[TenTec] In praise of older technology

[Brian Carling]

All listeners with an RIT control can just decide how girly or manly they want the other person's voice to sound :)
Another reason why I love CW so much...

Best regards - Bry Carling



> On Feb 22, 2014, at 7:03 PM, k6jek <k6jek at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> My experience is that with modern equipment, when people say they are on 3895 they actually are, +/- not much and they actually stay there. Land yourself on that number and you've got it. With older equipment not so. Without a leader that we all tune to, say in an informal gathering, we wander all over the band. Somebody is a little high, I tune to him, maybe miss by a little. Somebody else tunes to me, misses a little etc. And, of course, we all drift like mad. 
> 
> Even with a leader, it can be pretty amusing. I participate in a vintage sideband roundtable most Tuesdays. We all tune to the roundtable leader. Depending on what he's running we can end up 5 kHz from where we started if somebody doesn't jump in and drag the whole conglomeration back. And many of the people who have tuned to net control haven't really succeeded. Maybe the tuned to where he used to be. Maybe they just couldn't hear what's right.
> 
> And no, people aren't very good at hitting it dead on when they are tuning to natural speech. You can prove this to yourself. Using a dummy load and a recording of a voice that isn't you, tune with another receiver until the speech sounds right.  Analog only. Now play some music through the transmitter. Chances are it will sound like hell. You've missed the mark.
> 
> I've invited other people to do this. They can't hit it either. I have theories on why this is but that's another story.
> 
> Jon, K6JEK 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Feb 22, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Brian Carling wrote:
>> 
>> How does a digital readout help you to get on the same frequency any better than an analog one ? If you can't hear when a human voice sounds natural then a digital won't help.
>> 
>> Best regards - Bry Carling
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 22, 2014, at 6:01 PM, k6jek <k6jek at comcast.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I know. As an aficionado of vintage equipment I agree in spirt. But on SSB it really is delightful to talk with people who are actually on frequency, a rarity with vintage gear but the norm now with new equipment. People just sound so much more human when their speech isn't shifted 30 Hz or 20 or even 10. 
>>> 
>>> I have a Corsair (I) and have not considered replacing the PTO with a DDS unit but might just find a way to get a better read of my actual frequency. Shouldn't be hard. That way I can talk with my buddies on their Flex Radios (*), ICOM 7600's and such without annoying them while still enjoying my fine old stuff.
>>> 
>>> Jon, K6JEK
>>> 
>>> * I have all that modern stuff too, an SDR, OMNI VII etc. I just don't like it much. Heck, I think my favorites are the tube pieces from '50's.
>>> 
>>>> On Feb 22, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I remember when digital frequency readouts (the kind using an electronic counter, not the kind on a R-390) started appearing on ham gear. Most people (myself included) just had to have it. We never needed it before. There were easy enough reliable methods to make sure we stayed inside our band (or sub-band) limits, but for some reason it seemed like a digital display of our frequency became a necessity.
>>>> 
>>>> DE N6KB
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2/22/2014 11:14 AM, Mike Bryce wrote:
>>>>> I guess it was a year ago I put in a DDS replacement for the PTO. Rock solid. Dual VFOs, speed sensitive tuning, all kinds of goodies.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I took it out and the analog PTO back in.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yep, it didn’t have the same feel. It (the DDS) made all kinds of noise when no antenna was connected.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sometimes, and this was one of them, older really is better
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mike, WB8VGE
>>>>> SunLight Energy Systems
>>>>> The Heathkit Shop
>>>>> http://www.theheathkitshop.com/
>>>>> J e e p
>>>>> o|||||||o
>>>>> 
>>>>> A man with one clock knows what time it is. A man with two clocks is never sure.
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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