[TenTec] Omni-6 Plus Upgrade

[Chester Alderman]

>Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 20:42:09 -0400

>To: Del Seay <<seay@Alaska.NET>

>From: Chester Alderman <<chestert@mail.pressroom.com>

>Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni-6 Plus Upgrade

>In-Reply-To: <<34057B16.427@alaska.net>

>

>At 06:20 AM 8/28/97 -0700, you wrote:

>>I'd like to pass along my observations on the Plus upgrade for

>>those who are contemplating.

>

>As an Omni 6 owner for six years and a factory modified Omni 6+ owner now for only a few weeks, I'd like to use your message to add my observations and comments.

>>

>>First, I made a mistake ordering the 1.8 kHz 2nd filter for ssb.

>>I don't use ssb that much, and the filter is far too steep,

>>with the resulting audio being extremely limited. My fault, not

>>Ten-Tec's.

>

>I have a 2.4kc, 1.8kc, and 500 Hz filters in the first IF, and the full complement in the second IF. I am finding the 1.8 kc in the 1st IF and 500 Hz in the 2nd IF to be very good for digging out weak DX signals on 80 and 40 mtrs. I like the sharpness of the skirts and do not notice any degredation of the signal level, no matter what filter combinations I select.

>

>>A couple of years ago, I bought and played with one of the high

>>end DSP units, and was not impressed. Now, the built in DSP

>>in the OMNI appears about the same. The low pass filter works well,

>>the auto notch is great for the phone operators, but I have yet

>>to find a signal that I can copy with the dsp, that I can't copy

>>without. I guess it could be considered a nice toy, but not of

>>great help in serious dx chasing.

>

>I certainly agree! I've never found any DSP box that really did help dig out weak signals in the presence of normal band noise. For sure, in the presence of QRN, I don't find them to be of any help. The DSP in my Omni 6+ seems to be the same. If a signal is loud enough for you to read without the aid of the DSP, then the DSP will enhance the signal by dropping the background noise level, however one could copy that signal anyway. In my brief experience on 20/40/80 mtrs, if the signal is very near the band noise level, DSP will not enhance that signal. And in fact, in my opinion, makes the weak signal somewhat more difficult to copy because it introduces a 'ringing sensation' in the audio. I find the DSP on SSB signals to be very discouraging! If you can almost copy a SSB signal, when you turn the DSP on, the audio presence decreases so much that you can hardly copy the voice.

>However, I still reserve judgement on the DSP, with hopes that this winter, especially on the low end of 80 mtrs, with no QRN, the DSP will function much better. Right now I would say with good filters in the 1st and 2nd IF, DSP is not providing a significant enhancement to copying signals.

>>

>>The additional filtering has really sharpened the receiver, and is

>>well worth the upgrade. I have 2-500 Hz filters, and find that it is

>>great. I can't imagine ever needing, or being able to use a 250 hz

>>filter with it.

>>

>>There is one item that has been dropped from the menu - to my dismay. 

>>The ability to change the cw offset was great in the original. Now,

>>it appears we must be satisfied with 670 Hz.

>

>This problem, I do not have. I can adjust the CW sidetone from 400 Hz to about 900Hs. I can adjust the RIT and XIT the factory advertised amount. I do, however, notice that when using RIT, the tuning transition is not consistant. Say I have tuned the RIT up 200 cps from my xmit freq and start tuning it back down toward zero. As I watch the digital readout, the count will go something like ....5.4.3.2.3.2.1.3.2.1...etc. The frequency does not seem to jump as indicated, only the digital readout.

>>

>>Now - the built-in keyer seems better, although I doubt that there was

>>any intentional change. Probably just a result of the new firmware.

>>However, it does still change speed as the cpu works with other

>>functions. Very disturbing to a guy who has to keep a real close grip

>>on his hand or send undistinguishable garbage. It veries about 2 wpm

>>at the 30 wpm rate. I think that the cpu is probably too busy to keep

>>up with all it is trying to control.

>

>I don't use the internal keyer, but I'm sure everyone is aware that the Omni 6 will not key above 68 wpm? Truely not a big deal to most, but only to a very few (and I am among the very few). When you key above 68 wpm, the characters start changing the weight ratio, to the point when you get to about 74 wpm, it is no longer code. I have talked to TenTec (many years ago) and they explained the problem (PLL lock time) and I'm perfectly happy with their answer. The trade off would be to lose the fabulous receiver in the Omni 6...I'll happily take the receiver performance and use my backup Corsair II for my limited QRQ work.

>>

>>All in all, I am very satisfied, and there were no surprises. Everything

>>appears to be just as advertised. Another damned fine rig. Think I'll

>>keep it!

>

>I really like the additional filter selection for the 1st IF (however I would have perfered that the selected 1st IF filters all be cascadable!). I like the new menu system and I especially love the ability to set the tuning rate on both SSB, CW, and RIT! A big thumbs up for TenTec!!

>

>

>>

>>de KL7HF

>>

>>--

>>FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm

>>Submissions:              tentec@contesting.com

>>Administrative requests:  tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com

>>Problems:                 owner-tentec@contesting.com

>>Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm

>>

Chester Alderman

<color><param>0000,0000,ffff</param>W4BQF -- Tom

</color><color><param>ffff,0000,0000</param>chestert@pressroom.com

</color>


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions:              tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm