TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Ten Tec Omni D, Why so quiet ?

To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Ten Tec Omni D, Why so quiet ?
From: Clark Savage Turner <csturner@kcbx.net>
Reply-to: tentec@contesting.com
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:40:14 -0800
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
In my own careful experiments with the OMNI-C vs the TS-440 (ladder vs ceramic followed by monolithic lattice filters) the static levels are the same for the same level of sensitivity. If I cut back the RF gain on the 440 to the point where they were about equal, the signals jumped out of the noise about equal. The OMNI-C has less gain on the lower bands and automatically sounds quieter but retains enough gain to work fine under most conditions. The time where the ladder filter can help out is when there is heavy static and you try to copy a weak CW signal between crashes. I noticed a very small difference in the "ringing" characteristics of the rigs to my ears, I could copy just a tiny bit better on the OMNI-C in heavy static when the CW signal had enough strength to come through. When the signal was really weak and I had to use a lot of filtering, the 440 would win, but the fatigue factor in listening was worse.

The OMNI-C was a neat rig, so well done for its time.

Clark
WA3JPG


On Thursday, February 19, 2004, at 09:09 AM, Mike Hyder --N4NT-- wrote:


Perhaps someone can explain why it is so but I've seen much discussion about
the superiority of the Ten-Tec 'crystal ladder' filters over the 'crystal
lattice' filters used by other manufacturers. From what I've read, the
difference in those filter types may help account for the lower static
levels you are finding on the Omni-C.

_______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>