Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+In\s+praise\s+of\s+older\s+technology\s+AM\s+transmitwithTenTecrigs\s*$/: 25 ]

Total 25 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Bob McGraw - K4TAX" <RMcGraw@Blomand.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 09:03:59 -0600
Well adding a INRAD roofing filter to the Omni VI Plus makes it a totally different radio. I wouldn't view this as an equal compairson. Subjective or otherwise. 73 Bob, K4TAX -- Original Message -- F
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00364.html (12,882 bytes)

2. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Brian Carling <bcarling@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 10:21:53 -0500
My Omni VI Plus has some kind of roofing filter in the N-1 position. I need to open it up and see what brand and type of filter it is. It does not appear to work very well. Best regards - Bry Carling
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00365.html (13,449 bytes)

3. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Carl Moreschi <n4py3@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 10:29:16 -0500
The Omni VII, Omni VI, and Icom 7800 all seem to be about a tie on the Sherwood test data. The Omni VII is an excellent radio and has much better receive audio than the pinched audio on the Omni VI.
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00366.html (13,246 bytes)

4. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 18:37:36 +0100
The Omni VI with the INRAD roofing filter is about 15 dB better than the OM7 or 7800. Really no comparison. There most certainly is a difference but you will probably only notice it in a side-by-side
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00374.html (14,452 bytes)

5. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:46:06 +0000
W2VJN sent me a few emails while he was developing the mod and his measurements showed almost unbelievable improvement. He himself was an avid contester and low band dx'er with his Omni 6 for many ye
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00375.html (15,253 bytes)

6. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 22:22:02 +0100
Let me put some meat behind my previous post: Filter:.....TenTec....INRAD....INRAD Filter:.....Stock.....600Hz....2400Hz -- - 2 kHz.....79dB......94dB.....85.5dB - 5 kHz.....82.5dB....97dB.....95.5dB
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00379.html (12,973 bytes)

7. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Bob McGraw - K4TAX" <RMcGraw@Blomand.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 15:48:47 -0600
But Rick, are you comparing a radio that has a roofing filter vs. a radio that does not have a roofing filter. Yes there is and should be a noticeable difference. 73 Bob, K4TAX -- Original Message --
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00381.html (15,239 bytes)

8. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 23:04:43 +0100
Of course I am; but I am comparing a real live radio with a 9MHz IF and INRAD filter to a couple of other radios with a first IF of 45MHz or higher. And BTW, the 7800 has roofing filters. Very expens
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00382.html (17,887 bytes)

9. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jrichards@k8jhr.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 06:09:08 -0500
The guys in the contest group I sometimes operate with prefer the Omni VII to the Omni VII - they can use either, but the Omni VI now only gets worked on multi multi contests. So... I guess at least
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00391.html (12,103 bytes)

10. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jrichards@k8jhr.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 06:17:08 -0500
Hmmm... can I buy a PT-8000 ? If not, then I think it should not count. N'est ce pas? It does not seem a valid comparison to mention stuff that is still on the drawing board. Can I actually buy a PT-
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00392.html (12,348 bytes)

11. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:40:52 +0100
I don't know if "you" can, but anyone with enough money can buy and take delivery on a PT-8000. The Pt-8000 has been shipping for about a year (with a tiny interruption in production to fix a couple
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00394.html (13,213 bytes)

12. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Brian Carling <bcarling@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:31:58 -0500
Which model number INRAD filter do I want for 600 HZ roofing in my Omni VI Plus please ? Sorry for my ignorance but they list so many, and I want to be sure... Of course, I could also put the money t
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00397.html (14,602 bytes)

13. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:44:55 +0000
As far as the menu ergonomics, if the Omni VII is anything like the Orion (I believe it is), it's the easiest to use menu system I've ever encountered on an hf radio. As far as the roofing filter - y
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00398.html (16,301 bytes)

14. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Bob McGraw - K4TAX" <RMcGraw@Blomand.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 06:52:10 -0600
Bryan et al; Are you in to heavy contest operating? If not, as Rob Sherwood indicated, a radio with a 2 kHz Dynamic range of 80 dB is most adequate for ones operations. There are more important attri
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00399.html (15,818 bytes)

15. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:52:50 +0100
Bry, As several have already said, the INRAD filter is only necessary if you are heavily into CW contesting. Otherwise you will never know the difference whether it is in or out. Here is how you get
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00400.html (17,088 bytes)

16. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Carl Moreschi <n4py3@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 09:29:29 -0500
I think the extra BDR3 for the inrad filter is best suited for 160 meter CW DXing where the DX station is only 2 khz away from the callers. The callers 2 khz away on 160 can easily be S9+30 and the D
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00401.html (18,167 bytes)

17. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jrichards@k8jhr.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 16:02:51 -0500
Thanks Rick... having just viewed Sherwood's Dayton presentation again, I was not aware they were in production again. You are, of course, quite correct $17,000 or more for a transceiver just ain't w
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00419.html (14,341 bytes)

18. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jrichards@k8jhr.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 16:21:58 -0500
It is even easier. The Orion has multiple menus broken up on logical groupings and has many more features, settings, and controls to futz with. The Omni VI has something like 45 +/- items in a single
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00420.html (14,764 bytes)

19. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:44:16 +0000
Not sure if you misunderstand or not. Carl already explained it somewhere back in this thread. We're talking only about circumstances that demand more than 80dB dynamic range at 2KHz spacing. That's
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00423.html (13,884 bytes)

20. Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs (score: 1)
Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:37:48 +0100
"As far as the roofing filter - you really only need this IMHO if you're doing cw contesting." ... AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, this was said about adding the INRAD roofing filter to the OMNI VI. (SIX - not S
/archives//html/TenTec/2014-02/msg00427.html (12,049 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu