RadioBanter - View Single Post - REBUTTAL TO RX-340 COMMENTS BY PHIL

Telamon · November 18th 06, 01:29 AM posted to rec.radio.shortwave

In article . com,
wrote:

mike maghakian wrote:
In a recent receiver article, Phil of R75 fame made some negative
comments on the TT RX-340. I asked my friend who is an RX-340
expert to comment. these are not my comments but the source is
someone whose opinion is above question on this subject. Unless you
have really used and understand the 340, you don't know what you
are talking about.

here is what he wrote me: *********************************

What is he talking about? He NEVER has tried an RX-340, or any of
the other radios he compares in his charts OTHER THAN that
OVERRATED R-75. He has his head up his ass on the following
issues:

1. The RX-340, he says, has poor dynamic range. This declaration
is deceptive! In truth, the dynamic range of the 340 is excellent
in almost every aspect except in one type of monitoring condition
in which it IS poor: in VERY CLOSE-IN conditions--less than
2KHz--under extreme duress. In those instances, yes, the d r is
poor! He's right only in these instances. Fortunately for any
RX-340 user, these conditions rarely are encountered because the
filtering is superb, the front end is excellent, and blocking is
good. Here's an example of where the RX-340's d r WILL behave
poorly. Let's say you have an RX-340. You have it attached to a
high-performance, outside antenna. You are tuned to 882 kHz trying
to hear a very weak transatlantic/transpacific medium wave signal
from half-way around the world at s3 or s4 on your meter. You are
located in Eastchester NY, only 6 miles away from 50 KW WCBS NYC on
880 kHz, just two kHz away from the weak station you are after and
they are hitting your s-meter at 80 db over s-9. (BTW, that's a
rock-crushingly strong signal next to a weakling of a signal.) With
this being the case the 340 will, very annoyingly, splatter out the
weak signal and will most likely "de-sense" for about 5 kHz on
either side of 880 kHz. Not good. So, yes, Phil is right to
criticize the 340 as having poor d r, but only under these
circumstances. It is a limitation of the 16 bit DSP processor in
the 340 being compromised in this aspect of performance.

2. Phil says the RX-340 has fair audio. Never having had any
real-world, hands on experience with an 340 he relies on a
discredited internet report by written by Jan Alverstad of Norway.
This report was discredited by REAL RX-340 owners because Alverstad
admits to not spending the proper amount of time needed to adjust
and learn the radio!! So he makes a report slamming the audio in
narrow SSB as poor when he didn't know that the AGC, the Variable
IF Gain control and the PBT MUST be "set-up" BEFORE you can recover
good audio. He would have had better results if he bothered to
spend time reading the manual. No, the 340 is not hard at all to
use. It doesn't take a lot of time to learn it. But you cannot
just use it out of the box like you can with most other radios.
The first-time 340 user HAS to read the manual first--it's friggin'
common sense on a complicated, unconventional radio!! The audio,
especially in SSB is not just good, it is outstanding. Refer to
Larry Magne's review in PWBR in regards to what he calls
"breathtakingly low distortion in SSB."

3. The SAM is fair, Phil says. In my opinion, he's right to a
certain extent. But it isn't ALWAYS fair. Most of the time, about
80 percent of the time, the SAM works well, but not as well as the
R8-B. The 340 synch quirks has been well-documented by PWBR, 340
"gurus" Albert Belle Isle and Carl Moreschi, and by myself on eHam.
And as for the remaining 20 percent of the time? The SAM is
indeed only fair. This is because when the desired signal goes
into a rapid, deep fade, the synch "lets go" of the signal causing
a disruptive clicking which grows tiresome and distracting. Using
a long hang time setting helps iron this out considerably. There
is another situation--part of the 20 percent--that causes the SAM
to misbehave. When there is an extremely, key word: extremely,
strong, nearby signal 5 kHz away from the one you are tuned to, the
synch throws a fit. It starts to "pop" and "screech" loudly.
Really no excuse for a great radio to have. TenTec failed on this.
But overall the synch is just OK. This feature is the 340's major
fault; it's ONLY major fault luckily. What redeems the 340 and
prevents me from hating it for its fair synch is that the radio
delivers outstanding manual ECSS, better than any other radio I
have ever owned. When all of the parameters are properly
adjusted--PBT, AGC speed, IF Gain setting, BW--the recovered audio
is similar to the audio of the HF-225 with its synch on and in the
HiFI mode.

4. The internal speaker is poor. No qualms here, he's right. But
big ****ting deal. Who wants to use a small 3" top-firing speaker
on a $4,000 radio? Put a REALLY good speaker on the 340--I use and
LOVE the Sounds Sweet--and you'll be happy.

5. The display, Phil says, is fair. WHAT??? The display is a
thing of beauty. The readablitlty is great; the S-Meter is very
large and pleasing and esay to read and is professional and
accurate. The contrast/brightness is fully adjustable. The
read-out is HUGE. Why does he say that the display is fair? He
never sat in fron of a 340 so where does he get his info from?

Phil, not having any hands-on, real-world experience using an 340,
takes ANECDOTAL information from PWBR and on-line reviews and
publishes them out of context. This is the most egregious thing to
do when claiming to be writing a review of receiver performance
specs. It is a disservice to the hobby!

In two adjacent messages you have tried to convince us that the three
opinions of Phil, Jan and Dave about this radio are wrong and your
one opinion is somehow the right one. I'm not sure I understand why
you are getting so wound up about what is little more than anecdotal
evidence about one radio with a very small following. Unless of
course you possibly have another reason. Maybe you are getting ready
to sell one on Ebay and just saw the market value take hit. If so,
maybe you should take a lesson from your friend Radiomart and ignore
the comments of others and just get on with business. Or maybe you
just can't stand the thought of three people having an opinion that
differs from yours.

My all-time favorite radio is the Kenwood R5000 and it had it's share
of warts which were repeated by many reviewers. Whether we like how
the radio feels, know how it works and know the bands are really the
most important criteria for picking one receiver over another.

Your opinion about that radio is just another one to be added to the
list. But you do seem to be outnumbered.

Mike is pretty much on target on his comments. The other people
referenced are entirely off base. I've owned one for years, love the
performance and I'm not selling it.

I'd rather be a part of the correct minority than part of the incorrect
majority.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California