Michael wrote:
"craigm" wrote in message
...

Michael wrote:

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...


"Michael" wrote:



I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with
the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios.

That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products --
it's all there.

The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep.
Absolutely a good value? Not even close.

You need to experience a truly good radio. See
http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines.



Let me get this straight..... "Dumpster Fodder ???" Your getting
carried
away....

Recommend a better radio that will have a PRACTICAL improvement over an
R-75 without spending over $ 1,000.00 Please dont spit out specs that
hardly differ from that of the R-75 and are not statistically
significant
PRACTICALLY speaking.

Tell me what radio NEW out of the box will give me a PRACTICAL
improvement on my R-75 for under $1,000.00 and I'll buy it this week.
Remember, this is for DX'ing. I dont want a boom box.

Michael


Can you list the radios that fall in the $500-$1000 price range the
might
be candidates for comparison? They would have to be generally available
within the US.



Other then a few computer controlled alternatives, there are no other
choices other then the R-75. That's the larger point.

Then I think posing the challenge you expressed is a poor way to make a
point. There are radios, in my opinion, that I find to be an improvement
over the R75. Specifically, the IC-746Pro and g313i. However, they fall
outside your dollar range. At any specific price point the number of
radios to choose from is limited. The nature of the challenge you put
forth guaranteed there would be no way to meet it to your satisfaction.



The radios in the list I'm asking for don't have to meet your "PRACTICAL
improvement" criteria.

What does "statistically significant PRACTICALLY speaking" mean?

craigm


Meaning exactly as stated. Here is an example:

The Drake R-8 was tested to have a sensitivity of 0.25 and 0.18 with
the pre
amp on.

The R-75 was tested to have a sensitivy of 0.5 and .02 with the
first level
pre amp on

The Kenwood R-5000 was tested to have a sensitivity of .02

The NRD-525 was tested to have a sensitivity of .02

OK, what do you say ????

Only one of those is possibly in current production.


You can see what receiver gets the better test
numbers here.

All those that are out of production. You selected the list for
comparison, so, from that list I see the R75 had the poorest number. Is
that your point?

Think it matters PRACTICALLY speaking given what typical
noise floors are ???

That's a limitation on the user's antenna and location and not the
radio. For some, the difference is significant.

Would you feel it was worth it to spend a few thousand
dollars to get that extra decimal ???

Well, you've skipped over the $1000 to $2000 range which covers several
radios. Also, that extra cost goes into more than just improving one
number. That makes your question pointless.



This applies equally to other values.

Do you understand my point yet ????


Yes, for you the R75 appears to work well. Others have found they prefer
other radios for a variety of reasons. If you've found a radio that
you like, listen to it. If others find that the radio you like doesn't
work well for them live with that fact. Neither person is necessarily
right or wrong, they have each found what works for them.

Michael




Hey, at least the thread is on topic for the group.

craigm