That was over 20 years ago, Barry, and yes, it was Tom. It was a $3
modification that anyone could d-i-y.
After it was made public, it took Yaesu about 5 or 6 more years (one or two
models later) to finally incorporate the mod in their transmitters. Until
then, if the user did not step up to the plate and fix his own radio, he was
polluting the bands with tens of kHz of key clicks.
In this case I will agree with Terry. We all have the opportunity to vote
with our wallets.
Seems Joe Ham just didn't give a damn and continued to by the crappy Yaesu
transmitters, so why should Yaesu fix it?
I wish we could say that's all history now, but look at the graphs closely
that Jim pointed out to us.
73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Barry N1EU
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 3:20 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Dirty Transmitters - Flex and Yaesu
I actually think Tom W8JI deserves much (most?) of the credit, along with
W2VJN, for originally flushing out the key click issue about 15 years ago.
The focus was initially on the FT-1000(D) and FT-1000MP, which were the most
popular cw contesting rigs at that time and the worst offenders.
73, Barry N1EU
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Darrell Bellerive VE7IU <ve7iu@runbox.com>
wrote:
> It took a very long time for Rob Sherwood's judgements to take hold
> and for real change to happen. The fact that some manufacturers are
> taking steps to improve the cleanliness of transmitters is
> encouraging. It will take time, but I believe we will see improvement
across the board.
>
> I applaud those who, like Rob Sherwood and Jim Brown K9YC, have taken
> the time to test and document the cleanliness of transmitters. There
> is great information available to those researching the purchase of a
> clean transmitter.
>
> The information is quite technical, and there is more than one cause
> of a dirty transmitter. Not to take away from the great work that has
> been published, but I have wondered if a "dirty transmitter" or "worst
polluter"
> list or, with a positive spin, a "cleanest transmitter list" would not
> help promote the idea. A single "score" type of list.
>
> Look at how manufacturers now try to be ranked high on Rob's list of
> receivers. Perhaps the same for transmitters would help to accelerate
> the adoption of change. A simple list with a single overall score and
> then a link to a bit more detailed information. Many hams tend to like
> the technical side of things and take note of 20 dB less signal 2 kHz
> from the carrier, but having a single "score" might be a better means to
an end.
>
> Developing the score and the criteria for such a list would be more
> difficult to determine, and certainly in constant dispute, but some
> form of weighted formula combining issues such as IMD, phase noise,
> key clicks, etc., to determine the score would be required.
>
> And big numbers tend to be perceived as more valued than small
> numbers, so make the theoretically cleanest transmitter possible have
> a score of 1000, and the theoretically dirtiest possible transmitter a
score of 0.
>
> It would take a very thick skinned individual to pick criteria,
> develop a formula for a single score, and publish the list. But I do
> think such a list would help motivate manufacturers and purchasers to
> make better choices.
>
> 73, Darrell VE7IU
>
> On 15-12-10 02:11 AM, rick@dj0ip.de wrote:
>
>> snip...
>>
>> But I have been listening to what Rob Sherwood says since 1976 and so
>> far he has been spot on with his judgment.
>> Elecraft, FLEX, TEN-TEC and many other companies listen to his
>> suggestions.
>> Those who don't work with him so closely are coincidently the ones
>> whose transmitters are polluting our bands!
>>
>> Clearly Elecraft has shown us the path.
>> I hope others will follow and even use this technology in the lower
>> cost radios.
>>
>> In any case I applaud everyone participating in this discussion.
>> It is high time we discuss this topic as a technical topic, rather
>> than blaming it on some LID ham.
>>
>> snip...
>>
>> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>> (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|