I hope nobody would defend poor signals today. But I've been around long enough
to remember lots of drifty, chirpy, over-modulated signals from non-digital
"good old rigs".
Have you ever given out an RST 596C or 599X report? Do you know why the "T"
part is there? What "C" or "X" means? :-)
Still, I agree that older, less "hot" rigs (like my TS-520S) were easier on the
ears - if there was not much QRM. There is serenity in gentle bandpass filters
and deafness.
73 Martin AA6E
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:45:07 -0500
From: John Farler <jfarler@peoplepc.com>
Mike has described what my non-technical mind calls
"digital hamburger," the product of so many modern
rigs, as compared to older, cleaner (?) rigs...
Sure tires one out to listen, even though the rigs
are superior in all specs....
K4AVX
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 23:15:05 -0500
From: "Mike Hyder --N4NT--" <N4NT_Mike.Hyder@charter.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Ten Tec Omni D, Why so quiet ?
Message-ID: <002b01c3f768$1e81ac20$07fea8c0@radiodesktop>
References:
.............
In a rush to keep up with "modern technology" equipment manufacturers =
had to move toward synthesized, general coverage receivers. There was a =
trade-off with this in the increased noise introduced into the receive =
(and transmit) path.
...
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|