[TenTec] In praise of older technology AM transmitwithTenTecrigs

[Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP]

Of course I am; but I am comparing a real live radio with a 9MHz IF and
INRAD filter to a couple of other radios with a first IF of 45MHz or higher.

And BTW, the 7800 has roofing filters.  Very expensive ones.  
Even if you find a 3rd party filter for them (which I am not aware of), its
skirts (slopes) won't come anywhere close to that of the 9MHz filter.
It's simply a matter of fractional bandwidth.

And a second qualifier:  I am comparing a radio that readily exists (OM VI
with INRAD) to these other two radios.  Even if someone tries to add a
better roofing filter to the OM7 or 7800, it won't improve by much.  Just
won't have the steep skirts. Can't! (fractional bandwidth again)

Well... once again, it is not impossible to get a little improvement, just
impractical.
As proven with the FT-2000.
The add on high performance roofing filter for that radio costs $350 and was
very difficult to manufacture.
I know because I know one of the guys involved in the process.
And what was the result?
Some radios had halfway decent improvement with these filters, others did
not.
Seems the tolerances were all over the map.
Some OM were pleased, others were frustrated.  Frustrated, even after
spending $350 on a roofing filter.

Let's get real, here!
If you want super performance, then do yourself a favor and start with the
type of technology that easily supports getting there!  Don't start out with
a 15dB handicap.

AND LET'S ALSO NOT FORGET that 90% (or more) of all hams do not need the
additional 15dB we are talking about here.  For most people, the OM7 and
7800 perform better than what they need for the way they use their radios.

But if you want to ride in the fast lane . . . get a radio designed from the
ground up to do so!

73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt am Main)


-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bob McGraw
- K4TAX
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:49 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM
transmitwithTenTecrigs

But Rick, are you comparing a radio that has a roofing filter vs. a radio
that does not have a roofing filter.  Yes there is and should be a
noticeable difference.


73
Bob, K4TAX



----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick at DJ0IP.de>
To: <n4py3 at earthlink.net>; "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" 
<tentec at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM
transmitwithTenTecrigs


> The Omni VI with the INRAD roofing filter is about 15 dB better than 
> the
> OM7
> or 7800.   Really no comparison.
> There most certainly is a difference but you will probably only notice 
> it in a side-by-side comparison during a BIG contest; not in every day 
> life.
>
> I don't recall Rob ever testing the VI with INRAD.
>
> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl 
> Moreschi
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 4:29 PM
> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM 
> transmitwithTenTecrigs
>
> The Omni VII, Omni VI, and Icom 7800 all seem to be about a tie on the 
> Sherwood test data.  The Omni VII is an excellent radio and has much 
> better receive audio than the pinched audio on the Omni VI.
>
> Carl Moreschi N4PY
> 58 Hogwood Rd
> Louisburg, NC 27549
> www.n4py.com
>
> On 2/26/2014 10:03 AM, Bob McGraw - K4TAX wrote:
>> Well adding a INRAD roofing filter to the Omni VI Plus makes it a 
>> totally different radio. I wouldn't view this as an equal compairson.
>> Subjective or otherwise.
>>
>> 73
>> Bob, K4TAX
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barry N1EU" 
>> <barry.n1eu at gmail.com>
>> To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 4:35 AM
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology AM 
>> transmitwithTenTecrigs
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:25 AM, Bob McGraw - K4TAX 
>>> <RMcGraw at blomand.net> wrote:
>>>> It's easy, sell the Omni VI and buy an Omni VII. Much better in all 
>>>> aspects.
>>>
>>> Not sure about "all." I suspect that an Omni VI, especially one 
>>> fitted with an Inrad Roofing Filter mod, would run rings around an 
>>> Omni 7 in terms of narrow spaced IMD. It's also tough to beat the 
>>> Omni VI's front panel ergonomics, but that's subjective.
>>>
>>> 73, Barry N1EU
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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