[TenTec] OMNI VI/OMNI VII

[Don Jones]

John,
Thanks for posting this message. I put in a little over 5 hrs this weekend
myself and left the event with nearly the same impression. I run a OMNI 6
Opt 3 that has the INRAD roofing filter mod. My 6 has a full load of Ten Tec
filters. I have no reason to doubt the numbers published on INRAD's web
site. The receiver is very tight. I am really happy with my choice and the
$850 I spent to get this 6 to be money very well invested.
One thing I noticed, is that the 6 worked much better if I used a 600Hz
offset vs. my preferred 400Hz offset - the receiver performed profoundly
better. I monkeyed with the LP and NR button. To be honest I found I
preferred LP ON - NR OFF. The receiver was remarkably effective at digging
the QRP'ers out of the noise floor in the midst of superstations pounding in
at 10 over. 
Sometimes I used the 250Hz filter, most of the time I used the 500Hz filter
because of those who have not mastered the art of "zero beat".
Overall I was very impressed with my OMNI 6 opt 3. But I have to be honest,
I would love to get my hands on a O-2. When I heard the Ten Tec is now
offering the Eagle's receiver for the sub receiver in the O-2 that nearly
pushed me over that edge.
It is good to know the FT-1K-F is a decent radio.
73,
Don Jones KO7i
Arlington, WA 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Rippey [mailto:w3uls73 at gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 4:20 PM
To: tentec at contesting.com
Subject: [TenTec] OMNI VI/OMNI VII

I asked a question under this topic about the NR function on the OMNI VII
back in September. I was remiss in not thanking K8JHR, W3NP. AB9M, and
WB9DLC for very helpful replies at that time. Thank you!

Following are my personal observations after extensive listening yesterday
and today on 20 meters in the ARRL CW Sweepstakes (still going on) with an
OMNI VI Plus, a Mark V Field (with INRAD roofing filter mod) and a new Icom
IC-7410.

1. From the standpoint of listening, both the OMNI and the Field offered
first-rate audio (clear, crisp, clean CW notes) and had no trouble
separating the numerous signals (both rigs have a full complement of
optional filters). The geomagnetic K index was minimal, so conditions were
excellent. Little or no QRN. Ideal conditions.

2. To state the obvious, the OMNI is smooth, ergonomically speaking. All I
did was twirl the tuning dial. hit the various filter buttons depending on
what I wanted to hear--from everything when using the two 1.9 kHz filters,
to a 500/250 combination to isolate a particular signal, also using the PBT
control occasionally and ditto the NR button. The Field was almost as
smooth, requiring very little fiddling with the controls. The Field's
goldang filter arrangement doesn't allow for mixing and matching  like the
OMNI but it does have a second receiver which was fun to use when I wanted
to open up the bandwidth. In short, a draw. But the OMNI still wins on
simplicity.

As for the IC-7410, I will posit that Icoms enjoy the most sophisticated
firmware and software in the ham world, and even in the cheaper 7410 it
shows. The filtering, noise reduction, etc., are all very effective. I did
not find any reciprocal mixing problems that one might expect in a
lower-priced rig. But the experience of using all of the DSP circuitry
requires a lot of adjustments, both with the knobs and dials and with the
menus, and of course the CW sound, which is very good, still betrays its
DSP origins.

At the end of the day Saturday I went to the OMNI, and then to the Field.
Simpler, effective and very easy listening. I'll keep the 7410 as a third
rig just in case but my experience this weekend has cooled me on any idea
of moving up to any pricey DSP-based rig, even an OMNI VII.

P.S.: As far as transmit audio is concerned, I used the Field in last
weekend's CQ WW SSB, and got excellent audio reports from DX stations using
a basic Heil HC-5 mike. Of course the DSP rigs allow for all sorts of audio
tailoring, if one wants to go that route.

Thanks for reading.

73,

John, W3ULS