Right, Carl. Based on off-list comments I may not have been as clear as I
could have been before. The use of a Giehl chip changes the front panel user
interface on the Paragon to be essentially the same as a Paragon II, but the
serial command set is basically the same as the original Paragon, adding
only an acknowledge response to take care of timing issues with faster
computers and requiring an "enter" before sending digits for a direct
frequency load.
All that being said, to the original question about which rig to keep if you
have both, I think the Paragon II is an obvious choice. On the other hand,
if you are deciding between a used Paragon or Paragon II, the original 585
Paragon is a real value and a joy to use and sells for hundreds less. I
appreciate mine daily!
=Vic=
WA4THR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
I contracted with TenTec in 1994 and did the firmware for the Paragon II.
The Paragon II design point was to make the user interface as close to the
Omni VI as possible. The Paragon II uses the same serial command set as the
Omni VI which is the Icom CI-V interface.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
Franklinton, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vic Klein" <vhklein@ptd.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2005 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Paragon Question
> 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=
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|