| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Analog versus DSP
I'm in the market for a receiver after being out of the hobby for 15
years. After much research, I've narrowed my choice down to two rigs: AOR-7030+ and Icom 756Pro-III. I've never owned a IF DSP receiver before. I've owned an R4C, an FRG-7, and a NRD-525 over the years, but never a DSP rig. Have DSP receivers reached the point yet where they're a viable alternative to the best analog rigs? I've heard that first generation DSP rigs, such as the NRD-545 and the RX-340, have limited dynamic range (relative to the best analog rigs) due to limited A/D chips. I consider good dynamic range to be one of the most critical aspects of receiver performance--do the newer DSP rigs address this issue? My primary interests are utilities and DXing the MW and SW bands. I don't do much, if any, program listening, so audio quality isn't an overriding concern--I just listen long enough the ID the station. |
Analog versus DSP
Make no mistake, the 7030+ is a fine radio, and there are members of
this group who will defend it until death. However it is not for everyone due to it's lack of knobs and buttons and it's quirky menu driven system and tiny display. It has a remote that is also very tiny and cramped and requires you to line it up carefully to operate as it is optically driven and not wireless driven. I would strongly advise a hands on demo of it before purchasing or a two week return policy. See my review of the 7030 at: http://www.dxing.info/equipment/aor_...r8a_plimmer.dx I have owned an Icom 756 PRO III for the last three years and can assure you that you will be extremely pleased with this beautifully engineered radio. It is superb on utilities and you will get the lowest power stations anywhere in the world with ease. As for MW DXing, that is my speciality and it's performance over the difficult 9/10 Khz splits is nothing more than awesome. I recently got CFUN Vancouver BC 10,000 miles from here on 1410 Khz. It doesn't get better than that. You will be another extremely happy owner if you spend the extra money on the 756Pro3 and will later consider it one of the best purchases of your life. See my review of this radio at: http://www.dxing.info/equipment/icom_ic756_plimmer.dx John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods Drake SW8 & ERGO software Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100 BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A. GE circa 50's radiogram Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270 Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whip http://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx On Nov 12, 9:44 pm, wrote: I'm in the market for a receiver after being out of the hobby for 15 years. After much research, I've narrowed my choice down to two rigs: AOR-7030+ and Icom 756Pro-III. I've never owned a IF DSP receiver before. I've owned an R4C, an FRG-7, and a NRD-525 over the years, but never a DSP rig. Have DSP receivers reached the point yet where they're a viable alternative to the best analog rigs? I've heard that first generation DSP rigs, such as the NRD-545 and the RX-340, have limited dynamic range (relative to the best analog rigs) due to limited A/D chips. I consider good dynamic range to be one of the most critical aspects of receiver performance--do the newer DSP rigs address this issue? My primary interests are utilities and DXing the MW and SW bands. I don't do much, if any, program listening, so audio quality isn't an overriding concern--I just listen long enough the ID the station. |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 12, 11:44 am, wrote:
I'm in the market for a receiver after being out of the hobby for 15 years. After much research, I've narrowed my choice down to two rigs: AOR-7030+ and Icom 756Pro-III. I've never owned a IF DSP receiver before. I've owned an R4C, an FRG-7, and a NRD-525 over the years, but never a DSP rig. Have DSP receivers reached the point yet where they're a viable alternative to the best analog rigs? I've heard that first generation DSP rigs, such as the NRD-545 and the RX-340, have limited dynamic range (relative to the best analog rigs) due to limited A/D chips. I consider good dynamic range to be one of the most critical aspects of receiver performance--do the newer DSP rigs address this issue? My primary interests are utilities and DXing the MW and SW bands. I don't do much, if any, program listening, so audio quality isn't an overriding concern--I just listen long enough the ID the station. Unless I missed it, the ICOM doesn't have synch demod. Not the end of the world. The AR7030+NB cost does rise a bit if you consider adding the filter daughter board and more filters. The notch filter works well. I never found much use for the noise blanker. I never use the 7030 remote. Once you understand the menus, it is quite easy to operate. |
Analog versus DSP
Joe, thanks for your well presented and considered reply. I did say
that the 7030 was a fine radio and that there were those (you!) who would defend it to the death. It brings to mind the old adages: beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and, one man's meat is another man's poison. You love your 7030 and I don't like it, but I hasten to agree that indeed it would also have received well my catch on MW of Vancouver BC. The real point about radio's is it really doesn't matter much: if a half decent radio is connected to a good antenna and in the hands of an experienced and talented DXer you can receive the world. One of my best MW DX buddies who has shared many a DXpedition with me insists on using only his very old and much battered Yaesu FRG-7, yet I would rate him right alongside the very best MW DXer's in the world with the results he gets and the outstanding recordings he produces of rare faint far off stations. A few years back I remember the chap who won the difficult and prestigious Danish DX Club annual Challenge was using a Yaesu FRG-7700, a most pedestrian receiver. So it really doesn't matter Joe, it's more about what you personally like and what gets you fired up to enjoy twiddling those dials. I was weaned on a Eddystone (Marconi) valve radio 40 years ago and it's fine Roll's Royce engineering has stayed with me to this day. It's huge weighted tuning knob and the fine gearing to the tuning caps was an engineering revelation and a pleasure to own and operate. My Icom 756 PRO III continues that fine engineering tradition: a beautifully crafted fascia, fine sturdy solid metal casing and beautifully engineered knobs and buttons are a pleasure to behold and work with. It has a huge well crafted tuning knob with a roller bearing tuning finger indent = superb! A great pleasure to own and operate such a fine piece of engineering. It goes without saying that the radio side is superb as well. I had all three Drake R8 series radio's and hated them although I was impressed with the superior radio performance. DxAce thinks they are the best thing since George Washington came to town, but I couldn't stand the flimsy tinny covers, the wobbly buttons and the awful cheap plastic tuning knob. Then there are my other MW co-DXer's who own Drakes in the U.S and NRD 545D's in Scandinavia, but nearly all have migrated to the new SDR-IQ and are now going to move on to the latest Italian Perseus. I cant stand SDR's and doubt I will ever own one. If I win the Lotto one day I will go for the new Icom IC-7700, but at 55 pounds I don't know how I will ever get it up the hill on my Jongensgat Dxpedition's..??? So Joe, you enjoy your 7030 and continue to tout it and I will enjoy my Icom and tout that too................ John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods Drake SW8 & ERGO software Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100 BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A. GE circa 50's radiogram Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270 Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whip http://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx On Nov 15, 5:02 am, Joe Analssandrini wrote: On Nov 13, 10:21 am, wrote: Make no mistake, the 7030+ is a fine radio, and there are members of this group who will defend it until death. However it is not for everyone due to it's lack of knobs and buttons and it's quirky menu driven system and tiny display. It has a remote that is also very tiny and cramped and requires you to line it up carefully to operate as it is optically driven and not wireless driven. I would strongly advise a hands on demo of it before purchasing or a two week return policy. See my review of the 7030 at:http://www.dxing.info/equipment/aor_...r8a_plimmer.dx I have owned an Icom 756 PRO III for the last three years and can assure you that you will be extremely pleased with this beautifully engineered radio. It is superb on utilities and you will get the lowest power stations anywhere in the world with ease. As for MW DXing, that is my speciality and it's performance over the difficult 9/10 Khz splits is nothing more than awesome. I recently got CFUN Vancouver BC 10,000 miles from here on 1410 Khz. It doesn't get better than that. You will be another extremely happy owner if you spend the extra money on the 756Pro3 and will later consider it one of the best purchases of your life. See my review of this radio at:http://www.dxing.info/equipment/icom_ic756_plimmer.dx John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods Drake SW8 & ERGO software Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100 BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A. GE circa 50's radiogram Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270 Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whiphttp://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx On Nov 12, 9:44 pm, wrote: I'm in the market for a receiver after being out of the hobby for 15 years. After much research, I've narrowed my choice down to two rigs: AOR-7030+ and Icom 756Pro-III. I've never owned a IF DSP receiver before. I've owned an R4C, an FRG-7, and a NRD-525 over the years, but never a DSP rig. Have DSP receivers reached the point yet where they're a viable alternative to the best analog rigs? I've heard that first generation DSP rigs, such as the NRD-545 and the RX-340, have limited dynamic range (relative to the best analog rigs) due to limited A/D chips. I consider good dynamic range to be one of the most critical aspects of receiver performance--do the newer DSP rigs address this issue? My primary interests are utilities and DXing the MW and SW bands. I don't do much, if any, program listening, so audio quality isn't an overriding concern--I just listen long enough the ID the station. Dear John, Not to be obtuse, but you only used a borrowed AR7030 over ten years ago and there have been many changes (all for the better) since then. I have owned one since March of 2004 and have extensive experience with it. In your review, you mention that computer control of this radio is very slow - and indeed it was way back then but today, if you use the FREE RxWings program, response is practically instantaneous. This program also allows the radio to be operated as though it were NOT menu-driven. One can see and adjust/operate almost all the controls via one's computer. In addition you mention that the AR7030 has only memory scan - and you are correct UNLESS one is using RxWings. With this program, you have full frequency scanning and with fully adjustable parameters that you can set to your heart's delight. As a matter of fact, the RxWings program takes advantage of MANY capabilities and features of the receiver that are generally not available with the receiver's controls alone. I do not want to get into a discussion about the merits of the AR7030 'Plus' vs. the Icom 756Pro-III, especially as I have never seen one of the Icoms, but I would ask that people here cease repeating the old canards about operating the AR7030 'Plus' as they have long-since been discredited. First, even if one wishes to use the radio with its controls alone, it is just not that hard to do! If one can operate a VCR, a DVD player, one of the new HD televisions, or even a cell- phone, he/she will find operating the AR7030 a "piece of cake." We have ALL learned to use "menu-driven" products in the last ten years! And, as I said, with the RxWings program, operation of the radio is practically the same as if it had buttons and knobs galore. Just about everything is controllable (and its parameters fully user-adjustable) in ALL modes with this program. As for your MW reception, John, it is most remarkable and deserving of heartiest congratulations. I must state, however, that I believe that you would have achieved exactly the same results with an AR7030 'Plus' and that radio, even fully "tricked-out," costs far less than the Icom. (And while I cannot comment from personal experience as, again, I have no experience with the Icom, but just by knowing their reputation, I would bet that the audio quality of your MW catches would be at least as good with the AR7030 'Plus' as with the Icom - though I'd be willing to bet it would be far better with the AOR radio.) The AOR AR7030 'Plus' as available from Universal with its price of $1499.00 for the basic receiver and $339.95 [plus $25.00 installation] is, in my opinion, a genuine bargain considering its overall performance, sound quality, and construction quality. Remember the computer control program I recommend is FREE. Should a user wish to buy the daughter board for $59.95 in anticipation of installing crystal filter(s) at some future time, the price still comes to only $1923.90 plus shipping. Not a bad deal for all of which this radio is capable. (The only other desirable "option" is an external speaker, the price being what you desire and can afford. Generally no more that $50.00 need be spent; mine cost $29.95 at Radio Shack! Headphones are a good idea also. But most people already have these items laying around.) Before the gentleman who started this post makes a decision, I STRONGLY recommend that he purchase the Radio Database International "White Paper" - AOR AR7030 Series Tabletop Receivers. This costs only $6.95 postpaid from Passband.com. https://www.passband.com/secure/orderform.htm#Anchor-RADIO-3800. As a matter of fact, I would recommend than ANYONE with even a modicum of interest in a fine table model LW/MW/SW receiver buy this inexpensive "White Paper." You will find it most enlightening. I am sure that, whichever receiver the gentleman ultimately chooses, he will be well satisfied. As I stated above, I do not wish to get into a pointless discussion, much less an argument, about the merits of these radios but, John, I did want to bring to your attention that some of your experiences with the AR7030 are now outdated. All the best, Joe- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
Analog versus DSP
Okay, okay, I promise I won't sell the 756Pro = it's an outstanding
radio On Nov 15, 9:15 pm, Bart Bailey wrote: In posted on Thu, 15 Nov 2007 11:04:35 -0800 (PST), wrote: Begin If I win the Lotto one day I will go for the new Icom IC-7700, Even the Icom ads in the latest HRO catalog describe the 7700 as the "contesters" rig to use after spotting a station with the 756P3. |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 15, 2:04 pm, wrote:
Joe, thanks for your well presented and considered reply. I did say that the 7030 was a fine radio and that there were those (you!) who would defend it to the death. It brings to mind the old adages: beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and, one man's meat is another man's poison. You love your 7030 and I don't like it, but I hasten to agree that indeed it would also have received well my catch on MW of Vancouver BC. The real point about radio's is it really doesn't matter much: if a half decent radio is connected to a good antenna and in the hands of an experienced and talented DXer you can receive the world. One of my best MW DX buddies who has shared many a DXpedition with me insists on using only his very old and much battered Yaesu FRG-7, yet I would rate him right alongside the very best MW DXer's in the world with the results he gets and the outstanding recordings he produces of rare faint far off stations. A few years back I remember the chap who won the difficult and prestigious Danish DX Club annual Challenge was using a Yaesu FRG-7700, a most pedestrian receiver. So it really doesn't matter Joe, it's more about what you personally like and what gets you fired up to enjoy twiddling those dials. I was weaned on a Eddystone (Marconi) valve radio 40 years ago and it's fine Roll's Royce engineering has stayed with me to this day. It's huge weighted tuning knob and the fine gearing to the tuning caps was an engineering revelation and a pleasure to own and operate. My Icom 756 PRO III continues that fine engineering tradition: a beautifully crafted fascia, fine sturdy solid metal casing and beautifully engineered knobs and buttons are a pleasure to behold and work with. It has a huge well crafted tuning knob with a roller bearing tuning finger indent = superb! A great pleasure to own and operate such a fine piece of engineering. It goes without saying that the radio side is superb as well. I had all three Drake R8 series radio's and hated them although I was impressed with the superior radio performance. DxAce thinks they are the best thing since George Washington came to town, but I couldn't stand the flimsy tinny covers, the wobbly buttons and the awful cheap plastic tuning knob. Then there are my other MW co-DXer's who own Drakes in the U.S and NRD 545D's in Scandinavia, but nearly all have migrated to the new SDR-IQ and are now going to move on to the latest Italian Perseus. I cant stand SDR's and doubt I will ever own one. If I win the Lotto one day I will go for the new Icom IC-7700, but at 55 pounds I don't know how I will ever get it up the hill on my Jongensgat Dxpedition's..??? So Joe, you enjoy your 7030 and continue to tout it and I will enjoy my Icom and tout that too................ John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods Drake SW8 & ERGO software Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100 BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A. GE circa 50's radiogram Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270 Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whiphttp://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx On Nov 15, 5:02 am, Joe Analssandrini wrote: On Nov 13, 10:21 am, wrote: Make no mistake, the 7030+ is a fine radio, and there are members of this group who will defend it until death. However it is not for everyone due to it's lack of knobs and buttons and it's quirky menu driven system and tiny display. It has a remote that is also very tiny and cramped and requires you to line it up carefully to operate as it is optically driven and not wireless driven. I would strongly advise a hands on demo of it before purchasing or a two week return policy. See my review of the 7030 at:http://www.dxing.info/equipment/aor_...r8a_plimmer.dx I have owned an Icom 756 PRO III for the last three years and can assure you that you will be extremely pleased with this beautifully engineered radio. It is superb on utilities and you will get the lowest power stations anywhere in the world with ease. As for MW DXing, that is my speciality and it's performance over the difficult 9/10 Khz splits is nothing more than awesome. I recently got CFUN Vancouver BC 10,000 miles from here on 1410 Khz. It doesn't get better than that. You will be another extremely happy owner if you spend the extra money on the 756Pro3 and will later consider it one of the best purchases of your life. See my review of this radio at:http://www.dxing.info/equipment/icom_ic756_plimmer.dx John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods Drake SW8 & ERGO software Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100 BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A. GE circa 50's radiogram Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270 Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whiphttp://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx On Nov 12, 9:44 pm, wrote: I'm in the market for a receiver after being out of the hobby for 15 years. After much research, I've narrowed my choice down to two rigs: AOR-7030+ and Icom 756Pro-III. I've never owned a IF DSP receiver before. I've owned an R4C, an FRG-7, and a NRD-525 over the years, but never a DSP rig. Have DSP receivers reached the point yet where they're a viable alternative to the best analog rigs? I've heard that first generation DSP rigs, such as the NRD-545 and the RX-340, have limited dynamic range (relative to the best analog rigs) due to limited A/D chips. I consider good dynamic range to be one of the most critical aspects of receiver performance--do the newer DSP rigs address this issue? My primary interests are utilities and DXing the MW and SW bands. I don't do much, if any, program listening, so audio quality isn't an overriding concern--I just listen long enough the ID the station. Dear John, Not to be obtuse, but you only used a borrowed AR7030 over ten years ago and there have been many changes (all for the better) since then. I have owned one since March of 2004 and have extensive experience with it. In your review, you mention that computer control of this radio is very slow - and indeed it was way back then but today, if you use the FREE RxWings program, response is practically instantaneous. This program also allows the radio to be operated as though it were NOT menu-driven. One can see and adjust/operate almost all the controls via one's computer. In addition you mention that the AR7030 has only memory scan - and you are correct UNLESS one is using RxWings. With this program, you have full frequency scanning and with fully adjustable parameters that you can set to your heart's delight. As a matter of fact, the RxWings program takes advantage of MANY capabilities and features of the receiver that are generally not available with the receiver's controls alone. I do not want to get into a discussion about the merits of the AR7030 'Plus' vs. the Icom 756Pro-III, especially as I have never seen one of the Icoms, but I would ask that people here cease repeating the old canards about operating the AR7030 'Plus' as they have long-since been discredited. First, even if one wishes to use the radio with its controls alone, it is just not that hard to do! If one can operate a VCR, a DVD player, one of the new HD televisions, or even a cell- phone, he/she will find operating the AR7030 a "piece of cake." We have ALL learned to use "menu-driven" products in the last ten years! And, as I said, with the RxWings program, operation of the radio is practically the same as if it had buttons and knobs galore. Just about everything is controllable (and its parameters fully user-adjustable) in ALL modes with this program. As for your MW reception, John, it is most remarkable and deserving of heartiest congratulations. I must state, however, that I believe that you would have achieved exactly the same results with an AR7030 'Plus' and that radio, even fully "tricked-out," costs far less than the Icom. (And while I cannot comment from personal experience as, again, I have no experience with the Icom, but just by knowing their reputation, I would bet that the audio quality of your MW catches would be at least as good with the AR7030 'Plus' as with the Icom - though I'd be willing to bet it would be far better with the AOR radio.) The AOR AR7030 'Plus' as available from Universal with its price of $1499.00 for the basic receiver and $339.95 [plus $25.00 installation] is, in my opinion, a genuine bargain considering its overall performance, sound quality, and construction quality. Remember the computer control program I recommend is FREE. Should a user wish to buy the daughter board for $59.95 in anticipation of installing crystal filter(s) at some future time, the price still comes to only $1923.90 plus shipping. Not a bad deal for all of which this radio is capable. (The only other desirable "option" is an external speaker, the price being what you desire and can afford. Generally no more that $50.00 need be spent; mine cost $29.95 at Radio Shack! Headphones are a good idea also. But most people already have these items laying around.) Before the gentleman who started this post makes a decision, I STRONGLY recommend that he purchase the Radio Database International "White Paper" - AOR AR7030 Series Tabletop Receivers. This costs only $6.95 postpaid from Passband.com. https://www.passband.com/secure/orderform.htm#Anchor-RADIO-3800. As a matter of fact, I would recommend than ANYONE with even a modicum of interest in a fine table model LW/MW/SW ... read more Dear John, Thank you for your comments. You are correct in almost everything you say, especially about experienced users. With them, it ALMOST doesn't matter which receiver they are using - as long as they know what they're doing and have, of course, a proper antenna matched to the receiver in use. I too loved the old tube receivers and I still fire up my old Lafayette HE-10 two or three times a year for old time's sake. There is little that I can hear on my AR7030 'Plus' that I cannot also hear on the Lafayette with the same [Wellbrook ALA 330S] antenna. However, with due regard for those who continue to use their older receivers, I personally would not want to go back to using one. I really appreciate the performance of which modern receivers are capable. My comments were to you but also to the gentleman who started this post. He is looking for advice about buying either the AOR or the Icom. I merely wanted to let him (and you) know that the radio has indeed evolved in the last ten years and should not be discounted on the basis of early, and in many cases negative - especially concerning the operating system, reviews. I myself researched modern communications receivers for about ten years before I bought the AOR. (Any communications receiver is, after all, a rather expensive purchase.) The delay was partly because of those negative early reviews which complained about how difficult the receiver was to operate. Frankly, I was frightened by those reviews. It was only after speaking with several individuals, most notably Richard Hillier of AOR- UK, that I decided to buy one. I am very glad I did. I do not "defend this receiver unto death" but merely want to point out to the gentleman seeking to buy a new communications receiver that he should thoroughly investigate his two choices before making his decision. Either one of his choices would serve him splendidly. Ignoring the transmitter portion of the Icom, the difference, basically, is between knobs and dials vs. menu-driven operating systems. The menu-driven system of the AOR allows performance equal to or superior to anything on the market at a much lower cost than it would be were the radio to have expensive mechanical components. The free computer-control program [RxWings] is a "bonus." Thus the cost of the AOR AR7030 'Plus' is much lower than that of the Icom 756Pro-III and I should think that the AOR performs AT LEAST as well as the Icom with, I suspect, better sound quality (for which the AR7030 is known). Please again take note of the fact that I personally have no experience with the Icom transceiver. I repeat that I believe either receiver would serve him well. Best, Joe |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 14, 10:02 pm, Joe Analssandrini
wrote: I do not want to get into a discussion about the merits of the AR7030 'Plus' vs. the Icom 756Pro-III, especially as I have never seen one of the Icoms, but I would ask that people here cease repeating the old canards about operating the AR7030 'Plus' as they have long-since been discredited. First, even if one wishes to use the radio with its controls alone, it is just not that hard to do! If one can operate a VCR, a DVD player, one of the new HD televisions, or even a cell- phone, he/she will find operating the AR7030 a "piece of cake." We have ALL learned to use "menu-driven" products in the last ten years! When people complain that the menu system is 'complicated', I don't think they mean that it is complicated in the sense of 'difficult to understand'. Rather, they mean--or at any rate, I would mean--that it is complicated in the sense of requiring a larger number of movements or 'button pushes' and/or 'dial twists' per setting change. If you're DXing weak signals you will likely be continually adjusting some setting or other. It's not like a VCR or HD television, where you get it set up and then just let it go. Adding just a single modest step to the process of adjusting filter width or notch might not seem like a big deal, but you have to imagine it multiplied many thousands of times. |
Analog versus DSP
In article
, Steve wrote: On Nov 14, 10:02 pm, Joe Analssandrini wrote: I do not want to get into a discussion about the merits of the AR7030 'Plus' vs. the Icom 756Pro-III, especially as I have never seen one of the Icoms, but I would ask that people here cease repeating the old canards about operating the AR7030 'Plus' as they have long-since been discredited. First, even if one wishes to use the radio with its controls alone, it is just not that hard to do! If one can operate a VCR, a DVD player, one of the new HD televisions, or even a cell- phone, he/she will find operating the AR7030 a "piece of cake." We have ALL learned to use "menu-driven" products in the last ten years! When people complain that the menu system is 'complicated', I don't think they mean that it is complicated in the sense of 'difficult to understand'. Rather, they mean--or at any rate, I would mean--that it is complicated in the sense of requiring a larger number of movements or 'button pushes' and/or 'dial twists' per setting change. If you're DXing weak signals you will likely be continually adjusting some setting or other. It's not like a VCR or HD television, where you get it set up and then just let it go. Adding just a single modest step to the process of adjusting filter width or notch might not seem like a big deal, but you have to imagine it multiplied many thousands of times. That's why I use the remote control. It has direct buttons to functions lower in the menus. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 16, 12:03 am, Bart Bailey wrote:
In posted on Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:59:46 -0800 (PST), Steve wrote: Begin On Nov 14, 10:02 pm, Joe Analssandrini wrote: I do not want to get into a discussion about the merits of the AR7030 'Plus' vs. the Icom 756Pro-III, especially as I have never seen one of the Icoms, but I would ask that people here cease repeating the old canards about operating the AR7030 'Plus' as they have long-since been discredited. First, even if one wishes to use the radio with its controls alone, it is just not that hard to do! If one can operate a VCR, a DVD player, one of the new HD televisions, or even a cell- phone, he/she will find operating the AR7030 a "piece of cake." We have ALL learned to use "menu-driven" products in the last ten years! When people complain that the menu system is 'complicated', I don't think they mean that it is complicated in the sense of 'difficult to understand'. Rather, they mean--or at any rate, I would mean--that it is complicated in the sense of requiring a larger number of movements or 'button pushes' and/or 'dial twists' per setting change. If you're DXing weak signals you will likely be continually adjusting some setting or other. It's not like a VCR or HD television, where you get it set up and then just let it go. Adding just a single modest step to the process of adjusting filter width or notch might not seem like a big deal, but you have to imagine it multiplied many thousands of times. But isn't knob twirling and button pushing an accepted part of the allure of SW DXing?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, it's accepted. It's accepted because it's inevitable, but I don't think anyone wants to there to be any more knob twiddling and button pushing than is necessary to get the job done. |
Analog versus DSP
|
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 16, 12:54 pm, Bart Bailey wrote:
In posted on Fri, 16 Nov 2007 03:54:03 -0800 (PST), Steve wrote: Begin On Nov 16, 12:03 am, Bart Bailey wrote: In But isn't knob twirling and button pushing an accepted part of the allure of SW DXing?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, it's accepted. It's accepted because it's inevitable, but I don't think anyone wants to there to be any more knob twiddling and button pushing than is necessary to get the job done. My point was that playing with the knobs and features is an integral component of the joy of 'digging 'em out', otherwise someone would just tune to a local broadcast for set it and forget it entertainment. Point understood and taken. My point was that this doesn't warrant controls that are more complex than necessary, which is what many find to be the case with the 7030+. Otherwise I'm sure someone could sit down and devise a set of controls so complex as to require hundreds of motions and button pushes just to change the filter width. |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 16, 6:35 am, David wrote:
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:44:38 -0000, wrote: I'm in the market for a receiver after being out of the hobby for 15 years. After much research, I've narrowed my choice down to two rigs: AOR-7030+ and Icom 756Pro-III. I've never owned a IF DSP receiver before. I've owned an R4C, an FRG-7, and a NRD-525 over the years, but never a DSP rig. Have DSP receivers reached the point yet where they're a viable alternative to the best analog rigs? I've heard that first generation DSP rigs, such as the NRD-545 and the RX-340, have limited dynamic range (relative to the best analog rigs) due to limited A/D chips. I consider good dynamic range to be one of the most critical aspects of receiver performance--do the newer DSP rigs address this issue? My primary interests are utilities and DXing the MW and SW bands. I don't do much, if any, program listening, so audio quality isn't an overriding concern--I just listen long enough the ID the station. - I've yet to meet a DSP that made a call sign - any easier to copy, compared to my brain. David - "compared to my brain" ? - Many people here would say that that is a 'severely diminished' Entity to use as a Standard-of-Comparison to anything. ~ RHF |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 16, 9:54 am, Bart Bailey wrote:
In posted on Fri, 16 Nov 2007 03:54:03 -0800 (PST), Steve wrote: Begin On Nov 16, 12:03 am, Bart Bailey wrote: In But isn't knob twirling and button pushing an accepted part of the allure of SW DXing?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, it's accepted. It's accepted because it's inevitable, but I don't think anyone wants to there to be any more knob twiddling and button pushing than is necessary to get the job done. My point was that playing with the knobs and features is an integral component of the joy of 'digging 'em out', otherwise someone would just tune to a local broadcast for set it and forget it entertainment. Here is the short explanation. Old farts can't handle the ar7030 menus. if you understand computers, the menus are not an issue. What the menus do buy you is a compact radio, since you don't need all the space for buttons and knobs. Again, I'll repeat, I never use the remote. The menus are quite easy to use. |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 16, 3:31 pm, wrote:
Here is the short explanation. Old farts can't handle the ar7030 menus. if you understand computers, the menus are not an issue. What the menus do buy you is a compact radio, since you don't need all the space for buttons and knobs. Again, I'll repeat, I never use the remote. The menus are quite easy to use. I have no doubt that the menus are easy to use--that's not the issue. My concern is that they're tedious to use. Having to go through a menu to get to a function just can't compare to having a dedicated control for that function. |
Analog versus DSP
|
Analog versus DSP
|
Analog versus DSP
In article ,
David wrote: On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:44:38 -0000, wrote: I'm in the market for a receiver after being out of the hobby for 15 years. After much research, I've narrowed my choice down to two rigs: AOR-7030+ and Icom 756Pro-III. I've never owned a IF DSP receiver before. I've owned an R4C, an FRG-7, and a NRD-525 over the years, but never a DSP rig. Have DSP receivers reached the point yet where they're a viable alternative to the best analog rigs? I've heard that first generation DSP rigs, such as the NRD-545 and the RX-340, have limited dynamic range (relative to the best analog rigs) due to limited A/D chips. I consider good dynamic range to be one of the most critical aspects of receiver performance--do the newer DSP rigs address this issue? My primary interests are utilities and DXing the MW and SW bands. I don't do much, if any, program listening, so audio quality isn't an overriding concern--I just listen long enough the ID the station. I've yet to meet a DSP that made a call sign any easier to copy, compared to my brain. I've yet to meet a human DSP. I'll refrain from comments on your brain. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Analog versus DSP
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 12:34:15 -0800 (PST), RHF
wrote: On Nov 16, 6:35 am, David wrote: On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:44:38 -0000, wrote: I'm in the market for a receiver after being out of the hobby for 15 years. After much research, I've narrowed my choice down to two rigs: AOR-7030+ and Icom 756Pro-III. I've never owned a IF DSP receiver before. I've owned an R4C, an FRG-7, and a NRD-525 over the years, but never a DSP rig. Have DSP receivers reached the point yet where they're a viable alternative to the best analog rigs? I've heard that first generation DSP rigs, such as the NRD-545 and the RX-340, have limited dynamic range (relative to the best analog rigs) due to limited A/D chips. I consider good dynamic range to be one of the most critical aspects of receiver performance--do the newer DSP rigs address this issue? My primary interests are utilities and DXing the MW and SW bands. I don't do much, if any, program listening, so audio quality isn't an overriding concern--I just listen long enough the ID the station. - I've yet to meet a DSP that made a call sign - any easier to copy, compared to my brain. David - "compared to my brain" ? - Many people here would say that that is a 'severely diminished' Entity to use as a Standard-of-Comparison to anything. ~ RHF . I can construct an English paragraph without any grammatical errors. |
Analog versus DSP
Steve wrote:
Yes, it's accepted. It's accepted because it's inevitable, but I don't think anyone wants to there to be any more knob twiddling and button pushing than is necessary to get the job done. You haven't seen the subset of people who enjoy regenerative sets, I take it? Or, for that matter, you don't know anyone who drives a manual because they enjoy it? |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 16, 7:43 pm, Telamon
wrote: In article , wrote: On Nov 16, 9:54 am, Bart Bailey wrote: In posted on Fri, 16 Nov 2007 03:54:03 -0800 (PST), Steve wrote: Begin On Nov 16, 12:03 am, Bart Bailey wrote: In But isn't knob twirling and button pushing an accepted part of the allure of SW DXing?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, it's accepted. It's accepted because it's inevitable, but I don't think anyone wants to there to be any more knob twiddling and button pushing than is necessary to get the job done. My point was that playing with the knobs and features is an integral component of the joy of 'digging 'em out', otherwise someone would just tune to a local broadcast for set it and forget it entertainment. Here is the short explanation. Old farts can't handle the ar7030 menus. if you understand computers, the menus are not an issue. What the menus do buy you is a compact radio, since you don't need all the space for buttons and knobs. Again, I'll repeat, I never use the remote. The menus are quite easy to use. Look I've been through this. I have purchased 10's of millions of dollars in test equipment that operate in different ways and the preference that all users of that equipment have shown to me is a knob or button for every function. People do not want to go through menus to get to some operating function. These people are engineers and technicians. And I'll repeat that if you don't use the remote you are just plain dumb. Sure the menus are just fine but you can push a button on the remote that take several button pushes on the front panel so why go that route. -- Telamon Ventura, California Eh, I've bought my share of test eq too. I like the menus if they are done well. Hp started to use soft buttons in the 80s and hasn't gone back. |
Analog versus DSP
|
Analog versus DSP
|
Analog versus DSP
|
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 17, 5:35 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
wrote: On Nov 16, 3:31 pm, wrote: Here is the short explanation. Old farts can't handle the ar7030 menus. if you understand computers, the menus are not an issue. What the menus do buy you is a compact radio, since you don't need all the space for buttons and knobs. Again, I'll repeat, I never use the remote. The menus are quite easy to use. I have no doubt that the menus are easy to use--that's not the issue. My concern is that they're tedious to use. Having to go through a menu to get to a function just can't compare to having a dedicated control for that function. The menues are adaptive....that is, the functions you use most often are nearer the top. There isn't any tedious hunting. And you can set preferences for nearly every frequency you use. My recommendation is to use one for a while. Not just around the block. For a weekend. After a while, the menu trees become not only second nature, but transparent. And most functions you prefer to use are near the top. The menu trees are really not an issue on this radio. I agree with you here. It does become second nature. There's nothing cognitively challenging or demanding about the menu structure *at all*. However, from the point of view of ergonomics it literally boils down to a matter of efficiency and economy of hand movements, as is so often the case in this area. But this is still a minor nit to pick with what is unquestionably an outstanding receiver. Steve |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 17, 2:27 pm, Telamon
wrote: In article , wrote: On Nov 16, 7:43 pm, Telamon wrote: In article , wrote: On Nov 16, 9:54 am, Bart Bailey wrote: In .com posted on Fri, 16 Nov 2007 03:54:03 -0800 (PST), Steve wrote: Begin On Nov 16, 12:03 am, Bart Bailey wrote: In But isn't knob twirling and button pushing an accepted part of the allure of SW DXing?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, it's accepted. It's accepted because it's inevitable, but I don't think anyone wants to there to be any more knob twiddling and button pushing than is necessary to get the job done. My point was that playing with the knobs and features is an integral component of the joy of 'digging 'em out', otherwise someone would just tune to a local broadcast for set it and forget it entertainment. Here is the short explanation. Old farts can't handle the ar7030 menus. if you understand computers, the menus are not an issue. What the menus do buy you is a compact radio, since you don't need all the space for buttons and knobs. Again, I'll repeat, I never use the remote. The menus are quite easy to use. Look I've been through this. I have purchased 10's of millions of dollars in test equipment that operate in different ways and the preference that all users of that equipment have shown to me is a knob or button for every function. People do not want to go through menus to get to some operating function. These people are engineers and technicians. And I'll repeat that if you don't use the remote you are just plain dumb. Sure the menus are just fine but you can push a button on the remote that take several button pushes on the front panel so why go that route. Eh, I've bought my share of test eq too. I like the menus if they are done well. Hp started to use soft buttons in the 80s and hasn't gone back. Yes and since HP, then Agilent went the way of the menu they lost a lot of sales to Anritsu that made comparable equipment with a knob or button for every function. Personally I didn't care but most other people did care and so it goes. -- Telamon Ventura, California Oh please. If you don't see Agilent gear in the lab, it's Rhodes and Schwartz. |
Analog versus DSP
|
Analog versus DSP
This thread seems to have migrated from a DSP vs. analog discussion to
one of ergonomics of buttons/knobs vs. menus. What I'd really like to know is if there's any significant reason to prefer a DSP-based receiver (e.g. the 756Pro-III) over an analog receiver (e.g. AOR 7030+) on the basic of receiving performance. Here's where I perceive DSP receivers to have the advantage: * Sharper, narrower filters without artifacts (e.g. ringing) * Easy updates via software download (TenTec supports this, does Icom? (I doubt it)) and for analog: * Higher dynamic range than most DSP receivers * Lower cost (typically) * Better audio I had a chance to sit down and use a 756Pro-III for a few hours this weekend, and I must say the spectrum scope is an addictive feature! |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 19, 2:25 pm, wrote:
This thread seems to have migrated from a DSP vs. analog discussion to one of ergonomics of buttons/knobs vs. menus. What I'd really like to know is if there's any significant reason to prefer a DSP-based receiver (e.g. the 756Pro-III) over an analog receiver (e.g. AOR 7030+) on the basic of receiving performance. Here's where I perceive DSP receivers to have the advantage: * Sharper, narrower filters without artifacts (e.g. ringing) * Easy updates via software download (TenTec supports this, does Icom? (I doubt it)) and for analog: * Higher dynamic range than most DSP receivers * Lower cost (typically) * Better audio I had a chance to sit down and use a 756Pro-III for a few hours this weekend, and I must say the spectrum scope is an addictive feature! Digital filters ring unless they are sloppy. IIR filters ring. FIR filters don't ring IF the tap coefficients are all positive, but then the filter is sloppy. With DSP you have more control over the bandwidth, but no freedom from ringing. I don't think the 7030 is all that cheap once you buy the filter daughter board and some crystal filters. The filters don't just materialize in the radio. You need to solder them or pay someone to do it. |
Analog versus DSP
|
Analog versus DSP
VistaCruiser1 asked:
What I'd really like to know is if there's any significant reason to prefer a DSP-based receiver (e.g. the 756Pro-III) over an analog receiver (e.g. AOR 7030+) on the basic of receiving performance. Here's where I perceive DSP receivers to have the advantage: * Sharper, narrower filters without artifacts (e.g. ringing) * Easy updates via software download (TenTec supports this, does Icom? (I doubt it)) and for analog: * Higher dynamic range than most DSP receivers * Lower cost (typically) * Better audio _________________________________________ Certainly the filters on the Icom 756 PRO III are just awesome - they don't come much better than that. The only filters I ever knew "rang" where on very narrow mechanical filters such as you would use on CW, that is on analogue radio's. On the 756Pro3 you will get absolutely no ringing at all, even on the narrowest CW filter settings, and the number of 756Pro3 users who are ecstatic about the filter performance on CW are well listed in the eHam reviews, of which there are hundreds of happy owners. See: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/4635 No, the 756Pro3 is not firmware upgradeable, but it is the third incarnation of this radio and you will see the very many users on eHam who rave about it. As for getting a radio with the highest dynamic range, I would say that this is an overated feature. One of my DX pals had a radio with 93dB of close in performance and I never saw him post logs any better than anyone else. On the other hand, many of the top DXer's are now using SDR radio's which have a significantly lower close in performance, yet they are achieving the most amazing results. The close in of the 7030 is 82dB vs that of the 756Pro3 being 78dB (as tested by QST) - you will never notice the difference in practical use. As for audio, it was true of the early Icom offerings that their audio was poor, but the latest batch, including the 756Pro3 are very much better. In fact if you place the 7030 side by side with the 756Pro3 and play them alternatively through a good outboard speaker, I am willing to bet you will find the 756 audio better = it's really very good. Then we have price: yes, the 756Pro3 is expensive, but I never saw on any of the eHam reviews anyone claiming it was not value for money. I have owned mine for three years now and the shock of the high price has long since worn off after experiencing the pleasure of owning one of the finest performing and engineered radio's in the world. However, if price is a major consideration, then consider as an alternative the Icom 746Pro, which is considerably cheaper at about $1,600 - a very good buy and the identical engine as that used in the 756Pro3. Finally, if you are considering an SDR (many serious DXer's have already moved into these, especially the older SDR-IQ), then the only show in town at the moment is the Italian Perseus - it will land you at about $1000 and has some great features with performance to match. Remember, if you choose the 7030+ you are buying yesterday's technology, the radio has been on the market for about twelve years now. John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods Drake SW8 & ERGO software Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100 BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A. GE circa 50's radiogram Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270 Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whip http://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx On Nov 20, 12:25 am, wrote: This thread seems to have migrated from a DSP vs. analog discussion to one of ergonomics of buttons/knobs vs. menus. What I'd really like to know is if there's any significant reason to prefer a DSP-based receiver (e.g. the 756Pro-III) over an analog receiver (e.g. AOR 7030+) on the basic of receiving performance. Here's where I perceive DSP receivers to have the advantage: * Sharper, narrower filters without artifacts (e.g. ringing) * Easy updates via software download (TenTec supports this, does Icom? (I doubt it)) and for analog: * Higher dynamic range than most DSP receivers * Lower cost (typically) * Better audio I had a chance to sit down and use a 756Pro-III for a few hours this weekend, and I must say the spectrum scope is an addictive feature! |
Analog versus DSP
In article ,
David wrote: On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 23:26:01 -0800 (PST), wrote: Yes and since HP, then Agilent went the way of the menu they lost a lot of sales to Anritsu that made comparable equipment with a knob or button for every function. Personally I didn't care but most other people did care and so it goes. -- Telamon Ventura, California Oh please. If you don't see Agilent gear in the lab, it's Rhodes and Schwartz. My Anritsu is lousy with soft keys. Must be something newer then what I was buying. The Anritsu equipment I bought had a knob or button for every function but they may have gone the soft-keys around the screen method. Probably runs Window$ also. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Analog versus DSP
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:59:36 -0800, Telamon
wrote: In article , David wrote: On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 23:26:01 -0800 (PST), wrote: Yes and since HP, then Agilent went the way of the menu they lost a lot of sales to Anritsu that made comparable equipment with a knob or button for every function. Personally I didn't care but most other people did care and so it goes. -- Telamon Ventura, California Oh please. If you don't see Agilent gear in the lab, it's Rhodes and Schwartz. My Anritsu is lousy with soft keys. Must be something newer then what I was buying. The Anritsu equipment I bought had a knob or button for every function but they may have gone the soft-keys around the screen method. Probably runs Window$ also. It's too slow for tuning cavities but it makes superb measurements. 6 markers! http://www.us.anritsu.com/downloads/...1410-00251.pdf |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 19, 9:59 pm, wrote:
"Remember, if you choose the 7030+ you are buying yesterday's technology, the radio has been on the market for about twelve years now." Dear John, As I stated originally I do not really want to, nor can I truly, get into an "argument" over the merits of the ICOM IC-756 Pro III vs. the AOR AR7030 'Plus,' especially as I have no experience with the ICOM unit. I know you tried an AOR for about a month or two 10 years ago but I submit that this experience is not applicable today. I do wish to comment on your quote (above): "Yesterday's technology" is pejorative and, frankly, plain wrong, at least with regard to this receiver. The term "yesterday's technology" is only applicable when something clearly better has superseded that technology and, so far, NOTHING - not DSP, SDR, or anything else - has done so. I own a pair of Klipschorns. Have you ever heard them? I first heard one when I was fourteen years old and I never forgot that sound. I never, ever, thought I would ultimately be able to own a pair but, in the event, I did. This "technology" has been on the market virtually unchanged since 1946! 60 years! I have heard many, many speakers over the years - including quite a few that cost FAR more than the Klipschorns - but I have NEVER heard anything that even comes close! The reason this speaker is still on the market over 60 years is because it is just plain great. There is no other word for it. $40,000.00+ speakers come - and they are touted as the "latest and greatest" - and then they go - to be replaced by another $40,000.00+ "latest and greatest" ad infinitum and ad nauseum. (See STEREOPHILE Magazine or THE ABSOLUTE SOUND.) Meanwhile, the Klipschorn just goes on - continuing to produce the fantastic sound for which it is known and people, once having heard it, continue to buy it, "yesterday's technology" or no. I believe the same argument can be applied to the AOR AR7030 'Plus.' A piece of gear will be discontinued rather rapidly once sales fall off. That the sales of this radio have not done so to an appreciable extent is testimony to the overall high quality of its design. Twelve years is a long time in the electronics world and the AR7030's longevity definitely says something! Frankly, I feel your comment is specious and a bit unworthy of you. Generally your comments are far more reasoned. The discussion here about filters is equally wrong - good filters of whatever kind, properly applied and used, will not "ring" on modern receivers. I think it almost goes without saying that anyone in the market for either of these two receivers, or even other receivers of their caliber, know how to use these radios and will know when to employ any given filter. It is true that DSP receivers can have a great many more filters than an analog receiver. And it's also true that any extra filters for the AR7030 'Plus" will need to be installed - but this is a very easy task to accomplish. See AOR-UK's web site for the exact information on how to do it. But it's like gears on a bicycle. Most riders use only a very few of the twenty-one or so gears available to them and I suspect that most users of good shortwave equipment use only a very few of the available filters (I generally use only three of my five available). This, of course, is in no way saying that the AR7030 'Plus' is superior or inferior to the ICOM IC-756 Pro III which, I am sure, is a fine piece of equipment. Either would probably satisfy the gentleman who originally started this post. What I, and I suspect he, would really like to see is a comparison of the two by someone who owns and uses both - with both in current configurations. The only thing I can definitely state is that the AOR AR7030 'Plus' - even configured with several options - will cost far less than the ICOM IC-756 Pro III and it will perform and will be constructed at least as well. And, frankly, I do not believe that the ICOM will have superior sound quality to the AOR; equivalent maybe - it's possible, of course - but I routinely run the AOR's audio through my sound system (with the aforementioned Klipschorns) and its sound must be heard to be believed. You ought to hear the Voice of Russia's "Jazz Show" this way. Even with an inexpensive external speaker (RCA Radio Shack Cat. # 40-5000 - $29.95) the AOR's sound is, in a word, amazing. In my almost fifty years of shortwave listening I have never heard better. Best, Joe |
Analog versus DSP
In article ,
David wrote: On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:56:15 -0800, Telamon wrote: Oh please. If you don't see Agilent gear in the lab, it's Rhodes and Schwartz. The big players in test equipment I have bought from are HP/Agilent, Rhode & Schwarz, and Tektronix, Anritsu, and Wiltron. R&S is now a part of Tektronix and Wiltron is now a part of Anritsu. I have a Marconi (Aeroflex) 2945A on my bench. We have 3 R&S FSH3 (in road cases) an Agilent and an Advantest as well. Spectrum analyzers with tracking generators are very useful equipment. You probably work on VHF radio communications equipment. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Analog versus DSP
In article ,
David wrote: http://www.us.anritsu.com/downloads/...1410-00251.pdf I just bought a MS2026A to test some low band switches. For $12K it allowed us to use a $80K network analyzer in another test site. It works OK but I would not call it speedy. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 20, 11:34 am, Joe Analssandrini
wrote: On Nov 19, 9:59 pm, wrote: "Remember, if you choose the 7030+ you are buying yesterday's technology, the radio has been on the market for about twelve years now." Dear John, As I stated originally I do not really want to, nor can I truly, get into an "argument" over the merits of the ICOM IC-756 Pro III vs. the AOR AR7030 'Plus,' especially as I have no experience with the ICOM unit. I know you tried an AOR for about a month or two 10 years ago but I submit that this experience is not applicable today. I do wish to comment on your quote (above): "Yesterday's technology" is pejorative and, frankly, plain wrong, at least with regard to this receiver. The term "yesterday's technology" is only applicable when something clearly better has superseded that technology and, so far, NOTHING - not DSP, SDR, or anything else - has done so. I own a pair of Klipschorns. Have you ever heard them? I first heard one when I was fourteen years old and I never forgot that sound. I never, ever, thought I would ultimately be able to own a pair but, in the event, I did. This "technology" has been on the market virtually unchanged since 1946! 60 years! I have heard many, many speakers over the years - including quite a few that cost FAR more than the Klipschorns - but I have NEVER heard anything that even comes close! The reason this speaker is still on the market over 60 years is because it is just plain great. There is no other word for it. $40,000.00+ speakers come - and they are touted as the "latest and greatest" - and then they go - to be replaced by another $40,000.00+ "latest and greatest" ad infinitum and ad nauseum. (See STEREOPHILE Magazine or THE ABSOLUTE SOUND.) Meanwhile, the Klipschorn just goes on - continuing to produce the fantastic sound for which it is known and people, once having heard it, continue to buy it, "yesterday's technology" or no. I believe the same argument can be applied to the AOR AR7030 'Plus.' A piece of gear will be discontinued rather rapidly once sales fall off. That the sales of this radio have not done so to an appreciable extent is testimony to the overall high quality of its design. Twelve years is a long time in the electronics world and the AR7030's longevity definitely says something! Frankly, I feel your comment is specious and a bit unworthy of you. Generally your comments are far more reasoned. The discussion here about filters is equally wrong - good filters of whatever kind, properly applied and used, will not "ring" on modern receivers. I think it almost goes without saying that anyone in the market for either of these two receivers, or even other receivers of their caliber, know how to use these radios and will know when to employ any given filter. It is true that DSP receivers can have a great many more filters than an analog receiver. And it's also true that any extra filters for the AR7030 'Plus" will need to be installed - but this is a very easy task to accomplish. See AOR-UK's web site for the exact information on how to do it. But it's like gears on a bicycle. Most riders use only a very few of the twenty-one or so gears available to them and I suspect that most users of good shortwave equipment use only a very few of the available filters (I generally use only three of my five available). This, of course, is in no way saying that the AR7030 'Plus' is superior or inferior to the ICOM IC-756 Pro III which, I am sure, is a fine piece of equipment. Either would probably satisfy the gentleman who originally started this post. What I, and I suspect he, would really like to see is a comparison of the two by someone who owns and uses both - with both in current configurations. The only thing I can definitely state is that the AOR AR7030 'Plus' - even configured with several options - will cost far less than the ICOM IC-756 Pro III and it will perform and will be constructed at least as well. And, frankly, I do not believe that the ICOM will have superior sound quality to the AOR; equivalent maybe - it's possible, of course - but I routinely run the AOR's audio through my sound system (with the aforementioned Klipschorns) and its sound must be heard to be believed. You ought to hear the Voice of Russia's "Jazz Show" this way. Even with an inexpensive external speaker (RCA Radio Shack Cat. # 40-5000 - $29.95) the AOR's sound is, in a word, amazing. In my almost fifty years of shortwave listening I have never heard better. Best, Joe I like the 21 gear bike analogy. The AR7030 was originally designed with fidelity in mind. Much of the audio path is stereo because there was talk of a FM stereo option that unfortunately never materialized. Regarding ringing, the sharper the filter, the more it rings. You can't fight physics. I really annoys me how people think digital is the solution to everything without really understanding the nuances. |
Analog versus DSP
On Nov 20, 11:34 am, Joe Analssandrini
wrote: On Nov 19, 9:59 pm, wrote: "Remember, if you choose the 7030+ you are buying yesterday's technology, the radio has been on the market for about twelve years now." Dear John, As I stated originally I do not really want to, nor can I truly, get into an "argument" over the merits of the ICOM IC-756 Pro III vs. the AOR AR7030 'Plus,' especially as I have no experience with the ICOM unit. I know you tried an AOR for about a month or two 10 years ago but I submit that this experience is not applicable today. I do wish to comment on your quote (above): "Yesterday's technology" is pejorative and, frankly, plain wrong, at least with regard to this receiver. The term "yesterday's technology" is only applicable when something clearly better has superseded that technology and, so far, NOTHING - not DSP, SDR, or anything else - has done so. I own a pair of Klipschorns. Have you ever heard them? I first heard one when I was fourteen years old and I never forgot that sound. I never, ever, thought I would ultimately be able to own a pair but, in the event, I did. This "technology" has been on the market virtually unchanged since 1946! 60 years! I have heard many, many speakers over the years - including quite a few that cost FAR more than the Klipschorns - but I have NEVER heard anything that even comes close! The reason this speaker is still on the market over 60 years is because it is just plain great. There is no other word for it. $40,000.00+ speakers come - and they are touted as the "latest and greatest" - and then they go - to be replaced by another $40,000.00+ "latest and greatest" ad infinitum and ad nauseum. (See STEREOPHILE Magazine or THE ABSOLUTE SOUND.) Meanwhile, the Klipschorn just goes on - continuing to produce the fantastic sound for which it is known and people, once having heard it, continue to buy it, "yesterday's technology" or no. I believe the same argument can be applied to the AOR AR7030 'Plus.' A piece of gear will be discontinued rather rapidly once sales fall off. That the sales of this radio have not done so to an appreciable extent is testimony to the overall high quality of its design. Twelve years is a long time in the electronics world and the AR7030's longevity definitely says something! Frankly, I feel your comment is specious and a bit unworthy of you. Generally your comments are far more reasoned. The discussion here about filters is equally wrong - good filters of whatever kind, properly applied and used, will not "ring" on modern receivers. I think it almost goes without saying that anyone in the market for either of these two receivers, or even other receivers of their caliber, know how to use these radios and will know when to employ any given filter. It is true that DSP receivers can have a great many more filters than an analog receiver. And it's also true that any extra filters for the AR7030 'Plus" will need to be installed - but this is a very easy task to accomplish. See AOR-UK's web site for the exact information on how to do it. But it's like gears on a bicycle. Most riders use only a very few of the twenty-one or so gears available to them and I suspect that most users of good shortwave equipment use only a very few of the available filters (I generally use only three of my five available). This, of course, is in no way saying that the AR7030 'Plus' is superior or inferior to the ICOM IC-756 Pro III which, I am sure, is a fine piece of equipment. Either would probably satisfy the gentleman who originally started this post. What I, and I suspect he, would really like to see is a comparison of the two by someone who owns and uses both - with both in current configurations. The only thing I can definitely state is that the AOR AR7030 'Plus' - even configured with several options - will cost far less than the ICOM IC-756 Pro III and it will perform and will be constructed at least as well. And, frankly, I do not believe that the ICOM will have superior sound quality to the AOR; equivalent maybe - it's possible, of course - but I routinely run the AOR's audio through my sound system (with the aforementioned Klipschorns) and its sound must be heard to be believed. You ought to hear the Voice of Russia's "Jazz Show" this way. Even with an inexpensive external speaker (RCA Radio Shack Cat. # 40-5000 - $29.95) the AOR's sound is, in a word, amazing. In my almost fifty years of shortwave listening I have never heard better. Best, Joe RCA PRO-X33AV Speaker -Discontinued- RadioShack Cat # 40-5000 http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1327 http://support.radioshack.com/support_audio/54884.htm RCA Pro-X33AV 2-Way Die-Cast Mini Speaker RadioShack Cat # 400-5000 http://support.radioshack.com/suppor...oc60/60543.htm |
Analog versus DSP
wrote
Regarding ringing, the sharper the filter, the more it rings. You can't fight physics. I really annoys me how people think digital is the solution to everything without really understanding the nuances. You have obviously never worked a top line radio like the Icom IC-756 PRO III on CW with a narrow DSP filter. I assure you that even as narrow as 50 hertz THERE IS NO RINGING If you don't believe me I am quite prepared to e-mail anyone an MP3 recording of the 50 Hertz filter working a beacon. I also have many DX mates who work CW beacons and use Timewave DSP filters right down to 8 hertz and I have never heard them complain of ringing. John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods Drake SW8 & ERGO software Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100 BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A. Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270 Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whip http://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx |
Analog versus DSP
Excellent information! This has really helped me in my decision making
process. Right now I'm leaning towards the Icom, but I have a white paper on the 7030+ on order from the folks who publish Passport to World Band Radio, so I think I'll hold my final decision until I read it. In fact, if the review in the while paper is good, I might just invoke Jerry's Law: "If you can't decide between two choices, buy both!" |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:59 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com