Dear Telamon,

I absolutely agree with your assessment of some of the new people here
on this group. Who are they anyway? And why do at least some of them
feel the necessity to resort to vulgar language?

I suppose that if someone asked about a comparison of the Honda Civic,
the Toyota Corolla, and the Nissan Sentra on a group, there would be
some "clown" who would post that the Mercedes E-class is much better
"hands-down!"

The original question was for a comparison of SSB performance between
the Degen DE-1103 and the Sony ICF-SW7600GR (with a mention of a couple
of other small SW portables). Also the original poster said he was
interested in using a (potential) new receiver for MW broadcasts.

As I stated in my original post here, I do not own a Degen DE-1103. I
do own the Sony ICF-SW7600GR and its performance on SSB is very good
for a portable in its size and price class (that last should have gone
without saying!), at least in my opinion. (And I think I forgot to
mention that it is a superlative performer on MW as well.)

Last night, reception conditions were mediocre and the stations I could
hear (Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and a few others) had
shows that were not of interest to me at that time. (I was feeling a
bit out of sorts.) So I decided to try the 80-meter Ham band. On 3933
kHz (around 0420 UTC) I heard a group of Hams talking and the signal
was very clear. Just for the heck of it, I turned off my AOR/Wellbrook
and turned on the Sony/AN-LP1. The signal was by no means as clear or
as strong as on the AOR, but it was intelligble, if not pleasant. On
the AOR the signal sounded like "straight" AM; on the Sony the signal
was obviously sideband. But then look at the difference in price!
You're absolutely right - it is unfair to compare radios in different
price classes especially in view of the obvious fact that radios in
different price (and size) classes have different purposes.

I think the Sony did all right! (Unfortunately the Hams were talking
about Heat Pumps, which is not one of my favorite subjects. So after my
little "experiment," I turned everything off and went to bed!)

I suppose there's no real way to keep some of the "nastier" people off
this group, such as H. Slate. As I'm sure you, Telamon, and many others
know here I do try to answer questions where I feel that I can be of
some help to someone. I've been an SWL for almost fifty years (of
course that doesn't always make my answers right) and while my
shortwave radio "collection" is by no means as extensive as many of the
people here, I do have a fair amount of experience using the ones I
have (and quite a few others as well). If my messages are unwanted by
the majority of "old-timers" here, well just let me know and there will
be no hard feelings.

I've been called a few names before (most notably by my wife) but this
is the first time I've been called a "shill."

Best,

Joe

Telamon wrote:
In article pan.2006.08.08.20.02.19.280000@Quetzalcoatl,
Bob Dobbs EC42 wrote:

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 19:26:29 +0000, Telamon wrote:

In article pan.2006.08.08.08.09.44.574000@Quetzalcoatl,
Bob Dobbs EC42 wrote:

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 03:48:53 +0000, Telamon wrote:

You are being a bit silly about this comparison. Sony
ICF-SW7600GR is about $150 and the Eton E1 is about $500, which
is 3.3 times the cost of the Sony.

Unless you go through your radios quickly, the difference in
initial cost can be amortized in a fraction of their useful
lifespan, plus you have a more entertaining set for all that time.

You can build a much better widget of any type by spending over 3
times the money on the fabrication cost. You have to compare radios
that cost about the same otherwise it is comparing apples to
oranges.

That's the crux of my point, that over extended time those spherical
objects become more alike and the sweeter taste outweighs the initial
cost.

Most people that have thought about it agree with this outlook.

I can only speak for myself and I'm certainly not 'most people'.

Why do you post here? Is it just to debate? I try to be nice and I'm
just disabused by a new poster to the news group. Well, chances are you
are not new to the news group just one of a small handful of nut cases
that reside here with a new handle so I'll dispense with the niceties
and just declare you completely unreasonable.

Now check this out - You can not compare radios that have a large cost
difference between them. This is not a debatable statement and you are a
fool if you think otherwise. You are obviously just Trolling for trouble.

I don't go through my radios quickly but that has not been a price
consideration for me. Generally, I have paid more money for
performance and features that cost more money to put into a radio.

But if you were buying on cost alone, you wouldn't have accumulated
the experience that better equipment provides.

That has nothing to do with the thread as is injecting the E1 into a
thread about radios $200.

There are no radios that you pay more money for just because of
owner status or looks of a radio.

I'd guess from outward signs that there are indeed folk who pay more
for the status and prestige that high costs connote than the
performance generally associated with it.

Yeah that and maybe the new plastic smell right?

Plonk

--
Telamon
Ventura, California