[TenTec] Re: TenTec Digest, Vol 24, Issue 68
w9ge
finger at goeaston.net
Sun Dec 19 19:03:02 EST 2004
Hank: The 422 Centurian is one of the best buys in the amp world. Tunes
very easily, reliable, looks good, is quiet and just works. On cw it will
be hard to tell the difference between 422 and the other choice. Now if you
put the $$ saved by buying the 422 into the antenna farm it might make a
really big difference in the signal.
My opinion, the original ten tec 425 is one of the best ever built by
anyone. The 422 comes real close to it. Buy a 422 either new or used
without hesitation. You will love the performance with your new
Orion.Thanks, but my 422 is not for sale. Merry Christmas 73 bob de w9ge
----- Original Message -----
From: <tentec-request at contesting.com>
To: <tentec at contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 4:33 PM
Subject: TenTec Digest, Vol 24, Issue 68
> Send TenTec mailing list submissions to
> tentec at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> tentec-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> tentec-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of TenTec digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Centurian 422 vs Titan III (HENRY PFIZENMAYER)
> 2. Re: Omni 6 sensitivity (Duane - N9DG)
> 3. Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why (DK2GZ at aol.com)
> 4. Re: Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why (Toby Pennington)
> 5. Re: GFI Problems (K4IA at aol.com)
> 6. RE: Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't (Jim Brown)
> 7. RE: Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't (Tom Wagner)
> 8. Argosy -- QSK control question (Nu7z at aol.com)
> 9. Scout band modules (Jim Faulkner)
> 10. Re: Centurian 422 vs Titan III (Jim Miller WB5OXQ)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 10:32:58 -0700
> From: "HENRY PFIZENMAYER" <pfizenmayer at worldnet.att.net>
> Subject: [TenTec] Centurian 422 vs Titan III
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <009e01c4e5f0$cf1b6f90$f362480c at delldim4500>
>
> Like to hear some opinions on the new Centurian versus the Titan III . If
> I
> am gonna order the Centurian , I want to do it this week.
>
> 1. 1000-1200 watts versus 1500 watts is not an issue for me .
> 2. QSK life is not an issue , I will operate "semi-breakin" with the amp.
> 3. Spits and arcs are a big issue.
> 4. Looks like tube replacement cost are close enough to be a toss up.
> 5. 99 percent of operation will be CW.
> 6. While cost is not a complete non-issue , my last amp ran for
> 25 years and I expect the same with this one, at which point
> I won't care anymore !!!!
> 7. Have an Orion on order and expect to use the amp with Orion
> to keep it all Tentec.
> 8. Reliability -Reliability - Reliability is a major issue.
> 9. 160 is a must.
>
> I have read all the reviews I can find , looked at archives until
> my neck hurts and still have not reached a decision. One thing
> that continues to pop out at me is the number of Centurians
> for sale used - always wonder why - surely 1000 vs 1500 watts
> is not the issue.
>
> Any thoughts ?
>
> off line is fine to hanknospam at att.net
>
> Thanks - Hank K7HP
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:34:45 -0800 (PST)
> From: Duane - N9DG <n9dg at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <20041219173445.92426.qmail at web53008.mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I concur with Steve's assessment regarding the SSB rag
> chewing case. The Pegasus/Jupiter are probably the two
> most pleasant SSB rag chewing radios that there are.
> They are not however the best there is when comes to
> digging really weak signal out of the noise or for use
> on a crowded band. Even less so if you've made the IF
> gain full clockwise tweak. The Corsair design is very
> clean/quiet design until you get to its audio stages;
> there it really begins to show its weaknesses. The
> audio filtering op amps and other audio components are
> a rather noisy, the Pegasus/Jupiter are much cleaner
> and have much less audio distortion.
>
> So it is the relative strengths and weaknesses of both
> the Corsair and Pegasus that inspired my DSP IF
> experiment with the Corsair II. My initial results
> have been very encouraging. More to follow on that
> when I get some control issues with the SDR-1000
> squared away (I also have some other slightly
> different ideas along that same vein in the works too
> ;)).
>
> Having never used an Omni VI I can't comment about
> them. I do believe though that they have a better
> (cleaner) audio final amp than the Corsair and other
> earlier TT radios with National Semiconductor LM38x
> series audio amps (can anybody confirm this for me?).
> I also agree with the assessment of the Icom IC-765
> posted earlier, it is simply not a pleasant radio to
> listen to, and it suffers badly from audio IMD
> distortions. I've tried the various AGC mods for it to
> lessen that characteristic with little improvement. So
> not sure if my 765 have some genuine component problem
> or if they are all that way. I suspect it's some of
> both. Its main redeeming qualities are that it can
> hear very well on LW frequencies bellow 500 kHz and
> its pleasant "touchy-feely" ergonomics.
>
> Duane
> N9DG
>
> --- Steve N4LQ <n4lq at iglou.com> wrote:
>
>> The Pegasus is going to be easier on your ears than
>> almost anything due to
>> it's flat audio response, lack of crystal filters
>> and DSP with gentle
>> slopes. If you really want the superior selectivity
>> of the Omni VI then you
>> need to get one with option 3 and fill up the extra
>> filter slots. using the
>> noise reduction feature on cw will also help your
>> ears some. For SSB, you
>> will be dissapointed in the Omni VI when comparing
>> it with the Pegasus (FOR
>> AUDIO QUALITY). So keep Peggy around.
>> Steve N4LQ
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "denton" <denton at oregontrail.net>
>> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 11:04 AM
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>>
>>
>> > Ok Steve...here is my situation...
>> > I have an old Corsiar II that I am using for
>> casual listening with a 500
>> > hrz cw filter..
>> > I currently use a Pegasus for psk mostly, but I
>> notice it sounds better to
>> > my poor ears ( I wear hearing aids in both ears)
>> than the Corasir II does.
>> > I hardly work any ssb at all, just some digitial
>> modes...
>> > Ten Tec has used Omni VI's comming in all the time
>> these days, upgrading
>> > to the new Orion I assume.
>> > I am tempted to pick up one of those..but which
>> one?? What is the
>> > advantage of the Omni VI, same with option 2 and
>> same with option 3??
>> > Thanks in advance...
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq at iglou.com>
>> > To: <tentec at contesting.com>
>> > Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 7:33 AM
>> > Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>> >
>> >
>> >> The Corsair II would drive you nuts in that
>> situation. It's audio derived
>> >> AGC would pop your eardrums on the stong signals
>> so you reduce the RF
>> >> gain then you can't hear the weak one's while the
>> Omni VI's AGC is the
>> >> smoothest one around. No comparison.
>> >>
>> >> Steve N4LQ
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "denton" <denton at oregontrail.net>
>> >> To: <wf2u at starband.net>; <tentec at contesting.com>
>> >> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 10:25 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> Wonder how an Omni VI compares to a Corasir II
>> in similar circumstances?
>> >>> thanks de Denton WB7TDG
>> >>> ----- Original Message -----
>> >>> From: "WF2U" <wf2u at starband.net>
>> >>> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
>> >>> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 6:37 AM
>> >>> Subject: RE: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>I recently got rid of an Icom 756 in favor of
>> the Omni VI Opt.3.
>> >>>> Side-by-side comparison showed that the Omni VI
>> has a definite edge in
>> >>>> weak-signal reception. The difference may be
>> attributable to lower
>> >>>> phase
>> >>>> noise in the Omni VI. The 756 DSP wasn't up to
>> snuff clarifying mushy,
>> >>>> noisy
>> >>>> signals. The Omni VI DSP seems to work better.
>> The IC-756 could never
>> >>>> hear
>> >>>> weak signals in the "holes" in between strong
>> stations, where the Omni
>> >>>> VI
>> >>>> picks up some nice activity.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The PBT is different - in the Omni VI you can
>> lose the station if you
>> >>>> don't
>> >>>> retune the frequency when the station gets out
>> of the passband. In the
>> >>>> Icom
>> >>>> radios (I also had an Icom 740) passband tuning
>> doesn't shift the
>> >>>> center
>> >>>> frequency.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In fact, my Omni-C beats the IC-756 in
>> weak-signal work, except the
>> >>>> lack of
>> >>>> PBT makes it harder to dig out weak signals in
>> between strong stations.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 73, Meir WF2U
>> >>>> Landrum, SC
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>>>> From: tentec-bounces at contesting.com
>> >>>>> [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com]On
>> Behalf Of DennisKT5D at aol.com
>> >>>>> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 5:19 AM
>> >>>>> To: tentec at contesting.com
>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni 6 sensitivity
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I had an Icom-765 for awhile which sported
>> a very good
>> >>>>> receiver comlete
>> >>>>> with all the filters for cw work. It had the
>> PBT and IF shift
>> >>>>> mods done as well.
>> >>>>> I sat it down beside the Omni 6+ and did some
>> testing. Ambient
>> >>>>> noise level on
>> >>>>> both was almost identical with perhaps the
>> edge to the 765. At
>> >>>>> the time the
>> >>>>> 765 was matching up with some plans I had for
>> reconfiguring the
>> >>>>> shack so I was
>> >>>>> about to decide to sell the Omni 6+. Then the
>> CQ WW CW DX contest
>> >>>>> came along.
>> >>>>> After A/B comparison during the contest, I
>> abruptly changed my mind
>> >>>>> about
>> >>>>> reconfiguring the shack and selling the Omni.
>> >>>>> What I discovered was this. I could tune
>> between two strong US
>> >>>>> stations a
>> >>>>> couple of kHz's apart with the Omni and copy a
>> weak DX station, 3 to 4
>> >>>>> s-units, easily. Switching to the 765, I
>> absolutely could not
>> >>>>> hear the weak DX
>> >>>>> station. All I heard was an elevated noise
>> floor due to the close
>> >>>>> in strong US
>> >>>>> stations. Clearly, to my ears the Omni is the
>> superior contest
>> >>>>> rig of the two. The
>> >>>>> 765 could hear as well as the Omni in
>> non-contest conditions so
>> >>>>> sensitivity
>> >>>>> was not an issue. Both radios exhibited the
>> high pitched hiss on
>> >>>>> white noise
>> >>>>> but again, the 765 wasn't quite as bad as the
>> Omni. The
>> >>>>> selectivity was what
>> >>>>> really separated the two radios in contest
>> performance.
>> >>>>> If your radio doesn't seem to be as
>> sensitivity as it should
>> >>>>> be perhaps
>> >>>>> there is a problem with it. The Omni's
>> reputation is well earned
>> >>>>> here and the
>> >>>>> 765 is gone.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> TenTec mailing list
>> >>>>> TenTec at contesting.com
>> >>>>>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> TenTec mailing list
>> >>>> TenTec at contesting.com
>> >>>>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> TenTec mailing list
>> >>> TenTec at contesting.com
>> >>>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> TenTec mailing list
>> >> TenTec at contesting.com
>> >>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > TenTec mailing list
>> > TenTec at contesting.com
>> >
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:18:28 EST
> From: DK2GZ at aol.com
> Subject: [TenTec] Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <27.67f4147c.2ef72e04 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> Hello TT-Fans,
>
>
> I decided to go back to firmware 1.371 today.
>
> I am doing 99% CW this this radio.
>
> Why did I reload the 1.371 firmware:
>
> 1. the new keyer function does not work for me, still stuck in cutis B
> when
> power on the Orion and I cannot see any difference between the A
> and
> B mode
> the only solution is the do a master reset every time you power on
> the Orion
> The OMNI 6* have a better keyer timing for my operating style
>
> 2. the headphone click when you are using a qsk delay less 8%
> yes the qsk in faster in 1.372, but it you have the clicks in the
> headphone
> and you have to reduce the qsk-speed to 8% to reduce the click,
> you
> are in the same
> speed range as with the 1.371 firmware
>
> 3. lost the 2. RX nearly every day after power on the Orion, mostly
> when
> the 2. RX
> is listen on 80 meter CW, will not power on the Orion twice a day
> in
> serie
>
> 4. 17 Meter TX problem
> often had a extremly current consumption on 17 meter when powering
> the Orion on, so
> my power supply does not deliever 40 amp and more on 12 volt.
> Sometimes this
> problem was gone when I switch to 15 meter did a few dit dit dit
> and
> switch back to
> 17 meter, but not this sunday!
>
> 5. got several times a funny sounding main-receiver when using the AN
> on
> SSB mode and
> switch back CW and turn off the AN
>
> 6. the NR does not work as nicely as with 1.371
>
> Yes I did several master reset and also one time a RAM CLEAR and master
> reset again.
>
> Yes I know the things that solved with 1.372:
>
> 1. the roofing filter kick in is now analog with the BW
> 2. the RFGAIN is working better now, but the RX was fine also before
> 3. the Voice-keyer should work now better, but never used the Orion
> in
> SSB in TX mode
> 4. the keying loop with ACOM amps should work now, never used a ACOM,
> still
> using the old Centurion with the amp-keyling line, did not perform
> the Centurion mode
> for the older Centurion amps
>
> So why I should use the 1.372 firmware as an 99% CW OP?
>
> But also with 1.371 I having one thing that I cant solve up to now:
>
> On 20 meter and up I have an offset of -160 HZ in CW to the frequency read
> out.
> On the low bands 160/80/40/30 I do not have these offset.
>
> The configuration here is:
>
> ORION AT plus samplex SEC 1223 power supply:
>
> 1KHZ TT roofing filter in the 1.8 KHZ slot
> 600 HZ Inrad roofing filter in the 1 KHZ slot
> 500 HZ TT roofing filter in the 500 HZ slot
> 250 HZ TT roofing filter in the 250 HZ slot
>
> all filters enabled(1.8, 0.5, 0.25)
> Offset 500 HZ 190 HZ
> Offset 250 HZ 110 HZ
>
> Mode LCW on all bands.
>
> Yes I konw the problem could be the offset of the 500 and 250 HZ filters,
> but why
> only on the bands 20 meter and up?
>
> Switch to UCW on 20 meter and up do not solve the problem above.
>
> First time 1 can remember this offsett problem appear since I put the
> original 1 KHZ filter in in
> the 1.8KHZ slot, but not 100% sure about this.
>
> 73 de Harry, DK2GZ
>
> a TT-Fan since several years
>
> TT gear visit my shak in the past 22 years:
> OMNI D, Argonaut, Argonaut II. Paragon, OMNI 6+, TT-Kit 1320
>
> Never had such kind of problems with the K2/100 and TS570D(G) or
> the TT-gear above
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:51:13 -0500
> From: "Toby Pennington" <toby423 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <000401c4e604$18cd6c70$6502a8c0 at TOBYROOM>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Harry, sorry to hear about all the problems with 1.372. The last version
> 1.371 was very stable and without any improvments would be just fine for
> most operators. But 1.372 is going to take us up to a new level of
> operating
> proficency once the bugs are worked out. By the way, the engineering crew
> at TT are busy now getting things fixed. The beauty of all this is that
> you
> do have the option of going back to a version that you liked, and just
> keep
> on operating until all the issues that concern you are fixed.
>
> Please report your issues to Ten-Tec so they will be aware of your
> concerns.
> Toby
> W4CAK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <DK2GZ at aol.com>
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 2:18 PM
> Subject: [TenTec] Orion: going back zu 1.371, read why
>
>
>> Hello TT-Fans,
>>
>>
>> I decided to go back to firmware 1.371 today.
>>
>> I am doing 99% CW this this radio.
>>
>> Why did I reload the 1.371 firmware:
>>
>> 1. the new keyer function does not work for me, still stuck in cutis
>> B
>> when
>> power on the Orion and I cannot see any difference between the A
>> and
>> B mode
>> the only solution is the do a master reset every time you power on
>> the Orion
>> The OMNI 6* have a better keyer timing for my operating style
>>
>> 2. the headphone click when you are using a qsk delay less 8%
>> yes the qsk in faster in 1.372, but it you have the clicks in the
>> headphone
>> and you have to reduce the qsk-speed to 8% to reduce the click,
>> you
>> are in the same
>> speed range as with the 1.371 firmware
>>
>> 3. lost the 2. RX nearly every day after power on the Orion, mostly
>> when
>> the 2. RX
>> is listen on 80 meter CW, will not power on the Orion twice a day
>> in
>> serie
>>
>> 4. 17 Meter TX problem
>> often had a extremly current consumption on 17 meter when
>> powering
>> the Orion on, so
>> my power supply does not deliever 40 amp and more on 12 volt.
>> Sometimes this
>> problem was gone when I switch to 15 meter did a few dit dit dit
>> and
>> switch back to
>> 17 meter, but not this sunday!
>>
>> 5. got several times a funny sounding main-receiver when using the
>> AN
>> on
>> SSB mode and
>> switch back CW and turn off the AN
>>
>> 6. the NR does not work as nicely as with 1.371
>>
>> Yes I did several master reset and also one time a RAM CLEAR and master
>> reset again.
>>
>> Yes I know the things that solved with 1.372:
>>
>> 1. the roofing filter kick in is now analog with the BW
>> 2. the RFGAIN is working better now, but the RX was fine also before
>> 3. the Voice-keyer should work now better, but never used the Orion
>> in
>> SSB in TX mode
>> 4. the keying loop with ACOM amps should work now, never used a
>> ACOM,
>> still
>> using the old Centurion with the amp-keyling line, did not
>> perform
>> the Centurion mode
>> for the older Centurion amps
>>
>> So why I should use the 1.372 firmware as an 99% CW OP?
>>
>> But also with 1.371 I having one thing that I cant solve up to now:
>>
>> On 20 meter and up I have an offset of -160 HZ in CW to the frequency
>> read
>> out.
>> On the low bands 160/80/40/30 I do not have these offset.
>>
>> The configuration here is:
>>
>> ORION AT plus samplex SEC 1223 power supply:
>>
>> 1KHZ TT roofing filter in the 1.8 KHZ slot
>> 600 HZ Inrad roofing filter in the 1 KHZ slot
>> 500 HZ TT roofing filter in the 500 HZ slot
>> 250 HZ TT roofing filter in the 250 HZ slot
>>
>> all filters enabled(1.8, 0.5, 0.25)
>> Offset 500 HZ 190 HZ
>> Offset 250 HZ 110 HZ
>>
>> Mode LCW on all bands.
>>
>> Yes I konw the problem could be the offset of the 500 and 250 HZ filters,
>> but why
>> only on the bands 20 meter and up?
>>
>> Switch to UCW on 20 meter and up do not solve the problem above.
>>
>> First time 1 can remember this offsett problem appear since I put the
>> original 1 KHZ filter in in
>> the 1.8KHZ slot, but not 100% sure about this.
>>
>> 73 de Harry, DK2GZ
>>
>> a TT-Fan since several years
>>
>> TT gear visit my shak in the past 22 years:
>> OMNI D, Argonaut, Argonaut II. Paragon, OMNI 6+, TT-Kit 1320
>>
>> Never had such kind of problems with the K2/100 and TS570D(G) or
>> the TT-gear above
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:08:05 EST
> From: K4IA at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] GFI Problems
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <fb.66d5b786.2ef739a5 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
> In a message dated 12/19/2004 11:56:07 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> crgreene at cox.net writes:
>
> Now I need to get a line filter to keep my XYL's electric bed from
> cranking
> up when I transmit. That's a no-no at 6am :-)
>
>
>
>
> That's why they have an "OFF" switch. ;-)
>
> Radio k4ia
> "Buck"
> Fredericksburg, VA USA
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:41:26 -0600
> From: "Jim Brown" <jim at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Subject: RE: [TenTec] Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't
> To: "tentec at contesting.com" <tentec at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <20041219074140.626F27D05 at gw1.nlenet.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Actually, it applies to ALL uses of XL connectors for audio, including
> broadcasting, ham
> radio, sound reinforcement, studios, etc. And a major reason that the guys
> have been
> having so much trouble with getting mics to work with Orion is that the
> mfrs aren't following
> the Standard! Oh -- by the way -- at least half of the members of the
> Working Group are
> hams.
>
> Jim Brown K9YC
>
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:56:32 EST, N0KHQ at aol.com wrote:
>
>>The IEC/AES Standard that Jim is referring to was developed long ago for
>>Sound Reinforcement Equipment Systems safety and uniformity within the
>>industry
>>and doesn't have a darn thing to do with the mic pin-out configurations
>>on
>>ham radio equipment.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:16:19 -0500
> From: "Tom Wagner" <tfwagner at snet.net>
> Subject: RE: [TenTec] Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <BKELJNBDKBBJLLENNCCDEEILFBAA.tfwagner at snet.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Since this didn't get answered, I'll ask again.
> Is it TenTec that is not following the IEC/AES standard?
>
> Bottom line, if I have a mic with simple coax -- one center
> conductor plus shield -- to which pin is the shield to be
> attached on the Orion?
>
> 73,
> Tom
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Tom Wagner
> Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 4:55 PM
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [TenTec] Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't
>
>
> Page 9 of the Orion manual shows ground as pin 2. Page
> 10 of the manual shows minus (-) as pin 2. It also
> shows white as pin 2. A web search shows the
> mic pinout for the Omni VI as Pin 2 is ground.
> http://lists.contesting.com/archives/html/TenTec/2001-10/msg00163.html
>
> So is it TenTec that is not following the IEC/AES
> standard?
>
> Tom - N1MM
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jim Brown
> Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:56 PM
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [TenTec] Orion Mic Woes - Sounds like RFI but Wasn't
>
>
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:30:12 -0500, Tom Wagner wrote:
>
>>The
>>Orion really, really does not like pin 2 to
>>be grounded. (In the Heil setup, pin 1 is the
>>mic lead center conductor and pin 2 is
>>the shield.) This was the cause of the
>>oscillation/instability.
>
> Apparently Heil has never heard of the IEC and AES standards for wiring of
> XL
> connectors used for audio. These are international standards. The lowest
> numbered
> pin is ALWAYS the shield. Next one or two contacts are audio. These are
> not
> new
> standards -- they have been in existence for more than 50 years. There
> were
> two
> different standards for whether pin 2 or pin 3 was positive polarity with
> respect to
> the other. That difference was resolved about 10 years ago. But pin 1 has
> ALWAYS
> been the shield contact, and 2 and/or 3 have always carried audio. When
> there are
> control circuits, those circuits should be on the higher number contacts.
>
> BTW -- I'm a member of the AES Standards Committee Working Group that
> maintains these standards.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:18:08 EST
> From: Nu7z at aol.com
> Subject: [TenTec] Argosy -- QSK control question
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <196.34b6ea02.2ef73c00 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> Hi everyone -- I just purchased an Argosy and on CW it transmits almost/is
> true QSK. This makes it a little more difficult to key an amplifer with
> and I
> was wondering if anyone has worked this problem and have been able to
> establish
> some sort of delay control?
>
> Thanks in advance --
>
> Rick -- NU7Z
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:35:27 -0800
> From: "Jim Faulkner" <jrf59 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: [TenTec] Scout band modules
> To: "tentec reflector" <tentec at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <41200412019213527790 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> (If this comes through twice, sorry for the SPAM--it's my first attempt at
> a post)
>
> I'm looking for 12M and 17M band modules, a noise blanker card, and a
> mobile mount for my Scout.
> Thanks in advance & 73,
>
> Jim K5ZED
> Rio Rancho, NM
>
>
> Jim Faulkner
> jrf59 at earthlink.net
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:33:51 -0600
> From: "Jim Miller WB5OXQ" <wb5oxq at grandecom.net>
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Centurian 422 vs Titan III
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <002a01c4e612$6f03db20$0200a8c0 at atmp3ehbvwdfo7>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> I have owned a Centurion for years, I don't remember how long but over 5
> years I know. I bought it used and with the original tubes in it. It
> will
> make at least 1300 watts with 100 in on all bands except 10 where it only
> made 1100 but my omni 6+ may have made less tha 100 watts of drive too, I
> never checked. I have tried to use it onj 160 but it has distroyed every
> antenna I have tried to use and I do nto have room for a full size 1/2
> wave
> dipole. The output meter would show 1500 into the dummy load on 160 and
> my
> antennas could not take the power. I have used it on 3,885 am and with 25
> watts in it makes about 400+ watts of carries and easily modulates way
> beyond that. It is fairly quiet and I have never used it on CW, only am
> and
> ssb. I am told with graphite tubes and a couple of small mods it will do
> over 1500. I do not care because i am not convinced anyone would notice
> the
> difference in 1200 and 1500 watts! It is quick and easy to tune and has
> never arced in me on any band. It can run on 110 vac but it is not
> recommended and I have always run mine on 220vac. Absoutely no problems
> of
> me.
> WB5OXQ, Jim in Waco.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "HENRY PFIZENMAYER" <pfizenmayer at worldnet.att.net>
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 11:32 AM
> Subject: [TenTec] Centurian 422 vs Titan III
>
>
>> Like to hear some opinions on the new Centurian versus the Titan III . If
> I
>> am gonna order the Centurian , I want to do it this week.
>>
>> 1. 1000-1200 watts versus 1500 watts is not an issue for me .
>> 2. QSK life is not an issue , I will operate "semi-breakin" with the amp.
>> 3. Spits and arcs are a big issue.
>> 4. Looks like tube replacement cost are close enough to be a toss up.
>> 5. 99 percent of operation will be CW.
>> 6. While cost is not a complete non-issue , my last amp ran for
>> 25 years and I expect the same with this one, at which point
>> I won't care anymore !!!!
>> 7. Have an Orion on order and expect to use the amp with Orion
>> to keep it all Tentec.
>> 8. Reliability -Reliability - Reliability is a major issue.
>> 9. 160 is a must.
>>
>> I have read all the reviews I can find , looked at archives until
>> my neck hurts and still have not reached a decision. One thing
>> that continues to pop out at me is the number of Centurians
>> for sale used - always wonder why - surely 1000 vs 1500 watts
>> is not the issue.
>>
>> Any thoughts ?
>>
>> off line is fine to hanknospam at att.net
>>
>> Thanks - Hank K7HP
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>> Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.0 - Release Date: 12/17/2004
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.0 - Release Date: 12/17/2004
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> End of TenTec Digest, Vol 24, Issue 68
> **************************************
>
More information about the TenTec
mailing list