|
SW PC receivers
Hi all,
Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. Does anyone have any experience with this radio? Is it better than, say, Icom or Winradio? And what about computer noise? Also, I'm in an apartment and would like some kind of antenna (active?). Which one would you recommend, and where to get it. I am not really a DIY person :) Thanks! |
Bill schrieb:
Hi all, Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. Does anyone have any experience with this radio? Is it better than, say, Icom or Winradio? As far as I've read, the RX-320 is pretty much the best shortwave rig in its class; no idea whether the Winradio G303i or G313i might beat it in terms of strong signal handling, though. And what about computer noise? Assuming the RX-320 is decently constructed, there shouldn't be any more such noise than with any other PC controlled receiver. The best place for an antenna is as far away from noise sources (including the PC) as possible, with coax lead-in. BTW the worst interference sources from my rig here are the ethernet switch (cheapie) and a front mounted (unshielded) case fan. Also, I'm in an apartment and would like some kind of antenna (active?). Particularly when having to use the PC for receiver operation, you want something outdoors. Stephan -- Meine Andere Seite: http://stephan.win31.de/ PC#6: i440BX, 1xP3-500E, 512 MiB, 18+80 GB, R9k AGP 64 MiB, 110W This is a SCSI-inside, Legacy-plus, TCPA-free computer :) Mail to From: not read, see homepg. | Real gelesene Mailadr. s. Homep. |
"Bill" wrote:
Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. (snip) I considered buying one of those types of shortwave receivers before. However, I changed my mind after weighing all the possible long term implications. A good, well-built, standalone receiver can be useful over many years. Indeed, among my radios, I have a twenty-five year old Kenwood that is still performing like a champ. A computer-based receiver, on the other hand, is clearly dependant on the computer for continued use. Given the speed in which computer technology advances and today's technology becomes obsolete, a computer-based receiver clearly has a limited lifespan. Further, after a lessor number of years, when a new OS has replaced the OS needed to operate the receiver's software, any resale value would be sharply reduced. Of course, one can hope the receiver's manufacturer will release new software as operating systems change, but even they will eventually drop this model with a newer receiver with support for older models eventually ended. I'm not trying to talk you out of buying that receiver (since I don't know you, I have no real interest in what you buy). Instead, I just wanted to add this to the general discussion of this newsgroup. Stewart |
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in
nk.net: "Bill" wrote: Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. (snip) I considered buying one of those types of shortwave receivers before. However, I changed my mind after weighing all the possible long term implications. A good, well-built, standalone receiver can be useful over many years. Indeed, among my radios, I have a twenty-five year old Kenwood that is still performing like a champ. A computer-based receiver, on the other hand, is clearly dependant on the computer for continued use. Given the speed in which computer technology advances and today's technology becomes obsolete, a computer-based receiver clearly has a limited lifespan. Further, after a lessor number of years, when a new OS has replaced the OS needed to operate the receiver's software, any resale value would be sharply reduced. Of course, one can hope the receiver's manufacturer will release new software as operating systems change, but even they will eventually drop this model with a newer receiver with support for older models eventually ended. I'm not trying to talk you out of buying that receiver (since I don't know you, I have no real interest in what you buy). Instead, I just wanted to add this to the general discussion of this newsgroup. Stewart I have a PCR-1000 here that will work on everything from Win95 to WinXp + Linux//Unix. At the very worst you can dedicate on "older" computer to the setup and keep it going indefinitely. There may be many reasons to choose a different type of receiver, but the chaning OS scene is certainly not one of them. Since most modern receivers also have serial ports on them, and are used with some form of computer connection, if only just for logging, your argument would also apply to them. Certainly these receivers have no more limited a life span than any other more conventional gear. Having been in the hobby for many years, about the only thing I don't like about the software controlled gear is the lack of a knob or two to twirl :) But that is generally made up for with the veratility of the equipment. e.g. I can listen to short wave and at the touch of button turn the PCR- 1000 into a trunk tracking scanner. There are not many receivers on the market that are capable of a similar feat. -- Panzer |
Panzer240 wrote: "Dwight Stewart" wrote in nk.net: "Bill" wrote: Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. (snip) I considered buying one of those types of shortwave receivers before. However, I changed my mind after weighing all the possible long term implications. A good, well-built, standalone receiver can be useful over many years. Indeed, among my radios, I have a twenty-five year old Kenwood that is still performing like a champ. A computer-based receiver, on the other hand, is clearly dependant on the computer for continued use. Given the speed in which computer technology advances and today's technology becomes obsolete, a computer-based receiver clearly has a limited lifespan. Further, after a lessor number of years, when a new OS has replaced the OS needed to operate the receiver's software, any resale value would be sharply reduced. Of course, one can hope the receiver's manufacturer will release new software as operating systems change, but even they will eventually drop this model with a newer receiver with support for older models eventually ended. I'm not trying to talk you out of buying that receiver (since I don't know you, I have no real interest in what you buy). Instead, I just wanted to add this to the general discussion of this newsgroup. Stewart I have a PCR-1000 here that will work on everything from Win95 to WinXp + Linux//Unix. At the very worst you can dedicate on "older" computer to the setup and keep it going indefinitely. There may be many reasons to choose a different type of receiver, but the chaning OS scene is certainly not one of them. Since most modern receivers also have serial ports on them, and are used with some form of computer connection, if only just for logging, your argument would also apply to them. Certainly these receivers have no more limited a life span than any other more conventional gear. Having been in the hobby for many years, about the only thing I don't like about the software controlled gear is the lack of a knob or two to twirl :) But that is generally made up for with the veratility of the equipment. e.g. I can listen to short wave and at the touch of button turn the PCR- 1000 into a trunk tracking scanner. There are not many receivers on the market that are capable of a similar feat. Wideband receivers (whether they be PC controlled or not) are notorious for being overall poor performers. dxAce |
Panzer240 wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in nk.net: "Bill" wrote: Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. (snip) I considered buying one of those types of shortwave receivers before. However, I changed my mind after weighing all the possible long term implications. A good, well-built, standalone receiver can be useful over many years. Indeed, among my radios, I have a twenty-five year old Kenwood that is still performing like a champ. A computer-based receiver, on the other hand, is clearly dependant on the computer for continued use. Given the speed in which computer technology advances and today's technology becomes obsolete, a computer-based receiver clearly has a limited lifespan. Further, after a lessor number of years, when a new OS has replaced the OS needed to operate the receiver's software, any resale value would be sharply reduced. Of course, one can hope the receiver's manufacturer will release new software as operating systems change, but even they will eventually drop this model with a newer receiver with support for older models eventually ended. I'm not trying to talk you out of buying that receiver (since I don't know you, I have no real interest in what you buy). Instead, I just wanted to add this to the general discussion of this newsgroup. Stewart I have a PCR-1000 here that will work on everything from Win95 to WinXp + Linux//Unix. At the very worst you can dedicate on "older" computer to the setup and keep it going indefinitely. There may be many reasons to choose a different type of receiver, but the chaning OS scene is certainly not one of them. Since most modern receivers also have serial ports on them, and are used with some form of computer connection, if only just for logging, your argument would also apply to them. Certainly these receivers have no more limited a life span than any other more conventional gear. Having been in the hobby for many years, about the only thing I don't like about the software controlled gear is the lack of a knob or two to twirl :) But that is generally made up for with the veratility of the equipment. e.g. I can listen to short wave and at the touch of button turn the PCR- 1000 into a trunk tracking scanner. There are not many receivers on the market that are capable of a similar feat. -- Panzer Some PC based radios will be easier than others to keep going as computers and operating systems change. I'd be concerned about receivers that come on internal cards - because keeping an old computer running eventually becomes impractical. Can you still buy a new hard drive for an XT? But I do still have a 1976 Polymorphic Systems 8813 with three single sided hard sectored floppy drives and a whopping 56k of ram, and I suppose it could run some of the pc based radios if I wrote the software myself. |
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:23:57 -0400, dxAce wrote:
Panzer240 wrote: "Dwight Stewart" wrote in nk.net: "Bill" wrote: Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. (snip) I considered buying one of those types of shortwave receivers before. However, I changed my mind after weighing all the possible long term implications. A good, well-built, standalone receiver can be useful over many years. Indeed, among my radios, I have a twenty-five year old Kenwood that is still performing like a champ. A computer-based receiver, on the other hand, is clearly dependant on the computer for continued use. Given the speed in which computer technology advances and today's technology becomes obsolete, a computer-based receiver clearly has a limited lifespan. Further, after a lessor number of years, when a new OS has replaced the OS needed to operate the receiver's software, any resale value would be sharply reduced. Of course, one can hope the receiver's manufacturer will release new software as operating systems change, but even they will eventually drop this model with a newer receiver with support for older models eventually ended. I'm not trying to talk you out of buying that receiver (since I don't know you, I have no real interest in what you buy). Instead, I just wanted to add this to the general discussion of this newsgroup. Stewart I have a PCR-1000 here that will work on everything from Win95 to WinXp + Linux//Unix. At the very worst you can dedicate on "older" computer to the setup and keep it going indefinitely. There may be many reasons to choose a different type of receiver, but the chaning OS scene is certainly not one of them. Since most modern receivers also have serial ports on them, and are used with some form of computer connection, if only just for logging, your argument would also apply to them. Certainly these receivers have no more limited a life span than any other more conventional gear. Having been in the hobby for many years, about the only thing I don't like about the software controlled gear is the lack of a knob or two to twirl :) But that is generally made up for with the veratility of the equipment. e.g. I can listen to short wave and at the touch of button turn the PCR- 1000 into a trunk tracking scanner. There are not many receivers on the market that are capable of a similar feat. Wideband receivers (whether they be PC controlled or not) are notorious for being overall poor performers. dxAce True, they typically are. The original poster was looking at the Ten Tec RX320 though and that model is strictly HF. I have seen so many positive reviews of this radio; even by folks with very nice Drake, Racal et al tabletop radios; that I too strongly considered it. The only drawback for me was that it is tied to the computer and I wanted portability. Howard |
I would tend to disagree about the RX320 not being a DX machine.
I've gotten my fair share of good stuff on this radio; over the last couple of nights, for example, AIR Bangalore's regional service on 10330 has been doing quite well here in Maryland. I've often caught smaller LA stations using the 320. Almost anything my venerable R7A can hear, my RX320 can, too. The only limiting factor is, of course, hash from the monitor and/or computer. And to add to the data here, I'm using homebrewed antennas in my attic. It's a matter of skill, too. Regarding software; we've got a nice collection of links with all sorts of controller programs, mods, reviews - and there's even a link with a *huge* assortment of digital decoding software for those that like to get into that sort of thing. All that can be found on the RX320's Yahoo group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RX320/ 73s Mike Gavin Jacobs wrote: In article , says... Hi all, Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. Does anyone have any experience with this radio? Is it better than, say, Icom or Winradio? And what about computer noise? Also, I'm in an apartment and would like some kind of antenna (active?). Which one would you recommend, and where to get it. I am not really a DIY person :) Thanks! I have the RX320D and use it quite a bit. It is not a DX machine by any stretch, but it will handle a lot of spelunking nicely. The connection from the radio to the computer is a serial cable (and in my case an audio cable to play the audio through the computer, which in turn goes to the stereo amp). Using the supplied whip, you do pick up noise from the computer, but not because of the serial cable nor the audio cable. With a standalone radio, you could just shut the computer off; but the noise is hardly noticeable, and any other antenna (indoor or outdoor) will negate any issue. I agree with comment about not getting an internal card radio. Too much noise inside the best of the computer boxes. Also, they are much more expensive. At some point your new computer will come without a serial port; then you will need to buy either a USB to serial converter, or a serial card. Both these will be low risk and low cost compared to trying to make a card-radio work. Regarding software for the 320d: I paid extra for the radio/software package from a third party, but that turned out to be the wrong decision. Just buy the box from tentec, throw out the software that they supply, and use the freeware from: http://www.ilgradio.com/gnpdb/ While you are there, get the GNDB front-end and the ILG database; and the two programs work together very nicely. Also, you can get a freeware program that will decode DRM signals. I messed around with it and on the few occasions that the signal (from Sackville on the the east coast of Canada) was strong enough, the digital signal really delivered high quality. Also, you can get freeware DSP programs. So if you are feeding the audio through the sound card (as I am), you can shape the audio however you like (for example, I was once getting a lot of noise above 3khz on BBC, so I just put a low pass filter on it and was able to hear a signal that was otherwise unintelligible). I will admit that I am a computer nut, so this radio makes perfect sense for me; but it isn't for everyone. It isn't a portable rig by any stretch of the imagination (when I am on the road, I just use DXTUNERS). Hope that helps, Gavin |
In article , Stephan Grossklass
writes: Also, I'm in an apartment and would like some kind of antenna (active?). Particularly when having to use the PC for receiver operation, you want something outdoors. Try this... ! Outdoor antenna for Apartment Dwellers . .. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MATERIALS Some Stranded, Insulated copper wire from Radio shack Colors so it matches the bricks / outside of your building Some stick-on Cord holders One tube clear Silicone sealer glue One black magic marker One Rusty red magic marker A roll of Duct tape color of outside of apt. One Mop One piece of twine or string. One Small soft edged weight. PROCEDU See how far it is in between two windows of your Apt.. Measure out a piece of string this distance + ~ 6 - 8 feet. Attach a small soft edged weight to it. ( Look Outside to see no one is looking !! ) Secure curious household pets Open Both Windows. Insert mop part way out one] Close that window to secure mop handle Run over to the other window QUICK! Take the twine with the weight on it & (without risking life & limb) Toss the string over the mop sticking out the other window. Secure the end of that end of the string with a bit of slack Close that window Run over to the other window with the mop that has the twine handing down off it Pull the mop in Close the window. ( Breath deeply ) NOW.... Attach the stranded wire to the end of the string. Slightly open window Run over to the oher window. Open it & pull in string until wire / string connection is through.. Pull in enough so that wire will reach SWR Attach wire to SWR. Close window. - That's basically it. Modify as needed. You can take Square stick -on cord holders Camouflage them with magic Marker color , & Silicone glue them to the outside corners of the window, Then loop more wire ( DONT FALL OUT WHEN DOING THIS !!) around the cord holders. This makes the antenna longer. repeat for other windows..This should help lots.. ( Works for me !!) |
Gavin Jacobs wrote:
In article , says... Hi all, Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. Does anyone have any experience with this radio? Is it better than, say, Icom or Winradio? And what about computer noise? Also, I'm in an apartment and would like some kind of antenna (active?). Which one would you recommend, and where to get it. I am not really a DIY person :) Thanks! [...] I agree with comment about not getting an internal card radio. Too much noise inside the best of the computer boxes. Also, they are much more expensive. At some point your new computer will come without a serial port; then you will need to buy either a USB to serial converter, or a serial card. Both these will be low risk and low cost compared to trying to make a card-radio work. While I agree with the caveats above, it depends on your goals. The WinRadio G303i is an SDR, which allows you to do a lot of interesting hacks, should you want to. The API is published. Eventually I hope the register set for the card is published, so an open-source Linux driver for it can be developed. As for its performance as an HF receiver... It's astounding. NO noise leakage from the PC at all, and it has features many other receivers don't. I've thoroughly enjoyed mine. If you get one, be sure to get the "Professional Demodulator" version -- the extra $100 for that software is worth it, just for the continuous bandwidth adjustments. Now, if you aren't interested in a PCI-based receiver, which, granted *will* have a limited lifetime, the RX-320 is well regarded. I don't have that one so I can't speak for it, pro or con. You might want to pick up a copy of "Passport to World Band Radio" to see the reviews of the two receivers. Regards, Eric -- Eric F. Richards, "Making me root for a sanctimonious statist blowhard like Kerry isn't the worst thing Bush has done to the country. But it's the offense that I take most personally." -- http://www.reason.com/links/links071304.shtml |
"Panzer240" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote: I considered buying one of those types of shortwave receivers before. However, I changed my mind after weighing all the possible long term implications. (snip) I have a PCR-1000 here that will work on everything from Win95 to WinXp + Linux/ Unix. At the very worst you can dedicate on "older" computer to the setup and keep it going indefinitely. There may be many reasons to choose a different type of receiver, but the chaning OS scene is certainly not one of them. (snip) Perhaps I'm just a little oversensitive to the idea because of all the computer hardware and software that has become obsolete over the years - millions and millions of tons of still working but obsolete computers, printers, and peripherals, dumped into landfills throughout the country. Stewart |
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in news:8kHLc.8943
: Perhaps I'm just a little oversensitive to the idea because of all the computer hardware and software that has become obsolete over the years - millions and millions of tons of still working but obsolete computers, printers, and peripherals, dumped into landfills throughout the country. Stewart Heheheh I'm still using 486DX-66 's here to build cheap and dirty routers using KA9Q's old gateway (dos based) software ;) They are cheap and easy to build and require no HD, just two NIC's and a floppy disk drive. Lots go to the dump, very true, but there are enough of them around and at fire sale prices that you could keep the current PC controlled radios running almost indefinitely. -- Panzer |
Dwight Stewart wrote:
Perhaps I'm just a little oversensitive to the idea because of all the computer hardware and software that has become obsolete over the years - millions and millions of tons of still working but obsolete computers, printers, and peripherals, dumped into landfills throughout the country. Stewart Computer hardware recycling is becoming a lucrative business. You'd be surprised at how much gold they can get out of one. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/7/prweb142436.htm -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:59:26 +0200, Bill
wrote: Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. Does anyone have any experience with this radio? Is it better than, say, Icom or Winradio? And what about computer noise? Also, I'm in an apartment and would like some kind of antenna (active?). Which one would you recommend, and where to get it. I am not really a DIY person :) Thanks for the replies, all! Anyone have anything to say about the Winradio G303? It seems even better than the RX320D and the Icom. Though more expensive and internal (but well-shielded, I heard). |
Bill wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:59:26 +0200, Bill wrote: Having done some DX'ing with a small Sony SW radio for ten years, I would like to buy a better one, connected to the pc. I was thinking of the Ten-Tech RX320D. Does anyone have any experience with this radio? Is it better than, say, Icom or Winradio? And what about computer noise? Also, I'm in an apartment and would like some kind of antenna (active?). Which one would you recommend, and where to get it. I am not really a DIY person :) Thanks for the replies, all! Anyone have anything to say about the Winradio G303? It seems even better than the RX320D and the Icom. Though more expensive and internal (but well-shielded, I heard). Yeah, up there earlier. :-) It's a terrific radio for the money. Actually, it's a terrific radio, period. It is extremely well shielded -- I get NO noise at all. If you get one, get the Professional demodulator -- it's worth the extra $100 just to get continuous variable bandwidth. The spectrum scope is actually useful, unlike most built-in spectrum scopes. The filtering, since it is implemented in software and therefore doesn't have all the inevitable interactions that actual hardware has, is great. (Yes, sloppy filtering can be done in software, but that's not the case here.) There are, of course, disadvantages to using a radio that used both your sound card input and a free PCI slot, plus is unable to be moved around freely like a standalone radio, but if those issues aren't a big deal for you, go for it. Eric -- Eric F. Richards, "Making me root for a sanctimonious statist blowhard like Kerry isn't the worst thing Bush has done to the country. But it's the offense that I take most personally." -- http://www.reason.com/links/links071304.shtml |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:58 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com