[TenTec] Status simple radios

Thu Dec 3 15:03:58 EST 2015

I changed the subject line a bit.

No, fixed filter width would not be cheaper.
The real cost of implementation is the software development.

The code has already been written for variable filter widths.
It costs nothing to keep it in and saves nothing by throwing it out.

However in the interest of simplicity, I think we could have fewer steps (larger increments).
Turning a bandwidth knob requires no more effort than turning a bandwidth switch.
I guess you could have just a push button and step through various bandwidths.
Then you could have a 1-time adjustment in the software menu to define how many steps you want and what increments.  This is trivial in cost.

An adjustable bandwidth control is a very useful feature, at least in SSB.
I use it all the time because in the Eagle, it helps quite a lot.
In CW I don't find it so important.  I just set it at 100 Hz and get on with it.

73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)

-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Louis Ciotti
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 8:54 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Status

I was not saying go all analog,  just simplify the operation. They can go to digital vfo,  and then fixed  filter widths would allow cheaper DSP processor.
On Dec 3, 2015 2:41 PM, "rick at dj0ip.de" <Rick at dj0ip.de> wrote:

> Louis,
>
> While I agree that there is a market for simpler radios, not 
> overloaded with features, going back to an analog VFO and Xtal filters 
> is not only costly, it is a big step backwards in performance.
>
> Our bands are way more crowded than they were back in the 70s, the 
> days of the Triton IV.
> Far more hams have amplifiers than back then.
> Simple crystal filters won't cut it.  They lack the steep skirts of 
> the DSP filters.
>
> Multiple crystal filters in two IF frequencies is a minimum 
> requirement and this drives cost way up, and even then, the ultimate 
> attenuation is not as good as with DSP filters.
> DSP filters are much cheaper to implement, and far superior to the 
> dual-crystal filter solution.
> Going back to an analog VFO would rule out any kind of modern digital 
> mode so that would turn away half the potential buyers.
>
> The Eagle was a good step in the kind of radio you are talking about 
> except it had one major disconnect in the planning.  This kind of 
> radio appeals to old guys like me... who can't see very good anymore.  
> We don't need a tiny radio with a tiny display and a micro-S-Meter, we 
> need a normal sized radio with easy to read meter and scales, and we 
> need big knobs for our arthritis-plagued hands.
>
> So yes, give us a simple, affordable radio, but let's not have it 
> broadcast "yaba daba doo" each time we turn it on!
>
> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
> (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Louis 
> Ciotti
> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 7:49 PM
> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Status
>
> With some time to reflect on this announcement, It is clear that 
> Ten-Tec has hopefully reached bottom.  While the only tentec equipment 
> I currently own is my grandfathers old Trition IV set-up, I had in the 
> pas also owned an Argonaut, and an Omni VI+ opt 3.  I have always 
> loved the receive on ten-tec rigs, and my main rig being FT-950 now, I 
> do miss it.  It is my hope that Ten-Tec can be resurrected and produce quality equipment.
>
> A couple of items that are somewhat concerning in this announcement:
>
> 1)  I had no idea production was stopped on any of the products.  With 
> the statements that OMNI's and eagles will be back in production in 
> 2016.  Did RKR liquidate all the component inventory that is going to 
> cause this time get production rolling again?  Or did the new owner 
> just buy the name and IP?
> 2)  Asking for monetary support from end users.  I do not see this 
> working.  Talking about raising 200K-400K from end users if s BIG red 
> flag for me.
> 3)  RKR still has TenTec on their list of products.  What of the 
> people who are not on this reflector who attempt to order product from today on?
> Are they being turned away?  This can't be a good thing to happen.
> 4)  What is to happen with repairs.  There is no mention of this at all.
> RKR seemed to destroy TenTec reputation for providing repairs at a 
> reasonable cost, for just about any of TenTecs products, even well out 
> of production products.
> 5)  This coming out before the formal announcement is only going to 
> create lots of speculation, and rumors of what "will" happen in the future.
>
> As for my $0.02 opinion on future Ten-Tec offerings.  call it my top 
> 10
> list:
>
> 1)  Bring back a "vintage" styled radio.  Something for the new ham, 
> or old timer who does not want to dig through 3 layers of menus to 
> adjust the RF output power.  While all the new and fancy feature are 
> nice (DSP, band displays, built in digital mode encoders, etc.) they 
> are not must have for every ham out there.  Think a modern 544 with 
> the same marketing plan, base rig, matching power supply, external VFO, matching antenna tuner, etc...
> Something that can grow with the user.
> 2)  Bring back the line of Ten-Tet manual tuners
> 3)  #2, but a CW qrp rig
> 4)  Kits kits and more kits!!
> 5)  Cases.  I know this was dropped a few years ago, but a small line 
> a cases that experimenters and home-brewers can use would be great
> 6)  Include FULL documentation and open source all firmware source 
> code with all new radios so end users can trouble shoot, and 
> potentially fix their investment, and create modifications.
> 7)  Something geared toward mobile use.  Again keep it simple with 
> mostly front panel controls that can be easily operated while mobile.
> 8)  6M Transverter
> 9)  Bring back the 6N2
> 10) More open source radios
>
> While flagship and cutting edge radios are nice, there is defiantly a 
> marked for radios that adhere to the KISS principal.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Mike Bryce <prosolar at sssnet.com> wrote:
>
> > Well that’s a fine how-do-you-do this morning.
> >
> > I’ve been with the same company I’m various forms for 43 years.
> >
> > We were sold, went bankrupt, sold to a capital investment group, 
> > went bankrupt, sold again, did ESOP, sold, bankrupt… This went on and on.
> >
> > whenever  someone want’s to “invest in your company” you’d better run.
> > RKR wasn’t a good mix for Ten Tec. My opinion.
> >
> > Mergers are never a good idea. When I hired in, the company had just 
> > under a thousand employees. Today, we have 53. Where we once had 90% 
> > of the market, we struggle with 15%. Sure, we have 
> > newer/slimmer/import competitors, but somehow though the mergers, we 
> > lost track of what we where, where we’ve been, and where we’re going.
> >
> > Right now, Ten Tec is like the company I work for. We’re barreling 
> > down hill and nobody is driving the bus.
> >
> > It seems right now that Ten Tec is poking their heads down into the
> abyss.
> > And to me, the last owners used the company like a beer can—they 
> > drained out the last drop and then crushed the empty shell.
> >
> > The light at the end of my tunnel is getting brighter, and I can see 
> > myself retired by the time dayton 2016 arrives.  I won’t have the 
> > $$$ to throw into the pot to help Ten Tec design a new radio. Shades 
> > of ATLAS Radio come to mind when the owner said the same thing. Help 
> > me fund this new radio, and you’ll be first to own one. All the 
> > investors lost all their money.
> >
> > One thing that I couldn’t understand was why Ten Tec dropped making 
> > some of the accessories that would match with their gear?They did in 
> > the past, like the antenna tuners for the corsair, the Triton’s.
> > Ameritron can sell a four tube 811 amp for a price that makes is 
> > very easy to afford. Why can’t Ten Tec build such an amplifier? And 
> > not price
> it at $2999?
> >
> > MFJ has ten full page ads in QST selling accessories. There had to 
> > be profit in those. But, that all being said, I never sat in one of 
> > the board meets at Ten Tec. Perhaps they were a money looser.
> >
> > I certainly don’t want to sound like a monday morning quarterback 
> > and say what I’d do, because that’s so easy to do. I don’t know have 
> > a clue about the internal workings of any company, not even the one 
> > I work
> for.
> >
> > I will throw this into the hat.
> >
> > If Ten Tec does in fact show up at dayton 2016, I’ll be happy to 
> > volunteer a few hours every day at their booth. Elecraft has 
> > volunteers, why not Ten Tec?
> >
> > I wish the new owner the best of luck, and will continue to booster 
> > the company and purchase its products.
> >
> > I’m mike, wb8vge
> >
> > Mike Bryce
> > prosolar at sssnet.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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