The Orion (565) was never ever tested with the optional INRAD 600Hz
filter (designed by W4ZV) .
This 4-pole crystal is the perfect roofing filter with minimal Group
Delay. 6 or 8-pole filtering, used by the competition, can be good for
dynamic range specs, but a bad choice on 160m trying to dig out that
weak signal in the mud.
Together with the, at the time, exceptional close-by low phase noise its
receiver still is top-notch.
The 2nd receiver is not contest-grade in specs but that is a challenge
for the real operator using correct ATT +RF-Gain to maximise the use of
its dynamic range.
I have never found the theoretical limitation a problem. Not at our
contest station PI4TUE, nor at home.
For purists, there is the optional INRAD 45Mhz 4Khz roofing filter. that
will bring another xx dB's dynamic range.
For those lucky ones there is the TenTec optional RX366 2nd receiver,
which should have even better specs than the ORION's main RX.
It is phase locked (can be adjusted on the fly) to the main receiver,
making it on par with todays competition.
The internal sweep panaoramic screenfunction is total useless.
Today's IC7851/TS890/IC7610 are the best, but still cannot show weak
signals.
Any separate SDR, connected or master-slaved(via microham keyer II) is a
much better solution for the serious contester/DX'er.
Last but certainly not least, making a QSO is about correctlydecoding
the message from the other station.
Rob Sherwood mentions this audio reproduction quality.
This is a much underrated topic at reviewing receivers; can you hear the
weak signal?
it is not only about basic distortion at the IF &AF stages.
Filtering in digital domain (like all do today) is hyped for "Brickwall
filter response for better selectivity".
People are misguided by these rectangular shaped filtercurves.
In fact, these curves create massiveGroup delay distortion.
That is why <200 Hz filterwidth most top-notch transceivers sound hollow.
You cannot read a weak signal anymore.
During my own listening tests I compared typical Icom vs Elecraft vs the
ORION RX performance and found an 8dB difference between worse(Icom) and
the best (K2)
See my measurement results at:
http://pa5mw.blogspot.com/2009/12/upgrade-current-vhf-station-iv-mds.html
I found that the more round shaped digital filter curves (analog shape)
performed much better than the sharp edged Icom/K3.
At the TT ORION one can scout the band at BW=100Hz and not noting it is
set such small. The reproduced audio is totally free from ringing.
It is even better than the ORION II which according my measurements,
seems slightly different tuned; 150Hz BW is the mininmal BW to use
effectively at weak signal reading on Topband.
For the Icoms there is a powerfull solution; switch to 600Hz and use
both IF-shifts to dial total BW back to 50 or 100Hz. This makes all the
difference on especially 50MHz waek signal performance for
IC756-range/7400/7600
See also Adam Farson's ICOM pages.
I have not tested any rigs after 2009, but measured the TS590 IF shape
after I noticed it performs very good. Its filter curve shape(rounded
edges) show a well found optimum in terms of selectivity vs audio
reproduction quality.
I am sure the latest generation perform much better at all manufucturers.
Cannot understand why Elecraft did not act here; I have had numerous A/B
comparisons where the ORION, K2 and even a Drake R-4C can reproduce
clear audio when the K3 showed ringing zilt.
Same result can be heard at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIWSMHkSAXg
Anyone can do this weak signal comparison at home using an old analog
receiver.
YMMMV
73
Mark PA5MM
On 05/12/2018 17:47, Byron Cordes via TenTec wrote:
Nothing wrong with the stock second rx for general rx in the Orion but do you really want one
in your contest quality Ham Radio ? I think Henry was trying to say you can’t cover
all the frequency with one radio and not to expect a lack of performance somewhere. For the
time it was made it was first rate and now it’s a fine radio compared to any.
Byron AC9PA
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 5, 2018, at 1:25 AM, Rick@dj0ip.de wrote:
Almost all of Rob Sherwood's test reviews are posted on my web site, here:
http://www.dj0ip.de/sherwood-forest/sherwood-xcvr-tests/
I have the OM7 and O2, but I don't have a test of the O1.
73,
Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
May the Sunspots be with us!
-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec <tentec-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of Rodney
Sent: 05 December 2018 04:55
To: w2iy@verizon.net; Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
<tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] list opinion(s) on Omni VII and/versus Orion
I have had both check Sherwood testing, Orion test is better has 2 reciever
-----Original Message----.-
From: Michael Tortorella
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2018 10:34 PM
To: 'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'
Subject: [TenTec] list opinion(s) on Omni VII and/versus Orion
Folks, may we have a brief discussion of the relative merits of the Omni VII
and the Orion? Am thinking of one or the other and would like some input.
Thanks and 73, Mike W2IY
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
_______________________________________________
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
|