing up and down the band.
> However, most of those guys are EXCELLENT CW ops but can't afford stuff
> most of us would consider junk here in the States.
>
>
> Ten Tec has brought us MANY fine radios but so have the Japanese
> companies, Elecraft and others. Don't beat me up for using the "E" word on
> this reflector. Hi Hi... The K3 has an IMPRESSIVE receiver, however, it's
> audio fatigues my ears but that's another story.
>
>
> Just a few thoughts from my perspective. I was first licensed in 1971 at
> the age of 15 and just turned 56. So. that's over 40 years in this hobby.
> I have played with MANY of the digital modes, RTTY through Packet, Pactor,
> PSK and others as well as, SSB and AM but still prefer to finger talk
> using CW. Hi
>
>
> 73,
> Glenn WA4AOS
> DSM Labs (dot com)
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
> To: 'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment' <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Sun, May 13, 2012 9:22 am
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Top receivers
>
>
> Joel, thanks for pointing out that it was from Bob... (says so right at
> the
> bottom, doesn't it).
> I just assumed it was from Mark.
> Sometimes it's a big advantage when you can read! (hi)
>
> Bob has brought up a good point.
> Most modern receivers have gotten so good that there really aren't many
> bad
> ones on the market anymore, at least not in the mid-range and high end
> rigs.
> Until we can get the manufacturers to do something about the cruddy signal
> their transmitters are producing, it makes no sense to focus on the
> receivers anymore.
>
> It's kind of pathetic that today there are only 2 transceivers on the
> market
> whose 3rd order (and higher) IMD is as good as the old KWM-2, 40 years
> ago.
> Most are vastly worse and that is a major contributor to the impression we
> get that the bands are so full. It the transmitters were all as clean as
> the
> 40 year old KWM-2, we would have more space on the bands.
>
> And, the two rigs that are clean are 200w versions which are only clean
> when
> you run them at 75w in Class A mode!
> If you run them at their normal power levels, they are as bad or worse
> than
> all the rest.
>
> WE ALL NEED TO WAKE UP AND REALIZE THIS AND START DEMANDING THAT THE
> MANUFACTURERS CLEAN UP THEIR (TRANSMITTING) ACT!
>
> For many years, I didn't even look much at a rig's transmitter specs. I
> just assumed 100w is 100w and they're all about the same.
> THEY ARE NOT.
> Over the years we became very critical of our receivers and with the help
> of
> ARRL tests and Sherwood tests, we forced the manufacturers to improve
> their
> receivers.
>
> Now let's fix the transmitters!
>
> 73
> Rick, DJ0IP
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|