John,
Thank you for your comment.
I was using the OMNI VI(option 3) and a/b tested it significantly with
the K2.
For the record the OMNI was better than my prior radios.
I have carefully evaluated the PRO II published test data but never
owned one.
The K2 was clearly better in my opinion except as follows.
The K2 did not have the autonotch or dsp noise reduction of the OMNI. I
really missed the autonotch. The K2 now has DSP with effective noise
reduction and autonotch capability. The Orion and the Omni have a more
convenient desktop back panel than the K2.
I sold the OMNI to help finance the ORION. I did not miss the OMNI
except for autonotch while the K2 without DSP was my only radio.
Before the ORION was announced, I seriously considered the 756PRO II
because it almost met my TECHNICAL FIXATION requirements. But it is
compromised in the transmit purity area and not as good a receiver as
the K2. I probably would have replaced the Omni with the ProII if the
Orion had not shown up. According the the reviews and numbers I have
been led to believe that the 746 pro is not quite as good on HF as the
ProII and is probably almost as good as the Omni. I have also been led
to believe that CW on the 746 is a bit of an afterthought.
So I suspect I agree with your observation that the 746Pro and OMNI VI
seem close in performance on HF if the cw is acceptable on the 746.
I do wonder how the close in strong signal rejection compares.
I think you have a hard choice to make. It may come down to a decision
on how badly you want the 6 and 2 meter capability in the same box. I
personally do not like the transmit purity compromise outside the filter
bandwidth that ICOM has been making. This clutters up the bands in a dx
or contest pileup as badly as using a poor receiver front end. And the
good receiver cannot do anything about it. A poor receiver hurts only
the user. The poor transmitter hurts everyone.
I believe that the test numbers in the reviews are good indicators of
performance capability. The folks that say they do not believe the
numbers just are not interested those specific characteristics. True,
the test numbers do not help the comparison if the test if for 20 kHz
spacing and you are interested in 1 kHz or less spacing. So we are
getting better tests. ARRL extended test reports are invaluable.
Sometimes the writeups do not empathize the negatives but the data is
there. They are the only objective test we have especially here in
Hawaii where I often cannot find the radio I would like to borrow to
test side by side with my favorite.
John Rippey wrote:
> Your very good commentary on the ORION vs. the K2 was posted on the
> Ten-Tec reflector.
>
> I own an OMNI VI (opt.3) and a 746PRO, one of which I'm planning to
> sell. My impression is that in receiving CW, there is not that much
> difference between the two radios. Obviously the OMNI's QSK is hard to
> beat.
>
> Have you used an OMNI VI or a 746PRO? I would be interested in any
> comments, since I do not now own a K2 or ORION.
>
> Tnx & 73,
> John, W3ULS
>
>
|