> costly than my Pegasus and Jupiter. But for some reason I
> cannot explain, I find myself almost always using either the
> Pegasus or the Jupiter.
I think it can be explained and measured. I tend to spend more time operating
my Pegasus than I do when using my other
transceivers. The Peagsus' receive audio response is wider than most
receivers. Lows are deep and rich, and the high end
(depending on the DSP filter) is open and not pinched. Clearly, the low
frequency extension can be attributed to the use of DSP.
In crystal-filtered radios the carrier set point is often tuned to the lower
skirt of the crystal passband and set to approximately
100-200 Hz above the carrier point and low frequency content all but
disappears. Even adding the INRAD 2.8 kHz filters to an Omni
will do little to extend low frequency range. Another factor is the Pegasus'
AGC. It incorporates a very smooth AGC circuit and
does not overload easily.
I believe it's a combination of factors that contribute to the reduced listener
fatigue: audio response, harmonic/IM distortion, AGC
characteristics, and system noise factor.