Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Rig Question

To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Rig Question
From: W0MU <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 11:39:35 -0600
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
The 2nd receiver in the 990 is essentially a 590 receiver so that makes sense.

I would be pretty upset if the main 990 receiver was no better than the 590. What are you paying for.
On 6/15/2014 10:22 PM, Gary and Kathleen Pearse wrote:
On my 990 the 2nd receiver was consistently night after night better able to detect a weak CW 
sig on 40-160. Same settings on both receivers: different settings, AGC, no AGC, ATT, RF gain 
varied, it didn’t matter the race was won by the second. I didn’t fuss with SSB 
very much so that mode may yield different results.

My TS-590 paralleled the 2nd in all the A/B tests, and would beat the 1st on 
the same weak signals as well. The weak were at or in a S3-9 noise floor before 
DSP NB was applied to clean things up.

On 20M up the race winner may be different due to the conversion scheme in each rig, 
not sure as that wasn’t my winter goal at night in KL7.

The 990’s APF seemed to be only a narrow filter that didn’t necessarily create an “AH 
HA!” moment like some applications of that technology in other radios like the K3.

Both TS-590 and 990 suffer from Kenwood’s implementation of the DSP NB…when the 
signals rise, the DSP NB goes to sleep and the noise floor is elevated.

If I get my TS-590’s ALC fixed, my K3 setup is history.

73, Gary NL7Y


The main receiver in the 990 is supposed to be better than the 2nd rcv.  Things 
that make you go hmmmm.

Mike W0MU

_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>