> I wrote the text in question, and I'm an SO2R contester, and
> I don't agree. Many contesters have the facility to 1) pick
> off multipliers in between CQing on the same radio as is done
> with rigs like the FT1000MP now
Yes, but you can pick off a lot more multipliers if you can hear the second
receiver *during* the CQs. At 34 WPM, it takes about 6 seconds to send my CQ
and I usually set the delay between CQs to 2-3 seconds. So, two-thirds of
the time I wouldn't be able to tune for mults. But that's not my point
anyway. Your wording does not say that you can pick off multipliers
*between* CQs. Your wording says that you can pick off multipliers *while*
CQing. A reasonable person is going to believe that this means you can
receive while transmitting, just like you can with "Two Radios". I think
your enthusiasm for the radio is clouding your ability to see that the
wording is misleading. Judging from the number of e-mails I got agreeing
with my interpretation, you might want to reconsider. It makes no sense to
say things that will end up causing customers to be disappointed when they
get the radio. Why not tell it exactly as it is? The radio is good enough to
stand on its own merits without resorting to exaggeration.
> plus 2) the Orion does much
> more for two receiver operation than any other rig that has
> come before it. Routing two antennas separately to each
> receiver with the facility to switch to even a third antenna
> on either receiver. Separate band data jacks for controlling
> remote devices per receiver. Two linear amplifier keying
> outputs for running two linears. Routable audio through the
> speaker or user-assignable headphone controls (what good is a
> second receiver if you have to listen to all the audio from
> both receivers in both ears?) Everything on the radio
> controllable via RS-232 (hence, via contesting software).
I think all this stuff is great. I have a 1000D, which has some of these
features (sort of) and I think you guys have done a much, much better job.
For example, I had to disable the BPF-1 on my 1000D because the poorly
designed antenna switching imposed unacceptable limitations on use of the RX
antenna. What a waste! Your switching scheme is much better.
However, in order to maximize my SO2R score by listening *during* CQs, I
would have to use a second transceiver with the ORION. I'm afraid that once
the second radio is introduced, most of the above features will not be
useful to me. I only need the subreceiver for listening on a split transmit
frequency. It's hard to imagine using it to monitor a third band -- it's
hard enough to concentrate on the CQ radio and S&P radio, and I only have
two ears! If I had two ORIONs, the idea of monitoring four frequencies at
once is mind boggling, and I don't know how I would determine which signal
was coming from which radio. I use a TopTen antenna switching matrix with
only two outputs (one for each transceiver), so I can't make use of the
second antenna port and the flexible antenna switching. The second set of
band data outputs doesn't serve any purpose either -- the switching matrix
only supports the two band data outputs from the two main transceivers. A
four-way matrix would add a lot of cost with little benefit that I could
actually use. Like most SO2R ops, I only have two amps and one has to go on
each radio. So, I can't make use of the separate amp keying either. The
audio switching is nice, but doesn't help me with audio coming from the
second transceiver. I'll still have to use an external SO2R relay box for
audio switching (I'll need one for key and mic switching anyway.)
The bottom line is that since the subreceiver it is muted while
transmitting, it has limited utility to an SO2R op. That, in turn, requires
that I add a second transceiver, which in turn diminishes the usefulness of
the dual controls and outputs on the ORION. Sorry, but that's the way it is.
> Focusing on whether the opposite receiver mutes is losing
> sight of everything else this radio has for contesting,
> period (not just SO2R).
No, not really. I was merely making a point about the wording of a paragraph
on your website. I never said the radio isn't terrific. I've read the manual
and I think it is.
Personally, I don't really care all that much that the ORION doesn't provide
two radios in a box. That has very little to do with my interest in the
radio. See below.
> I guess I am surprised by this, because I asked for a whole
> lot of this to be put into Orion on the basis that contesters
> would immediately see what a paradigm shift this radio truly
> is - I think, though, I may have my work cut out for me
> explaining how truly amazing this piece of gear is for contesting.
> "Instant Two Radio Mode" on the Orion is much more than
> merely listening to a pair of receivers.
You may believe so, but what's important is what your readers believe when
they read the phase "Instant Two Radio Mode". SO2R ops like myself will
believe that the words "Two Radio" mean "Single-Op Two Radio" -- i.e., the
ability to tune for mults while CQing.
>
> The "typical" contester using ONE transceiver is now at a
> huge advantage using Orion over anything else that is out
> there today just by virtue of all the duplicated features we
> have packed into the radio. The SO2R contester, as I pointed
> out yesterday, could have 4 bands going, 4 amps, 4 sets of
> transmit antennas and Beverages interfaced to the two radios
> all at one time. Did I mention ultra high end receiver
> performance, too? :-)
OK, I agree that from a flexibility standpoint the ORION is better for SO1R
contesters than any other rig on the market. However, I disagree that the
flexibility features are of much benefit to SO2R ops. We can't make use of
them because there's not much practical advantage to using the subreceivers
for monitoring additional bands -- you can only do it one-third of the time
and I'm not convinced that very many of us could keep that many audio inputs
straight at 4AM on the second day of CQWW!
Ah, now let's talk about the ultra high end receiver performance. That
happens to be the primary reason I'm interested in the ORION. I thought it
would be a tremendous bargain if it also did true SO2R in one box because
then I could get that great receiver performance for Run and S&P at the same
time. But I don't really care that it doesn't do that. If the receiver will
actually let me copy weak signals in the presence of strong signals close to
the passband, then it is indeed a breakthrough and I'm going to want one to
increase my contest scores. You don't need to over-hype the "Two-Radio"
features to sell me on that. Heck, if the receiver is as good as you claim,
then I'll probably end up buying two.
73, Dick WC1M
|