Larry,
One of the most cumbersome ergonomic problems with the
Kenwood TS570 is that the device which moves from memory
to memory and from filter to filter are the same knob.
If you take the filters out of line but think they're
still in the line, you tune the knob and change bands
completely.
Some guy in China is sending CW to you on 20 meters but
you're suddenly on 10 or 15 meters. Your offset and
filter settings are gone and the QSO is effectively
over.
Many users also report that the final amplifier on the
TS570 is unforgiving. On some bands, it folds back
power significantly with an apparent SWR of 2 to 1 or
less.
Receiver sensitivity is only fair, which is in line with
most medium priced DSP receivers.
The TS570's DSP switches at the upper right hand side of
the control panel make the incoming signal sound like
Donald Duck. QST Magazine's review on the rig reflected
this. These buttons, labeled N.R. 1 and N.R. 2, produce
very strange and annoying flutterings without positively
impacting reception much.
In addition, the 570's optional narrow SSB filter does
little but change the audio quality of the incoming
signal. Similarly, the "DSP Cutoff" knobs on the upper
right of the panel don't seem to impact SSB reception
very effectively. Both of these items have been
discussed in the ham radio media repeatedly.
The 570 has the most effective "Beat Cancel" function
I've ever seen. It's great on 40 meters.
The battery which backs up the memories is among the
most difficult in the industry to change. QST has run
a "Hints and Kinks" article on how to change the
battery, but even the user manual suggests returning the
radio to Kenwood to have the battery changed because
it's so difficult to reach.
As a guy who spent 25 years in the commercial
broadcasting industry, I can assure you that the audio
is mushy, especially when narrow DSP filters are used.
It's inherent in the design of most medium priced DSP
rigs because it's a trade-off for those great filters.
Finally, and probably most important, when you call
Kenwood's service center to ask a question about the rig
(my emphasis follows), YOU ARE TOLD THAT SERVICE
TECHNICIANS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ANSWER TELEPHONE CALLS
AND CANNOT SPEAK DIRECTLY WITH YOU. IT'S AGAINST
COMPANY POLICY!!!!
Consequently, no matter how small the problem may turn
out to be, you are told to write a letter, bundle up the
rig and ship it to Kenwood.
Isn't it nice how the Ten Tec technical number is
answered by folks who actually build and service
radios? To me, that's worth a lot.
73s,
Rick
WO8L
Pfafftown, NC
> Rick:
>
> > I read your posting on Ten Tec's DSP with interest.
> > What you're describing, though, is not so much problems
> > with the Pegasus and Jupiter.
> >
> > Actually, you pretty well describe the nature of DSP as
> > it's currently available in most mid-range ham rigs from
> > virtually all manufacturers.
>
> To a certain extent I think you have a point. I have poor hearing now, high
> end gone completely, but the Peg CW note was really bad. Most other
> manuracturers avoid generating the CW note in DSP.
>
> > I have used the Pegasus and can assure you that its
> > audio is no more or less "mushy" than the sound of my
> > Kenwood TS570S. In addition, the Kenwood has weaknesses
> > which the Pegasus doesn't and vice-versa.
>
> OK, I have owned, and returned to TT for a refund the Pegasus, and I use a
> TS570 daily which is the best yacomwood yet CW radio.
>
> What might the TS-570 weaknesses be?
>
> I use a TS570 in my remote HF CW system and I find it great and very
> reliable and consistent. It is the first yacomwood I have seen in a long
> time with all the features that really work in software - the original bag
> is over the front panel and the panel lights have never been turned on. I
> only once pushed the ON/OFF button ON so I could get it started, everything
> else is through the serial port.
>
>
> > DSP filtering, whether at the IF level or the audio
> > level, is easy to use and very versatile but does come
> > with some compromises in audio quality, receiver
> > selectivity and receiver sensitivity.
>
> Yes choices are made
>
> > To avoid these compromises, the consumer would need to
> > jump to a higher priced and more complex rig. The
> > Pegasus/Jupiter and its host of competitors are just
> > what they're designed to be. They're medium priced, mid-
> > range performance rigs which do the job for most hams
> > for both domestic and DX contacts.
>
> Here we disagree. The Peg/Jup is a mess and needs serious help as far as I
> am concerned.
>
> > The difference in receiver performance between my OMNI V
> > full of filters and the Kenwood TS570 or Jupiter are
> > obvious to the experienced ham who wants the best.
>
> The for me is not "wants the best" I want something that is not so seriously
> flawed that it is objectionable. I had 3 Pegs here and all were the same
> exactly, the Jupiter was here last week and it is no better at all.
>
> > However, a new OMNI VI+ or Kenwood TS-2000 with optional
> > filters carries a price triple a Pegasus. Combined with
> > a decent beam or even a vertical, the typical ham can
> > work all the contacts he or she can handle with the less
> > expensive rig.
>
> Well there are those who feel the OMNI VI+ is not good enough, I have used
> one and I was impressed - but not enough to buy one. The TS-2000 seems to
> have the TS-870 curse they have apparently not finished the software yet. I
> had one here to test the commercial software I sell and the radio had to be
> reset several times and there were several codes that just did not work
> properly and the work around required that I reset the system every day or
> so, which means they have bugs. As with the TS-870 they are denying any
> bugs so I just dont sell software for that radio until they get them fixed.
>
> > Lots of hams like to cuss and discuss all of the varied
> > strengths and weaknesses of various rigs.
>
> I have no time for that, lots to do here.
>
> > Similarly, the perfect rig has never been made. But the
> > Pegasus/Jupiter and its competitors sure pile up the DX
> > at a reasonable price compared to the boat anchors we
> > hams once used.
>
> I still have a home made phasing rig from about 1956 or so, it has worked
> its share of dx if that is the goal but the issue is, TT has a problem, my
> question was are they using the same DSP engine? If they are, the new radio
> has the problem and I will avoid it. Sadly the K2 is vastly more popular
> than any recent TT rig. I feel TT is dropping the ball, continuously these
> days.
>
> Larry
> VA3LK
>
>
>
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/tentec
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
|