Gregg wrote:


Hey Michael, I'll just add that I don't really feel the same way as
you when you say "the old radios were lousy" or even your last
sentence. Though no doubt, there are pluses to the digital radios - if
it's really that big a deal - you can take care of that - not the
presets of course but having a digital next to you if it's that big a
deal to check the bands would suffice.

The only draw back IMO to my HQ129X was the lack of a digital readout.
I took care of that by having one added on and that was solved. IMO
much of having a specific receiver is how much skill you have in your
particular piece. I got to use the R75 for a little bit with a friend,
I had never used one before and he had never used the 129X with the
added on Q Multiplier...this was before I had the freq counter added
on.

There was nothing he heard on his piece (different antenna) that I
couldn't hear and even he said he liked the audio better on the
Hammarlund. There were two BCB stations though, don't remember what
they were specifically but one was on the most eastern part of
Oklahoma that he couldn't pickup on his receiver that I could on mine.
How much of it was that he only had been in the hobby for maybe a year
and a half and had the Icom for 6-7 months? I don't know. I just
wanted to see if the noise floor on that particular piece was lower
than mine, unfortunately I didn't get to test drive it to find out.

In closing, I really think it helps if you have your receiver
mastered, and I do with my Hammarlunds - specifically the 129X.
Gregg, I couldn't have said it better myself! Digital is nice with all the
bells and whistles, but I'm sure even John Plimmer would say that it is the
antenna and the operator that make up over 90% of the listening and DX'ing!
Are you in OK? I am originally from OKC, mother, brother, daughter(and now
granddaughter) son and step-father live in Midwest City. Oh, the days in my
old room with that Sears bought S-120!