Who would ever thought a discussion of which radio Omni VII or Orion would lead
to great information on the Orion I and Orion II ! I have in joyed it very
much. Thank you . Please continue if you like .
Byron AC9PA
Sent from my iPad
> On Dec 11, 2018, at 9:46 AM, Carl Moreschi <n4py3@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Firmware 1.373b5 filters were done by Smith who came from Kachina. Filters in
> 3.32 were done by Gary Barber.
>
> Carl Moreschi N4PY
> 58 Hogwood Rd
> Louisburg, NC 27549
> www.n4py.com
>
>> On 12/11/2018 10:30 AM, pa5mw@home.nl wrote:
>> The russian navigation beacons are on 160m active and just appear in the
>> noise (1813.1)
>>
>>
>> I just compared my both ORIONs using that exact CW-like signal :
>>
>> ORION serial ending 4 (inc RX366)Fw V3.32: weak and ringing sound at 100Hz
>> BW. Better at 200Hz BW where ringing is gone, but still just not as good as
>> the other ORION.
>>
>> ORION serial ending 5 (fw 1.373b5): clearly readable and total absence of
>> any ringing.
>>
>> I recall upgrading above 2nd ORION to V3.32 a few years ago, and found it
>> was just not as good in reading weak signals at the smallest BW. So I
>> downgraded it back to V1.373b5 for just that reason.
>> A/B comparing it to the other ORION now confirms the earlier found
>> differences.
>>
>> I had similar performance differences with an OII (fw V3.x) which behaved
>> exactly like above, which for me now is an indication it is fw related.
>>
>> 73
>> Mark PA5MW
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TenTec<tentec-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of Barry N1EU
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 13:52 PM
>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment<tentec@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] list opinion(s) on Omni VII and/versus Orion
>>
>> I believe you're going to find the filter shapes about the same across the
>> firmware revisions. That was one thing that I don't think got touched as
>> the Orion evolved. fwiw, I was a beta tester from the beginning till the
>> end.
>>
>> Barry N1EU
>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 9:40 AM<pa5mw@home.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>
>>> Maybe it is different at fw 1.373b5 ??
>>>
>>> Anyway; I can dig out weak signals on 160m best at 100Hz BW.
>>> At 100Hz I can slowly tune the whole band without feeling restricted
>>> by any artifacts or ringing/hollow/distorted sound or anything.
>>> Heck, I sometimes forget the next day that BW is still at 100Hz when
>>> tuning the band.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Mark PA5MW
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: TenTec<tentec-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of Martin Sole
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 9:11 AM
>>> To: tentec@contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] list opinion(s) on Omni VII and/versus Orion
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I just used Spectrogram 14 fed with line audio to the pC sound card.
>>> I get the same shape you do at 300Hz and at 100Hz similar. In SSB at
>>> 2700Hz bandwidth its a different story, very steep skirts and tiring
>>> audio after 3-4 hours. Reducing the taps to give a smoother roll off,
>>> and notwitstanding other issues, seems to help a lot. I found around
>>> 100 is about ideal shape wise. I mistakenly put 32 in the last email
>>> which is as low as it goes and is too low for sure. I still hear
>>> ringing at 100Hz with
>>> 199 taps on weak cw. Once about about s4-5 the ringing is much less
>>> noticeable.
>>>
>>> Martin, HS0ZED
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 11/12/2018 14:12, pa5mw@home.nl wrote:
>>>> Just to be clear on this; the ORION does not require lowering the
>>>> filter
>>> taps setting at all.
>>>>
>>>> First its basic filtershape at 199 is already perfectly analog-like
>>>> round shaped (see my previous weblinks for measurement pictures) and
>>> secondly it would only widen the filterwidth and especially its skirts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Mark PA5MW
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: TenTec<tentec-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of Martin
>>>> Sole
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 3:10 AM
>>>> To: tentec@contesting.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] list opinion(s) on Omni VII and/versus Orion
>>>>
>>>> I still have an Orion and I still like it a lot, even though it's
>>>> not
>>> without its faults and could have used more development.
>>>>
>>>> With regard to the filter taps it is unfortunate that when set to
>>> anything other than the maximum length of 199 there is a problem as
>>> you vary the bandwidth strange things can happen.
>>>>
>>>> I like the taps set low, the shape at 32 suits me very well. I
>>>> usually
>>> use a wide roofing filter, 6kHz typically, that helps the noise
>>> blanker a bit though it's hardly much use. There is very little need
>>> for narrow roofers here anyway, the IF filtering is fine by itself.
>>>>
>>>> Adjusting the IF bandwidth with the taps set at anything other than
>>>> 199
>>> it is quite possible to get a deep notch right in the centre of the
>>> passband, one step on the tap setting either way corrects it so I am
>>> guessing something is not being dealt with properly in the bandwidth
>>> setting routine. This is 3.032x7b.
>>>>
>>>> I will go back to trying 1.375b to see if I can live with that but I
>>> suspect the loss of the APF will limit my happiness with that version.
>>>>
>>>> All in all I think the Orion is an almost ideal radio in many respects.
>>>>
>>>> Martin, HS0ZED
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/12/2018 03:08, Kim Elmore wrote:
>>>>> You noted some very interesting filter characteristics regarding
>>>>> the
>>> Orion transceivers, Mark. One thing you mention is that the DSP
>>> filters may have skirts that are too steep, leading to other
>>> artifacts. Have you tried reducing the number of “taps” used for the
>>> DSP? That will certainly change the characteristics of the filter.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73& MX,
>>>>>
>>>>> Kim N5OP
>>>>>
>>>>> "People that make music together cannot be enemies, at least as
>>>>> long as the music lasts." -- Paul Hindemith
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 10, 2018, at 13:37,<pa5mw@home.nl> <pa5mw@home.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tnx,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still own 3 TT ORIONs here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Old 2002 version, recently acquired(swapped for my OII), heavily
>>>>>> used (has at least different PCB circuit tracks around the DC
>>>>>> power
>>>>>> input) using fw 1.375b
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - New bought 2004 version; this is my favorite one using fw 1.375b
>>>>>> (yes tried V2x and higher)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Occasion bought recently, RX366 included, new blue LCD. (fw
>>>>>> 3.x)
>>> great diversity with on the fly adjustable phase locking. Have not
>>> been able to try in contesting yet due to no TX antenna(s) at home
>>> QTH. Cannot comment on RX performance compared to anything yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To anyone considering buying an ORION:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - verify that A9 (Power Distribution) board was upgraded on ALL el.
>>>>>> Caps to higher voltage/temp and low ESR types
>>>>>> - verify that memory battery was exchanged
>>>>>> - verify or do the simple LCD backlight upgrade (LCD Saturation
>>>>>> fix; adding series resistor only) this enhances the clarity
>>>>>> bigtime and extends lifetime
>>>>>> - verify or rework the DC input socket to something better (old
>>>>>> 2002 version can be upgraded to Powerpole, 2004 can not)
>>>>>> - add the (optional) heatsink fan if you operate contests in a
>>>>>> very warm environment
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Check http://tentecwiki.eqth.net/doku.php?id=565 for more info
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see no reason to upgrade to any other transceiver without giving
>>> something and/or loose the fun of operating the ORION.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73
>>>>>> Mark, PA5MW (not MM, that was a typo)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: TenTec<tentec-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of Barry
>>>>>> N1EU
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 14:14 PM
>>>>>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment<tentec@contesting.com>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] list opinion(s) on Omni VII and/versus Orion
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Great comments Mark!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For many years I was very active on 160M cw and I found that the
>>>>>> Orion, Orion II and RX366 receivers differed somewhat in their
>>>>>> ability to handle
>>>>>> s9++ signals, which were encountered regularly in the northeast
>>>>>> s9++ USA on 160M
>>>>>> cw due to several very powerful stations in this region. I found
>>>>>> the
>>> Orion main rx to be the only one that seemed totally capable of
>>> handling the very strongest signals. The Orion II seemed to introduce
>>> slight audible distortion on the very strong signals. I tried several
>>> Orion II's and even went so far as to re-align the Orion II front end
>>> per factory specs, which made no difference. The RX366 seemed to
>>> introduce a strange audible clicking (hard to describe) when there
>>> were many strong signals on the band in a contest. Again, I tried
>>> multiple RX366's and they all had this issue. Finally the stock
>>> subreceiver was by far the worst offender and would produce phantom
>>> spurious signals spaced 2-3KHz away from the strong fundamental
>>> signal. Several users reported this and this was a well known issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have no theory for why the Orion differed from the Orion II - I
>>> assumed the circuits were identical, but there must be some difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All this is from memory, I no longer own the radios. YMMV
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73, Barry N1EU
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 10:43 AM Mark<pa5mw@home.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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-
>>>>>>> md
>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>> .h
>>>>>>> tml
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|