Carl:
Would you have any thoughts about the 756Pro versus the RX340 as far as
receiver performance is concerned?
John N1JM
-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-admin@contesting.com [mailto:tentec-admin@contesting.com]On
Behalf Of Carl Moreschi
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 4:49 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Evolution N4PY
I have used an Omni VI in the past quite a bit. I now use the RX340
as my ham receiver. The Omni VI is certainly an excellent receiver.
As far as ham band usage, the RX340 beats the Omni VI in filter selection
by a lot. All the filters in the RX340 are brick wall type filters with
amazingly
steep skirts. They are much sharper than the pegasus filters and sharper
than
the Omni VI filters. The Omni VI does a credible filtering job but the
RX340 filters
are just better and there is 57 to pick from. It really makes a difference
in a
very crowded SSB situation when you can select the filter from 2400, 2200,
2000, 1900, 1800, 1700, or even 1600 hertz.
The resistance to overload on the RX340 is fantastic. I believe the Omni VI
is also great in this area.
And of course, the general shortwave listening band usage is incredible with
one
of the best synchronous AM implementations ever made.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
Franklinton, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Duane A Calvin" <ac5aa@juno.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Evolution
> Who has said the RX-340 receiver beats the VI+ for ham use? I haven't
> seen that mentioned anywhere (yet)...
>
> 73, Duane AC5AA
>
>
> Duane A. Calvin, AC5AA
> Austin, Texas
> ac5aa@juno.com -or- ac5aa@austin.rr.com
> Day: dacalvin@us.ibm.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|