Taught a novice class, one of members got ticket and her dad, a ham, sent
her a TS-930 transceiver. We helped her put up an aerial then sat down at
the rig to see how it worked. My best rig up til then was a 544 or 546,
don't remember. I was fascinated with all the bells & whistles available on
receive. Tuned into a crowded band and played with all the tuning controls.
With each adjustment, the rig sounded better and better. Finally I turned
off all that stuff to hear how the receiver sounded without all the finely
tuned filters, etc., and it sounded even better. Apparently it was the
change that sounded better and it didn't matter much what it was.
There was no setting on that TS-930 that sounded as good as my old Ten-Tecs.
73, Mike N4NT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Gulseth" <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Cc: "Bwana Bob" <wb2vuf@verizon.net>
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 15:46
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Older rigs
> Bob,
>
> Point (2) is well taken. Back in the days of "vinyl" when I worked in
> small
> market radio I could hear when a stylus was getting "edgy" (chipped or
> worn);
> it had the same effect on me as a chalkboard screech. Thus I question how
> much real advantage there is in most normal situations (especially since
> I'm
> not a contester or serious DXer) of digital manipulation and its
> associated
> artifacts versus the (at least to me) much easier to listen to audio of a
> purely analog chain.
>
> But then again, some folks might not even notice the difference (or at
> least
> it might not bother them like it does me.) Guess this is one of
> those "different strokes for different folks" HI HI!!
>
> 73, Al
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|