Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 10, 2014, at 8:20 AM, "Bob McGraw - K4TAX" <RMcGraw@Blomand.net> wrote:
>
> Rick et al;
>
> Your comments are very appropriate. Yes, merge my comments and observations
> with yours.
>
> Last evening with the two radios sitting in front of me, I quickly created
> the list. There is a lot more that could have been added. From my take,
> numbers are numbers, and the real proof of the pie is actual on the air usage
> in a given location and specific circumstances. In many cases today one will
> actually need two or more radios on the desk to make a real and valid
> evaluation. To this end, the Tentec 30 day trial period does exactly this
> and this is something no other company provides.
>
> Rob has done an outstanding job of measuring and presenting results of many
> receiver brands and models. He is to be highly commended for his excellent
> work. I do caution, those looking to his Receiver Test Data, should
> understand exactly what is being presented. Just because the particular
> brand and model is at the top of the list or any ranking for that matter,
> does not make it "the best" or better than another one on the list. I have
> downloaded the list to EXCEL and thus I can sort on any parameter. When this
> is done one will find other brands and models appear at the top of the list.
> I find there is no receiver on the list that consistently appears at or near
> the top with any relevance of sort routine.
>
> There are other factors which I view that make for a "good receiver". I
> personally place a lot of weight on receive audio quality. To that I do
> include the internal speaker, what ever it may be. One point I will not
> accept is poor audio quality for it makes not only inferior sound but for
> extended listening it is very fatiguing. To support this point, I recently
> loaned my Eagle to a close friend. While it was on his desk, his wife
> commented; "that little radio sounds much better than the ones you have". He
> has other brands and models, some much more expensive than the Eagle, pre or
> post sale promotion prices. From my take, the best receiver performance
> but with poor or inadequate audio is a lousy receiver. Thus I say what good
> is all the advanced electronics ahead of the audio chain? In speaking of
> "chain" ---- the strength of a chain is defined by its weakest link. A poor
> audio system makes for a poor receiver.
>
> Tentec has always been known for good quality audio both on TX and RX. With
> this and other good quality attributes, their on air performance usually is
> equal to or is better than most other brands or models.
>
> Clearly the difference between the Omni VII and the Eagle are quite notable.
> I find it necessary to use slightly different operating techniques with the
> two radios in order to attain optimum results with each one. Thus I've
> always said, don't operate a Tentec radio like others one may have or use.
> They are distinctly unique and different.
>
> ***************
> As to the background pertaining to the current sales promotion, I can
> speculate on this just like many others have done. One point I've not seen
> advanced in these discussions is one I've not expressed but will do so.
>
> Perhaps with the age of the Omni VII and the Eagle and the technology in the
> Argonaut VI, like most companies, Tentec has realized and amortized their R &
> D costs for these products. Once R & D is amortized, those costs are usually
> no longer included in the cost of the manufactured product. Therefore the
> costs have gone down and the new reduced cost basis can be then factored to
> retail price. It is this new price that is not being used to sell the
> products.
>
> As a case and point, about 5 years ago we purchased a 42" Sony HD LED TV for
> about $2200. Last year a lightning strike destroyed that TV. It was replaced
> with a 48" Sony HD LED TV for about $899.
>
> ****************
>
>
> 73
> Bob, K4TAX
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
> To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 2:29 AM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Reasons to buy an OM7 instead of an Eagle
>
>
>> Bob,
>>
>> That was good stuff.
>> If I find the time, I will try to merge both our lists into one.
>> I just now noticed, the OM7 announced in 2004, not 2007, so it has been 10
>> years since I have used or even seen an OM7.
>>
>> I would like to say a few words about receiver performance now, showing ON
>> THE AIR TESTS made on the OM7.
>>
>> Rob Sherwood's list shows measured lab numbers and Rob shares with us his
>> opinion of what is required by most people in order to have a good enough
>> receiver. What few people have picked up on is that he has raised the
>> numbers by 5%. He is now saying 75dB BDR3 for SSB and 85dB for CW. This is
>> slightly higher than what the OM7 can achieve (on CW) but lower than the
>> Eagle.
>>
>> NEVER-THE-LESS, those are just numbers, meaningless to most of us hams.
>> So what real world difference does it make?
>>
>> Perhaps I am the only person who ever tested and 'documented' this in a real
>> world environment that showed a distinct difference. In reality, 99.9% of
>> us will never have that environment AND that specific environment can no
>> longer be reproduced.
>> However, I do want to point out that at that time, there was indeed a very
>> distinct advantage in favor of the radio with the highest BDR3.
>>
>> In 2004, a couple of weeks before the OMNI VII announced, I conducted a
>> transceiver test (I think I called it "intermod shootout") at one of our
>> contest sites. The test was conducted on 40m on a Friday evening, but no
>> big contest was running. However this was BEFORE the shortwave broadcast
>> stations had moved outside of the ham band, so the total amount of voltage
>> hitting a receiver's front end (here in Europe) was tremendous! Tremendous
>> because I was using a 3 element 40m Yagi at 105 ft. height. This
>> environment can never be repeated because the broadcast stations are gone
>> now.
>>
>> In addition, rotating the beam made a big difference in the amount of
>> intermodulation generated by the receivers and the direction
>> North/North-East was the worst. I left the beam in that direction, then
>> compared several transceivers.
>> At that time, the "Meister" was the Orion (1). There was no Eagle or O2
>> yet.
>>
>> The (sometimes significant) difference between all 7 transceivers tested was
>> recorded in a video (for each radio) showing the S-Meter and recording the
>> accompanying sound. You can see and hear the difference in these videos.
>> These results have been posted on the Bavarian Contest Club web site for
>> more than 10 years now.
>>
>> Lots of people speculate about all kinds of things including receiver
>> performance and Ten-Tec going out of business.
>> I haven't figured out a way to benchmark TT going out of business, but I do
>> know how to test receivers in a real world environment, and when I test
>> stuff, I post it to the Internet for everyone to see and hear.
>>
>> In today's environment, the only way to approximate this type of challenging
>> band condx is to operate in the middle of a very BIG contest, such as CQWW
>> DX contest, especially in CW! AND, as I stated earlier, when operating,
>> don't skip over the messy pile-ups, jump in and work the station on that
>> frequency. THAT'S WHERE THE DIFFERENCE IS!
>>
>> I've posted this link several times before but I'll post it again.
>> Here's the LINK:
>> http://www.bavarian-contest-club.de/reviews/Transceiver-intermod-shootout-on
>> -40M-in-europe-;art32,565
>> Look under "RESULTS" to find clickable links to the video files.
>>
>> (NOTE: most likely the link will be broken by the reflector. Copy it -both
>> lines of it, together- and paste it into your browser).
>>
>> Two comments: first, I am indeed the world's worst photographer, which is
>> evident from these videos, but the message does come through. Second, in
>> the excitement, I sometimes unknowingly switched to speaking German instead
>> of English. That's because the station owner who is German was testing with
>> me and he was commenting to me in German, causing my brain to switch from
>> 7-bit to 8-bit ASCII. I guess there was a sticky bit! (hi)
>>
>> THE BOTTOM LINE:
>> Receiver performance is a highly misunderstood subject, partly because we
>> each have our own definition of what our needs are. It is impossible to
>> make a list ranking true receiver performance and reflect the true
>> performance of each radio. Rob is the first person to tell us that in all of
>> his presentations. He tells us of the many other important things, first
>> and foremost, "you have to enjoy using the radio". THIS IS MORE IMPORTANT
>> THAN ANY LIST, and the only person on the planet that can determine that is
>> YOU.
>>
>> Rob's list shows the radios ranked by BDR3, nothing more.
>> It may be used as one of many selection criterion but it certainly is not
>> the most decisive one.
>>
>> The biggest difference between the Eagle and the OM7 is in the ergonomics of
>> the radios.
>> How you use them and navigate the menus is VERY different.
>> Many people will not like the Eagle. I love it.
>> Some may not like the OM7 because it doesn't have separate AF/RF gain
>> controls and because it's Panadaptor is not very good. Other than that, my
>> guess is that most people will be more comfortable operating to OM7.
>>
>> But if you are a serious contester, take the Eagle (unless you absolutely
>> need OmniRig support).
>>
>> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bob McGraw
>> - K4TAX
>> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 3:20 AM
>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Reasons to buy an OM7 instead of an Eagle
>>
>> Well Rick as you know, I have both on the desk.
>>
>> The Eagle receiver is somewhat better. How much well with the optional
>> filters in the Omni VII and both used for CW, I perceive one would find it
>> necessary to have both radios and the ability to switch between the two to
>> discern much if any difference. Sherwood Engineering has the Eagle Dynamic
>> range Narrow spaced measured at 90 dB while the Omni VII is measured at 80
>> dB. Rob also stated that most hams will find the 80 dB performance most
>> adequate.
>>
>> However, per Sherwood Engineering Receiver report, the Noise floor on the
>> Omni VII is -130 & -140 dBm while the noise floor on the Eagle is -124 &
>> -132 dBm.
>>
>> The display on the Omni VII is much easier to see and read plus it gives
>> more information and one can see the S meter {Rick}.
>>
>> The S meter on the Omni VII goes to 60 dB over S-9 while the S meter on the
>> Eagle goes to 30 dB over S-9.
>>
>> The S meter on the Eagle shows only signal strength and SWR. The S meter on
>> the Omni VII shows signal strength and is user selectable between PWR out
>> and SWR.
>>
>> The Eagle has dual concentric knobs for AF gain and RF gain and another set
>> for PBT and BW. The Omni VII has one knob that has a momentary push in to
>> toggle between the two functions.
>>
>> The Omni VII had separate RIT and XIT buttons and displays. The Eagle had
>> only a RIT function which is difficult to read the value on the display.
>>
>> The Omni VII has a CW spot function. The Eagle does not.
>>
>> The Eagle has a hardware Noise Blanker. The Omni VII has a firmware Noise
>> Blanker.
>>
>> The Eagle DSP BW works nicely down to 100 Hz while the Omni VII DSP BW only
>> goes to 200 Hz. For both radios, any optional filters automatically switch
>> in the RX path as the respective BW is selected.
>>
>> The Omni VII RX BW is adjustable up to 12 KHz standard. The Eagle BW
>> adjustable up to the widest roofing filter installed.
>>
>> The MENU on the Omni VII is accessed by a MENU button on the front panel.
>> The Eagle Config Menu must start with the power off, hold down FNC and then
>> turn power on.
>>
>> The KEY jack on the Omni VII is on the front and is a 1/4" TRS connector.
>> The KEY jack on the Eagle is on the rear and is a 1/8" TRS connector.
>>
>> The EXT SPKR jack on the Omni VII is on the rear and is a 1/4" TR connector.
>>
>> The EXT SPKR jack on the Eagle is on the rear and is a 1/8" T R connector.
>>
>> The Omni VII has a dedicated button for TUNE and PWR while the Eagle one
>> must use the FNC before accessing the PWR function.
>>
>> The Eagle is controlled externally via USB communications port. The Omni
>> VII is controlled externally by a RS-232 port.
>>
>> The Omni VII has a direct internet connection. The Eagle does not offer
>> this feature.
>>
>> The Omni VII offers two ANT port plus a separate RX ANT port. The Eagle
>> only offers a single ANT port.
>>
>> The Omni VII offers direct frequency entry. The Eagle does not have direct
>> frequency entry.
>>
>> The Omni VII can switch direct to any band with the push of a button. The
>> Eagle must cycle through several bands to get to the others.
>>
>> The ATU is much faster to resolve a match with the Omni VII. The Eagle
>> takes a bit longer to resolve a match. Both radios ATU will match a 10:1 SWR
>> or better.
>>
>> The Eagle is about 1/4 the size of the Omni VII
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I could do three or four pages of this stuff. How much more do you want or
>>
>> need? Best bet, just download both manuals from the Tentec website and
>> read them.
>>
>> 73
>> Bob, K4TAX
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
>> To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 4:10 PM
>> Subject: [TenTec] Reasons to buy an OM7 instead of an Eagle
>>
>>
>>> I was just asked off list for reasons to warrant spending the extra bread
>>> on
>>> an OM7 instead of an Eagle.
>>> Ha! I had to bite my tongue to keep from saying "none, there aren't any!"
>>> (hi)
>>>
>>> There are of course 2 or 3 minor reasons and I've created my list below.
>>> Perhaps someone else more familiar with the OM7 than I am can think of
>>> other
>>> reasons that I have forgotten.
>>> Grateful to any additional tips.
>>>
>>> (and to the OM who asked me this question, if you do not subscribe to the
>>> tentec group at contesting.com, send me another email and I will forward
>>> you
>>> any replies we get).
>>> ==========================================================
>>>
>>> Hi OM, (name withheld)
>>>
>>> You do realize of course that you have posed that question to a man in
>>> love
>>> with his Eagle! (hi)
>>> OK, but I will try and be objective on this.
>>>
>>> The Eagle's better receiver is really only noticeable in BIG contests
>>> where
>>> a good operator is willing to dive into the middle of the heaviest pile-up
>>> on the band to work whatever DX multiplier is under all the rumble. Apart
>>> from that, there is not a lot of difference in the two receivers. However
>>> when the going gets tough, the Eagle will outshine the Omni 7.
>>>
>>> I'll start with the only other negative of the OM7 over the Eagle: it has
>>> only one knob for AF and RF gain. Not the end of the world but separate
>>> knobs would have been better.
>>>
>>> And of course if you go backpacking, I'd rather carry an Eagle! (hi)
>>> Same applies for mobile operations.
>>>
>>> Now here is my short list of features the OM7 has which the Eagle does
>>> not:
>>>
>>> . A larger read out, including an S-Meter that you can actually see and
>>> read
>>>
>>> . Better interfacing to old amplifiers (or new Ameritron amplifiers) in CW
>>> mode. The OM7 has adjustable hang delay on the tail end of the signal.
>>> The
>>> Eagle does not have this feature and if you have one of these amps, you
>>> absolutely need it. With the Eagle, you must purchase the Model 318 Amp
>>> Keyer for a hundred bucks.
>>>
>>> . Interfacing to Ten-Tec full QSK amplifiers (dual-cable keying). The
>>> Eagle
>>> does not have this. If you don't have a full QSK linear with this keying
>>> loop circuitry, it doesn't matter.
>>>
>>> . A band scope (though it's not the greatest)
>>>
>>> . Larger heat sink on the back side for cooling the final transistors.
>>> You
>>> really do not need a fan unless you are running RTTY. The Eagle doesn't
>>> have this so it must rely on a fan. It is not terribly loud but it is
>>> audible.
>>>
>>> . Direct frequency entry keypad
>>>
>>> . Curtis mode A and B keying. It's fixed on the Eagle, but I have no idea
>>> which one. Somehow I never paid any attention to that stuff. I just key
>>> whatever they throw at me and it somehow seems to always work.
>>>
>>> . Two spare RCA phono plugs AND an internal provision to connect two coax
>>> cables to these to be used as connection for a pre-selector or noise
>>> cancelor.
>>>
>>> . A serial port.
>>>
>>> . Connection for the POD (the remote VFO knob). I sometimes miss this on
>>> my
>>> Eagle.
>>>
>>> . 2 antenna jacks
>>>
>>> . Ethernet connection
>>>
>>> . AUX RX (antenna) - an input for a receive-only antenna (uses one of the
>>> two ANT connections)
>>>
>>> . Adjustable bandwidth on SSB
>>>
>>> . Adjustable RX and TX equalizers
>>>
>>> . CTCSS for FM
>>>
>>> . Adjustable CW (keying) weighting
>>>
>>> . SPOT (for spotting in CW) - which I personally feel is worthless
>>>
>>> . Adjustable rise/fall time on CW. A fancy option but I don't feel it is
>>> necessary. The Eagle's CW signal is just fine.
>>>
>>> . FSK X Data (if you are into RTTY)
>>>
>>> . VFO Speed Shift which basically speeds up the tuning rate by a factor of
>>
>>> 4
>>> when you turn the VFO knob real fast. Many people like this feature a
>>> lot.
>>>
>>> . A very comfortable software menu (probably the very best in the
>>> industry)
>>>
>>> . OmniRig support (very important for many 3rd party software programs)
>>>
>>> . A dedicated RIT/XIT knob (using the RIT on the Eagle is very clumsy)
>>>
>>> . And of course REMOTE CONTROL (over the Internet)
>>>
>>> That's all that comes to mind right now, but keep in mind that I do not
>>> own
>>> an OM7 and the last time I even saw or used one was in 2007. That was 7
>>> years ago. and my old grey cells "ain't what they used to be".
>>>
>>> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>>> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TenTec mailing list
>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|