[TenTec] THANK YOU AND APOLOGY

[K8JHR]

On 7/26/2014 5:01 PM, Bob McGraw - K4TAX wrote:

> The charts on his website are totally misleadding.  That's his take.

--------------------------------------------------


Gentlemen -

I may be mistaken, and greatly misunderstand all this, but to accuse me 
of deception or misrepresentation is a low blow.

We are supposed to compare radios using these graphs, and I copied them 
exactly from the respective product reviews. You don't say how or why 
they are misleading.

I was encouraged by ARRL Lab expert Bob Allison,  who reviewed the same 
graphs and said,

	"THEY HAVE NEARLY THE SAME COMPOSITE NOISE."

(caps added for emphasis.)
__________________


I AM SORRY AND I APOLOGIZE FOR CONSUMING EXCESS BANDWIDTH.

I offered the data in good faith, because thought I understood the issue 
and could not find the data Rick referred to.  Someone said Sherwood had 
data, but he said no.  Someone said ARRL product reviews had the data, 
so I looked there.  I asked ARRL's Lab Technician Bob Allison and he 
agreed with my assessment, and saying they both have the same noise 
profile.  That seemed reasonable grounds to hold my ground.  Perhaps 
not. Maybe he misunderstood and was talking bout some other type of 
transmitter noise.


I OFFER A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO ANOTHER LIST MEMBER

who went out of his way to explain how the graphs I found may not depict 
the same type of noise you guys are talking about.  He patiently 
explained, in a way I can understand, how we reached impasse, and may 
not be talking about the same thing, and how the data I presented may 
not be on point, although I offered it in good faith because I thought 
it was correct.

Terms such as "Phase Noise" and "broad band noise"  and "transmitter 
noise"  are bandied about as if they are the same thing.  The ARRL 
product reviews graphically represent "transmitter noise" without 
explaining exactly what type of noise they are talking about.  Is that 
"phase noise" or "broadband noise"  or some other "transmitter noise" - 
obviously, I am having a hard time sorting it all out.

I appreciate the extra guidance I received from that special List 
Member, who explained how each side of the debate is pointing in 
different ways at different things, yet unable to move the other side to 
its position.  That helped a lot.

I apologize for my misunderstanding - but sometimes it is hard to accept 
what one person says when it conflicts with what others you trust might 
say.  Heck, I figure even engineers can be mistaken, at least sometimes, 
and it is hard to know which engineer to believe when other engineers 
disagree.

I learned a hard lesson from this, namely a little knowledge is a 
dangerous thing, and a rookie cannot always play in the big league. 
Still, it was unfair to accuse of deception or misrepresentation.

In any event, I apologize for fighting hard for what I thought was 
correct, and I yield the floor to the experts.

------------------ James - K8JHR ----------------

Just for the record, this is Mr. Allison's complete post to show I am 
not taking matters out of context and demonstrate I acted on his advice 
in good faith.  I thought he said I was correct.

________________________________________
From: Allison, Bob, WB1GCM
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2014 7:52 PM
To: Allison, Bob, WB1GCM
Subject: RE: Transmitter Noise  Issue  Puleeeze help !

Looking at the composite noise on our web site (Product Reviews by 
Manufacturer), the Eagle is a little bit better in the composite noise 
area than the TS-590S, but both are considered reasonable. The only time 
when this issue would come up would be Field Day, when two transceivers 
are trying to use the same ham band; one on phone, one on CW. In such a 
case, the stations would likely be at least 100 kHz apart from each 
other. Thus, at 100 kHz from the carrier, both have nearly the same 
composite noise. This not an issue.

Bob
________________________________________