Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver. It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Bill Crocker

Bill Crocker wrote:
Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver.
It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Bill Crocker

I had one for over a year, it had the optional remote keypad and the
latest V1.15 software update. I thought it was a good receiver,
sensitive, lots of bandwidth choices (34 I think), good audio, good
agc, decent synchronous detector if properly used. The only reason I
sold mine was to buy a Ten Tec RX-340. I actually ran them side by side
for over a month before selling the 350D, not a whole lot of difference
between the two receivers imho. I think the biggest gripe most owners
have about it is the seemingly indifference by Ten Tec to updates on
the software which has a couple of minor (IMHO) bugs.

Les Locklear

I think that most of the 340 owners out there would think you are crazy if
you say they are similar receivers ("not a whole lot of difference")! I know
my friend Dean would groan if I told him what you said !







"Les" wrote in message
oups.com...

Bill Crocker wrote:
Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver.
It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Bill Crocker

I had one for over a year, it had the optional remote keypad and the
latest V1.15 software update. I thought it was a good receiver,
sensitive, lots of bandwidth choices (34 I think), good audio, good
agc, decent synchronous detector if properly used. The only reason I
sold mine was to buy a Ten Tec RX-340. I actually ran them side by side
for over a month before selling the 350D, not a whole lot of difference
between the two receivers imho. I think the biggest gripe most owners
have about it is the seemingly indifference by Ten Tec to updates on
the software which has a couple of minor (IMHO) bugs.

Les Locklear

I think that most of the 340 owners out there would think you are crazy
if
you say they are similar receivers ("not a whole lot of difference")! I
know
my friend Dean would groan if I told him what you said !



"Les" wrote in message


oups.com...


- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Bill Crocker wrote:
Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver.
It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.


Thanks in advance for your input.


Bill Crocker


I had one for over a year, it had the optional remote keypad and the
latest V1.15 software update. I thought it was a good receiver,
sensitive, lots of bandwidth choices (34 I think), good audio, good
agc, decent synchronous detector if properly used. The only reason I
sold mine was to buy a Ten Tec RX-340. I actually ran them side by
side
for over a month before selling the 350D, not a whole lot of
difference
between the two receivers imho. I think the biggest gripe most owners

have about it is the seemingly indifference by Ten Tec to updates on
the software which has a couple of minor (IMHO) bugs.


Les Locklear

Well, they both heard the same signals, both had decent audio, both
were "dead on" as far as frequency readout. Sure the 340 has 58
bandwidths vs, 34 for the 350D. Yes, the 340 has a better synchronous
detector. But, the 350D has a better noise reduction and blanking
system. It's not like I just started using receivers Mike, I'm 62 years
old and have owned more receivers than some small dealers have sold.
I'm just relating my experiences with the two receivers. I have an
extensive antenna system and a real good multicoupler, so it was an
equal test imho.

Les

Les

well then everyone should be buying a 350 and saving $2500.

if they were so close, what was worth the extra $2500. that is a lot to pay
for one feature

My friend Dean is pretty much an authority on the 340 and says the sync is
not that good.


"Les" wrote in message
oups.com...
I think that most of the 340 owners out there would think you are crazy
if
you say they are similar receivers ("not a whole lot of difference")! I
know
my friend Dean would groan if I told him what you said !



"Les" wrote in message


oups.com...


- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Bill Crocker wrote:
Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver.
It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.


Thanks in advance for your input.


Bill Crocker


I had one for over a year, it had the optional remote keypad and the
latest V1.15 software update. I thought it was a good receiver,
sensitive, lots of bandwidth choices (34 I think), good audio, good
agc, decent synchronous detector if properly used. The only reason I
sold mine was to buy a Ten Tec RX-340. I actually ran them side by
side
for over a month before selling the 350D, not a whole lot of
difference
between the two receivers imho. I think the biggest gripe most owners

have about it is the seemingly indifference by Ten Tec to updates on
the software which has a couple of minor (IMHO) bugs.


Les Locklear

Well, they both heard the same signals, both had decent audio, both
were "dead on" as far as frequency readout. Sure the 340 has 58
bandwidths vs, 34 for the 350D. Yes, the 340 has a better synchronous
detector. But, the 350D has a better noise reduction and blanking
system. It's not like I just started using receivers Mike, I'm 62 years
old and have owned more receivers than some small dealers have sold.
I'm just relating my experiences with the two receivers. I have an
extensive antenna system and a real good multicoupler, so it was an
equal test imho.

Les

Les

In article ,
"mike maghakian" wrote:

well then everyone should be buying a 350 and saving $2500.

if they were so close, what was worth the extra $2500. that is a lot
to pay for one feature

My friend Dean is pretty much an authority on the 340 and says the
sync is not that good.


"Les" wrote in message
oups.com...
I think that most of the 340 owners out there would think you are
crazy if you say they are similar receivers ("not a whole lot of
difference")! I know my friend Dean would groan if I told him what
you said !


"Les" wrote in message


oups.com...


- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -

Bill Crocker wrote: Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's
RX-350D HF receiver. It's very expensive, and it doesn't appear to
be in wide use.


Thanks in advance for your input.


Bill Crocker


I had one for over a year, it had the optional remote keypad and
the latest V1.15 software update. I thought it was a good
receiver, sensitive, lots of bandwidth choices (34 I think), good
audio, good agc, decent synchronous detector if properly used. The
only reason I sold mine was to buy a Ten Tec RX-340. I actually
ran them side by side for over a month before selling the 350D,
not a whole lot of difference between the two receivers imho. I
think the biggest gripe most owners have about it is the seemingly
indifference by Ten Tec to updates on the software which has a
couple of minor (IMHO) bugs.


Les Locklear

Well, they both heard the same signals, both had decent audio, both
were "dead on" as far as frequency readout. Sure the 340 has 58
bandwidths vs, 34 for the 350D. Yes, the 340 has a better
synchronous detector. But, the 350D has a better noise reduction
and blanking system. It's not like I just started using receivers
Mike, I'm 62 years old and have owned more receivers than some
small dealers have sold. I'm just relating my experiences with the
two receivers. I have an extensive antenna system and a real good
multicoupler, so it was an equal test imho.


Can you define "the sync is not that good" a little better?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

read these reviews of the RX-340, I don't think that they would say the 350
and 340 are about the same/////////

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/3757

for that matter, read Magnes reviews, I don't think he would say they are
similar either........




"Les" wrote in message
oups.com...

Bill Crocker wrote:
Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver.
It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Bill Crocker

I had one for over a year, it had the optional remote keypad and the
latest V1.15 software update. I thought it was a good receiver,
sensitive, lots of bandwidth choices (34 I think), good audio, good
agc, decent synchronous detector if properly used. The only reason I
sold mine was to buy a Ten Tec RX-340. I actually ran them side by side
for over a month before selling the 350D, not a whole lot of difference
between the two receivers imho. I think the biggest gripe most owners
have about it is the seemingly indifference by Ten Tec to updates on
the software which has a couple of minor (IMHO) bugs.

Les Locklear

mike maghakian wrote:
read these reviews of the RX-340, I don't think that they would say
the 350
and 340 are about the same/////////

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/3757

for that matter, read Magnes reviews, I don't think he would say they
are
similar either........




"Les" wrote in message
oups.com...

Bill Crocker wrote:
Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver.
It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Bill Crocker

I had one for over a year, it had the optional remote keypad and
the
latest V1.15 software update. I thought it was a good receiver,
sensitive, lots of bandwidth choices (34 I think), good audio, good
agc, decent synchronous detector if properly used. The only reason
I
sold mine was to buy a Ten Tec RX-340. I actually ran them side by
side
for over a month before selling the 350D, not a whole lot of
difference
between the two receivers imho. I think the biggest gripe most
owners
have about it is the seemingly indifference by Ten Tec to updates
on
the software which has a couple of minor (IMHO) bugs.

Les Locklear


Opinions are like assholes Mike, everyone has one and lots of them
stink. I operated both receiver side by side and i stated my opinion.
Magne isn't the end all for receiver reviews ya know.

I know you had a bad experience and seem to have a hard on for Ten Tec.
That is your opinion and right.

Mine differed from yours.

Les

On Wed, 4 May 2005 16:28:35 -0400, "Bill Crocker"
wrote:

Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver. It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Bill Crocker

Had one... way overpriced- suffered from image problems.
Sent it back for a refund.

wrote:
On Wed, 4 May 2005 16:28:35 -0400, "Bill Crocker"
wrote:

Interested in hearing opinions on Ten-Tec's RX-350D HF receiver.
It's very
expensive, and it doesn't appear to be in wide use.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Bill Crocker

Had one... way overpriced- suffered from image problems.
Sent it back for a refund.

That problem was corrected, they made a low pass filter available at no
charge to owners of older RX-350's.

Les