|
David wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:08:37 -0400, "Michael" wrote: "mike maghakian" wrote in message ... For the category of SWBC listening and DXing, the satellit 800 is a far superior product, really there is no comparison 1) better sound 2) better selectivity in the stock versions 3) FAR better sync detector, even if it is a fixed version ! Your saying the Sat 800 is a better radio then the R-75 for DX'ing ??? "Medication time" Michael ''Listener fatigue'' is a factor in some kinds of DXing. This is the first thing I have EVER seen you post that is both relevent and accurate. Thank you. Please, keep it up. This may be a flame-fest, but it's on topic. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 |
"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hmmm,,,, thats odd as I have a combo AM - FM radio station almost literally in my back yard. The stations antennas are maybe 750-800' from my antenna and I have never had any image problems at all. I'm sure there is a birdie or 2 somewhere throughout the bands but I have never noticed any of those either. I listen to ute's and amateur 99% of the time and find the R 75 does very well for this. ( I do use a seperate speaker as the internal one sucks) but that is my biggest complaint. Jeff |
Honestly, I don't have an IC-R75 to compare with my
Sat 800, but if I were going for purely DX machine, I'd seriously look into an R-5000, R8/R8A/R8B or an NRD-525/NRD-535. Nothing against the R75, but if the sync is that bad as is believed, I'd rather go for either a better one (Drake's) or none at all (JRC or Kenwood). That said, I stick with my Sat 800 for listening right now because it's price point is pretty darn good for what you get. That and I can't really spend any more money on my shack right now, too. --Mike L. "mike maghakian" wrote in message ... this is not a troll this is FACT what it takes you half an hour to do with an R75, I can do in 5 seconds with a satellit 800, and it would probably still be better. I have owned several R75's with different configurations so I KNOW what I am talking about. and the fixed SYNC on the 75 is still pathetic compared to the 800. FACT NOW I DID SAY SWBC, the 800 is a bit handicapped for code/RTTY etc where really tight selectivity is needed. but for AM mode, the 800 is unbeatable, this is FACT "Michael" wrote in message ... "mike maghakian" wrote in message ... For the category of SWBC listening and DXing, the satellit 800 is a far superior product, really there is no comparison 1) better sound 2) better selectivity in the stock versions 3) FAR better sync detector, even if it is a fixed version ! Your saying the Sat 800 is a better radio then the R-75 for DX'ing ??? "Medication time" Michael |
Michael Lawson wrote:
Honestly, I don't have an IC-R75 to compare with my Sat 800, but if I were going for purely DX machine, I'd seriously look into an R-5000, R8/R8A/R8B or an NRD-525/NRD-535. Nothing against the R75, but if the sync is that bad as is believed, I'd rather go for either a better one (Drake's) or none at all (JRC or Kenwood). The sync on R-75 works. And works quite well, when it's applied according to directions. It is, however more than a bit fiddly. And most users have neither the patience, nor the inclination to apply it according to instructions. I had no problems with the sync in the R-75's I've used. But it was more work to get them to do what I expected than other designs. Not everything is going to be a Drake design. Still, this one is less than as user friendly as current technology permits. That said, I stick with my Sat 800 for listening right now because it's price point is pretty darn good for what you get. That and I can't really spend any more money on my shack right now, too. --Mike L. "mike maghakian" wrote in message ... this is not a troll this is FACT what it takes you half an hour to do with an R75, I can do in 5 seconds with a satellit 800, and it would probably still be better. I have owned several R75's with different configurations so I KNOW what I am talking about. and the fixed SYNC on the 75 is still pathetic compared to the 800. FACT NOW I DID SAY SWBC, the 800 is a bit handicapped for code/RTTY etc where really tight selectivity is needed. but for AM mode, the 800 is unbeatable, this is FACT "Michael" wrote in message ... "mike maghakian" wrote in message ... For the category of SWBC listening and DXing, the satellit 800 is a far superior product, really there is no comparison 1) better sound 2) better selectivity in the stock versions 3) FAR better sync detector, even if it is a fixed version ! Your saying the Sat 800 is a better radio then the R-75 for DX'ing ??? "Medication time" Michael |
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Michael Lawson wrote: Honestly, I don't have an IC-R75 to compare with my Sat 800, but if I were going for purely DX machine, I'd seriously look into an R-5000, R8/R8A/R8B or an NRD-525/NRD-535. Nothing against the R75, but if the sync is that bad as is believed, I'd rather go for either a better one (Drake's) or none at all (JRC or Kenwood). The sync on R-75 works. And works quite well, when it's applied according to directions. It is, however more than a bit fiddly. And most users have neither the patience, nor the inclination to apply it according to instructions. I had no problems with the sync in the R-75's I've used. But it was more work to get them to do what I expected than other designs. I take it that it's a bit more than simply push the button, then?? What has to be done to make the sync work, Peter?? Not everything is going to be a Drake design. Still, this one is less than as user friendly as current technology permits. I'm just disappointed that Sony has never followed up on their own sync with a model geared more toward serious DXing than the 2010. The 2010 was a trendsetter, but it was also the high water mark of Sony SW portables, too. --Mike L. |
Michael Lawson wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Michael Lawson wrote: Honestly, I don't have an IC-R75 to compare with my Sat 800, but if I were going for purely DX machine, I'd seriously look into an R-5000, R8/R8A/R8B or an NRD-525/NRD-535. Nothing against the R75, but if the sync is that bad as is believed, I'd rather go for either a better one (Drake's) or none at all (JRC or Kenwood). The sync on R-75 works. And works quite well, when it's applied according to directions. It is, however more than a bit fiddly. And most users have neither the patience, nor the inclination to apply it according to instructions. I had no problems with the sync in the R-75's I've used. But it was more work to get them to do what I expected than other designs. I take it that it's a bit more than simply push the button, then?? What has to be done to make the sync work, Peter?? Yes, it's more than simply pushing a button. It's been a number of years since I've used one, but as I recall, there were some gain adjustments, and filter selections. Once dialed in, sync worked fine. There are some specific parameters that need to be addressed when using sync on RX-350, too. But if you're attentive to the details, it, too, works as promised. The best sync I've used to date is on AR-7030+. Dials itself in and stays locked through the deepest fades. Second is sync on HF-150. I have a Drake. SW-2. Sync is fine, but more prone to losing lock than the AOR. For the record, I'm not as passionate about synchronous detection as some here. It's a tool, nothing more. It doesn't cure cancer, ingrown toenails, or receding hairlines. And it's not worth starting a religion over. It's a tool for reception of radio signals. AM Stereo uses it, too. In fact, that's where the Drake sync detector came from. I use it rarely. Mostly I rely on a good set of filters, a comprehensive ground, and an antenna that can suck the pubic hairs from between your teeth. Nothing replaces good basics. Not everything is going to be a Drake design. Still, this one is less than as user friendly as current technology permits. I'm just disappointed that Sony has never followed up on their own sync with a model geared more toward serious DXing than the 2010. The 2010 was a trendsetter, but it was also the high water mark of Sony SW portables, too. --Mike L. |
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 21:13:56 GMT, D Peter Maus
wrote: snip Yes, it's more than simply pushing a button. It's been a number of years since I've used one, but as I recall, there were some gain adjustments, and filter selections. Once dialed in, sync worked fine. What I've found that helps is to reduce the RF gain and to set the AGC to fast and often going to the wider filters helps. There are some specific parameters that need to be addressed when using sync on RX-350, too. But if you're attentive to the details, it, too, works as promised. The best sync I've used to date is on AR-7030+. Dials itself in and stays locked through the deepest fades. Second is sync on HF-150. I have a Drake. SW-2. Sync is fine, but more prone to losing lock than the AOR. For the record, I'm not as passionate about synchronous detection as some here. It's a tool, nothing more. It doesn't cure cancer, ingrown toenails, or receding hairlines. And it's not worth starting a religion over. It's a tool for reception of radio signals. AM Stereo uses it, too. In fact, that's where the Drake sync detector came from. Well I beg to differ, since acquiring a Sony 7600 and later the R75 - both with sync detection - I've not had a single ingrown toenail !! Unfortunately I bought them after the hairline receded. I use it rarely. Mostly I rely on a good set of filters, a comprehensive ground, and an antenna that can suck the pubic hairs from between your teeth. Nothing replaces good basics. Agreed! I seldom use synch either - perhaps if I had a radio with the famed Sherwood synch detector or a Drake I would find it more useful. In any case, yes it is just another tool. It reminds me of the saying "if your only tool is a hammer - all of your problems look like nails." There are more tools than synch and it pays to gain familiarity with what they do and when to apply them. As to R-75 status - I think they're still around due to the existing stock supply not because of Icom deciding to continue production. That opinion, and $2.00 US will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Howard |
"Michael Lawson" wrote:
Honestly, I don't have an IC-R75 to compare with my Sat 800, but if I were going for purely DX machine, I'd seriously look into an R-5000, R8/R8A/R8B or an NRD-525/NRD-535. Nothing against the R75, but if the sync is that bad as is believed, I'd rather go for either a better one (Drake's) or none at all (JRC or Kenwood). That said, I stick with my Sat 800 for listening right now because it's price point is pretty darn good for what you get. That and I can't really spend any more money on my shack right now, too. Well, I can't argue with the money issue. Fortunately, all the radios I use now are *very* listenable -- the R8500 is very un-ICOM-like in that regard, and a good ear for music is a nuisance when dealing with a DSP that introduces monkey chatter. (The R75's doesn't, but the '545 is supposed to have monkey chatter problems and the Timewave external is downright painful if given a signal with audio above 3 kHz.) Current radios I have are R8500x2, WR G303i, Ten-Tex RX340, Collins R392. Past radios have been R75, FRG-100, FRG-7, HF-150. --Mike L. "mike maghakian" wrote in message ... this is not a troll this is FACT what it takes you half an hour to do with an R75, I can do in 5 seconds with a satellit 800, and it would probably still be better. I have owned several R75's with different configurations so I KNOW what I am talking about. and the fixed SYNC on the 75 is still pathetic compared to the 800. FACT NOW I DID SAY SWBC, the 800 is a bit handicapped for code/RTTY etc where really tight selectivity is needed. but for AM mode, the 800 is unbeatable, this is FACT "Michael" wrote in message ... "mike maghakian" wrote in message ... For the category of SWBC listening and DXing, the satellit 800 is a far superior product, really there is no comparison 1) better sound 2) better selectivity in the stock versions 3) FAR better sync detector, even if it is a fixed version ! Your saying the Sat 800 is a better radio then the R-75 for DX'ing ??? "Medication time" Michael -- Eric F. Richards "The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed." - Dilbert |
D Peter Maus wrote:
For the record, I'm not as passionate about synchronous detection as some here. It's a tool, nothing more. It is how I feel as well. It doesn't cure cancer, No problem... ingrown toenails, No problem... or receding hairlines. ....rats. I use it rarely. Mostly I rely on a good set of filters, a comprehensive ground, and an antenna that can suck the pubic hairs from between your teeth. Nothing replaces good basics. Amen. I agree with that last sentence wholeheartedly. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 |
"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Lucky |
Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. Isn't the 2nd pre-amp really meant for use up in the 50-54 MHz range? How in the freaken world can you argue this point? It's an ICOM... so it's very easy to argue the point! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
Lucky wrote:
"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Lucky |
"Lucky" wrote:
"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... [...] Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. [...] I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. [...] Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. [...] Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. You can't read, can you? Try again. slowly. For. The. Money. It. Is. A. Good. Value. (rolls eyes) -- Eric F. Richards "...there are moments (as when Gore speaks... slowly... and... heavily.... to... grown... men... and... women... so... that... you'd... swear... he... was... trying... to... explain... Wittgenstein... to... three... year... olds) when you have the disconcerting thought that the vice president may come from Mars." Lance Morrow, http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/...rrow7_21.a.tm/ |
Hi, Peter,
D Peter Maus wrote: Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Thank you for clearly articulating what I could not. That's what I get for posting when in a crummy mood, I suppose. Unfortunately, the only fix for *my* issue with the R75 would have been a seriously good manual preselector. Since the CI-V computer info could have continuously updated external gear, one could conceive of an electronic tracking preselctor, but at a cost several times that of the '75 itself. ....kinda like starting with a Cessna 150 with the goal of making a supersonic jet from the airframe... -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 |
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Michael Lawson wrote: I keep telling myself that an R-5000 is just as good. More or less, it is. Okay, Peter, I'm curious. What do you think of the R71A vs. the R-5000?? Some year I'm going to spring for one of them or one of the R8/R8A/R8B's (depending on price point used). Since you were in lurk mode when the last discussion on that happened, what's your opinion?? --Mike L. |
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Lucky Hi Peter I'm happy with my R75 just the way it is. I added a pair of 2.8's {9mhz and 455Khz} and the voice synthesizer, the remote option and that's all I need right now. I can use other options besides the sync on the R75 to reduce fading. I always find a way to get the signal in nicely. I get good strong signals here in Florida so the sync is not a big issue for me. I also don't overload. If I ever do, I again use the great options on the R75 to fix it. All in all besides being a fantastic value for the money, it's a great communications receiver. The SSB and ECSS on it can't be beat, period. It's SUPERB in this regard. I love that radio. For BCB, the 2.8 does it for me. Lucky |
Michael Lawson wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Michael Lawson wrote: I keep telling myself that an R-5000 is just as good. More or less, it is. Okay, Peter, I'm curious. What do you think of the R71A vs. the R-5000?? Some year I'm going to spring for one of them or one of the R8/R8A/R8B's (depending on price point used). Since you were in lurk mode when the last discussion on that happened, what's your opinion?? --Mike L. When I made my choice, I played with each for more than a day, and did all the reading I could on each model. What I found was that it's a virtual dead heat between the two. Performance differences are insignificant, and pretty evenly balanced between the two. Build quality is nearly the same. Ergonomics for each are uneven. I preferred the keypad of R-71 over R-5000 for it's more standard layout, but the buttons on R-71 are smaller. In the dark, one is as easy/difficult to use as the other. Audio quality is better on the Kenwood. Prices on the used market are about the same. And both have excellent pedigrees. The RAM battery on the ICOM is only as much of an issue as you want to make it. Mine was still the original battery, and the guy who bought mine is still using it as it was sold to him. The WillCo board eliminates that issue entirely. But diligent preventative attention prevents calamatous loss of function, too. Now, looking at each as an aging example of a long discontinued product, R-71 seems to have fewer debilitating foibles than R-5000. Seems to be more readily repaired or reconditioned than R-5000. R-5000 displays are tough to come by, encoders are starting to fail. Then again, the DC-DC converters for R-71's display are starting to need rebuilding, the trimmers on the PLL unit need to be replaced, and the heat around the regulator is causing solder joints to fail. What it really comes down to is how much you want to screw with one, today, and which one you personally prefer. In real world usage, what you would gain by switching from one to the other is a matter of taste, not hard performance. |
"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... [...] Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. [...] I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. [...] Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. [...] Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. You can't read, can you? Try again. slowly. For. The. Money. It. Is. A. Good. Value. (rolls eyes) -- Eric F. Richards "...there are moments (as when Gore speaks... slowly... and... heavily.... to... grown... men... and... women... so... that... you'd... swear... he... was... trying... to... explain... Wittgenstein... to... three... year... olds) when you have the disconcerting thought that the vice president may come from Mars." Lance Morrow, http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/...rrow7_21.a.tm/ I get your point Eric. I was trying to go beyond the arguement of it just being a good value by showing how good it is regardless of price. It's good radio period, not just for the "value". Lucky |
"Howard" wrote in message ... On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 21:13:56 GMT, D Peter Maus wrote: snip Yes, it's more than simply pushing a button. It's been a number of years since I've used one, but as I recall, there were some gain adjustments, and filter selections. Once dialed in, sync worked fine. What I've found that helps is to reduce the RF gain and to set the AGC to fast and often going to the wider filters helps. There are some specific parameters that need to be addressed when using sync on RX-350, too. But if you're attentive to the details, it, too, works as promised. The best sync I've used to date is on AR-7030+. Dials itself in and stays locked through the deepest fades. Second is sync on HF-150. I have a Drake. SW-2. Sync is fine, but more prone to losing lock than the AOR. For the record, I'm not as passionate about synchronous detection as some here. It's a tool, nothing more. It doesn't cure cancer, ingrown toenails, or receding hairlines. And it's not worth starting a religion over. It's a tool for reception of radio signals. AM Stereo uses it, too. In fact, that's where the Drake sync detector came from. Well I beg to differ, since acquiring a Sony 7600 and later the R75 - both with sync detection - I've not had a single ingrown toenail !! Unfortunately I bought them after the hairline receded. I use it rarely. Mostly I rely on a good set of filters, a comprehensive ground, and an antenna that can suck the pubic hairs from between your teeth. Nothing replaces good basics. Agreed! I seldom use synch either - perhaps if I had a radio with the famed Sherwood synch detector or a Drake I would find it more useful. In any case, yes it is just another tool. It reminds me of the saying "if your only tool is a hammer - all of your problems look like nails." There are more tools than synch and it pays to gain familiarity with what they do and when to apply them. As to R-75 status - I think they're still around due to the existing stock supply not because of Icom deciding to continue production. That opinion, and $2.00 US will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Howard Hi Howard I found that using the sync manually works better then the auto mode. Lucky |
"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... D Peter Maus wrote: For the record, I'm not as passionate about synchronous detection as some here. It's a tool, nothing more. It is how I feel as well. It doesn't cure cancer, No problem... ingrown toenails, No problem... or receding hairlines. ...rats. I use it rarely. Mostly I rely on a good set of filters, a comprehensive ground, and an antenna that can suck the pubic hairs from between your teeth. Nothing replaces good basics. Amen. I agree with that last sentence wholeheartedly. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 So true. You can have the best rig money can buy but without good basics, the money is wasted on it. I think many people leave the hobby or not get into it because they didn't set things up right. I know I did a lot of things wrong when I first started out and I'm still learning. Lucky |
"dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Not only is the R-75 a good value for dollar, it is a good absolute value as well. Price aside, it is a good radio period. It is well built, sensitive, selective, has a good user interface, is adequate for program listening, can be very good for program listening with simple mods, and it is outstanding for utility and DX'ing. For me, it doesn't make the sense god gave a mule to malign the R-75 because after market mods can improve the performance of the audio definition and the function of the sync detector should you decide to do so. The R-5000 is a great radio and it doesn't even have a sync detector. The NRD 545 is a good radio and to my ear, even through an external speaker the audio is hollow and tinny for any radio, let alone one with a price tag that is so high. I have used the R-75, R-5000, R8, R8b and have some time on an NRD-545. Going by actual usage, I can honestly say that NONE of those radios are "WONDER RADIOS" in comparison with the others. The all have their strengths, but none of them will work miracles in comparison to other ones. They are all capable radios. Of all of those radios, the one that I'd prefer to have for DX'ing and or utility would be the R-75. For program listening, I'd take the R8b. The audio quality itself is not all that much better then my Kiwa modified R-75, but the ssb selectable AM sync on the R8b can be a marvel for cutting out not just fade distortion but cutting out QRM completely from a signal above or below. I can also do the same thing with QRM using my Sony 7600gr too !!!! So.... Those are facts. The R-75 is a good performer in some categories and an OUTSTANDING performer in most others. How can you say it is not an absolute value ??? In reading posts from people that COMPULSIVELY malign the R-75 and obsess over the perceived AM sync deficiency ad nausium, it seems like it is the self justification of a person who spent way more money then the R-75 costs on their rig. Or is it self justification on your part because you either don't have or don't want to spend the money for a better rig? No... Not true at all. I'd spend more money on a better rig. I was going to buy an NRD-545 not too long ago. I tried one out on loan from a friend. Although I loved the way it looked and I loved the way the controls were set up, I thought the weak audio was a serious distraction. Still... That is not why I didn't get one. I was primarily looking for a better DX'ing radio. I'd deal with lesser audio if the DX'ing abilities were better then my R-75. I came to the realization after testing out the NRD-545 that noting could help me DX' any better due to the high noise floor here in north NJ. I dont need a new rig, I need to move to another area. I always did want to see the American southwest. May be Arizona :-) Yes, it's an OK radio, but come on... OK.. I know you like your R8 series, but do you really think the R8 series is better then the R-75 for DX'ing. ??? Absolutely. If they weren't I'd have been one of the first to get R75 The R8 series is only WAY better then the R-75 for one thing and one thing only. And not... not program listening. With my Kiwa mods and external speaker, it does well for program listening. Although not too many people mention it when comparing the R8 with the R-75 because everyone is pointing out the synch thing, the R-75 SUCKS ON ICE for medium wave DX'ing. It's way too noisy. I loved using all of the R8 series for MW, especially the R8b. I thought the R8b's AM synch was the cats ass. Regardless, you cant tell me the R8 or R8a or R8b is better at SW DX'ing then the R-75. I believe I already did. Several times! Tell me again and tell me why. Haven't I wasted enough time on you already? You really need to learn how to pay attention. Start off by gazing at that front panel and try to commit to memory the fact that you're using a R75 vs. an R-75. Oh... the front panel. I see it... Your wrong again... It reads "IC-R75". I wasn't wrong at all, 'tard boy... PLEASE try to pay attention. It DOES NOT say R-75 does it, 'tard boy? It doesn't read R75, nimrod. If you insist on mocking people for a petty oversight, I suggest that you should take more care not to make any oversights yourself as you have just done. It reads IC-R75. Now be reasonable and stop casting stones from your glass house. Simply put to your stone casting frustration... The IC-R75 is a better radio for DX'ing and SSB/utility then the R8 series. Yield to the facts. I promise you'll feel better once you do so. Michael |
Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Not only is the R-75 a good value for dollar, it is a good absolute value as well. Price aside, it is a good radio period. It is well built, sensitive, selective, has a good user interface, is adequate for program listening, can be very good for program listening with simple mods, and it is outstanding for utility and DX'ing. For me, it doesn't make the sense god gave a mule to malign the R-75 because after market mods can improve the performance of the audio definition and the function of the sync detector should you decide to do so. The R-5000 is a great radio and it doesn't even have a sync detector. The NRD 545 is a good radio and to my ear, even through an external speaker the audio is hollow and tinny for any radio, let alone one with a price tag that is so high. I have used the R-75, R-5000, R8, R8b and have some time on an NRD-545. Going by actual usage, I can honestly say that NONE of those radios are "WONDER RADIOS" in comparison with the others. The all have their strengths, but none of them will work miracles in comparison to other ones. They are all capable radios. Of all of those radios, the one that I'd prefer to have for DX'ing and or utility would be the R-75. For program listening, I'd take the R8b. The audio quality itself is not all that much better then my Kiwa modified R-75, but the ssb selectable AM sync on the R8b can be a marvel for cutting out not just fade distortion but cutting out QRM completely from a signal above or below. I can also do the same thing with QRM using my Sony 7600gr too !!!! So.... Those are facts. The R-75 is a good performer in some categories and an OUTSTANDING performer in most others. How can you say it is not an absolute value ??? In reading posts from people that COMPULSIVELY malign the R-75 and obsess over the perceived AM sync deficiency ad nausium, it seems like it is the self justification of a person who spent way more money then the R-75 costs on their rig. Or is it self justification on your part because you either don't have or don't want to spend the money for a better rig? No... Not true at all. I'd spend more money on a better rig. I was going to buy an NRD-545 not too long ago. I tried one out on loan from a friend. Although I loved the way it looked and I loved the way the controls were set up, I thought the weak audio was a serious distraction. Still... That is not why I didn't get one. I was primarily looking for a better DX'ing radio. I'd deal with lesser audio if the DX'ing abilities were better then my R-75. I came to the realization after testing out the NRD-545 that noting could help me DX' any better due to the high noise floor here in north NJ. I dont need a new rig, I need to move to another area. I always did want to see the American southwest. May be Arizona :-) Yes, it's an OK radio, but come on... OK.. I know you like your R8 series, but do you really think the R8 series is better then the R-75 for DX'ing. ??? Absolutely. If they weren't I'd have been one of the first to get R75 The R8 series is only WAY better then the R-75 for one thing and one thing only. And not... not program listening. With my Kiwa mods and external speaker, it does well for program listening. Although not too many people mention it when comparing the R8 with the R-75 because everyone is pointing out the synch thing, the R-75 SUCKS ON ICE for medium wave DX'ing. It's way too noisy. I loved using all of the R8 series for MW, especially the R8b. I thought the R8b's AM synch was the cats ass. Regardless, you cant tell me the R8 or R8a or R8b is better at SW DX'ing then the R-75. I believe I already did. Several times! Tell me again and tell me why. Haven't I wasted enough time on you already? You really need to learn how to pay attention. Start off by gazing at that front panel and try to commit to memory the fact that you're using a R75 vs. an R-75. Oh... the front panel. I see it... Your wrong again... It reads "IC-R75". I wasn't wrong at all, 'tard boy... PLEASE try to pay attention. It DOES NOT say R-75 does it, 'tard boy? It doesn't read R75, nimrod. Sure it does 'tard boy... look at it again! It sure as hell doesn't say 'R-75' now does it? If you insist on mocking people for a petty oversight, I suggest that you should take more care not to make any oversights yourself as you have just done. It reads IC-R75. Now be reasonable and stop casting stones from your glass house. Like I said, your skull sure is thick! Simply put to your stone casting frustration... The IC-R75 is a better radio for DX'ing and SSB/utility then the R8 series. Your fantasy, not mine! Yield to the facts. I promise you'll feel better once you do so. I faced up to the facts many, many, years ago, 'tard boy. That's why I don't use ICOM radios! Get a frickin' clue, and try not to cry yourself to sleep tonight. LMAO dxAce Michigan USA "I swear by, not at, Drake receivers" © http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
In article ,
"Michael" wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message .. . Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Not only is the R-75 a good value for dollar, it is a good absolute value as well. Price aside, it is a good radio period. It is well built, sensitive, selective, has a good user interface, is adequate for program listening, can be very good for program listening with simple mods, and it is outstanding for utility and DX'ing. For me, it doesn't make the sense god gave a mule to malign the R-75 because after market mods can improve the performance of the audio definition and the function of the sync detector should you decide to do so. The R-5000 is a great radio and it doesn't even have a sync detector. The NRD 545 is a good radio and to my ear, even through an external speaker the audio is hollow and tinny for any radio, let alone one with a price tag that is so high. I have used the R-75, R-5000, R8, R8b and have some time on an NRD-545. Going by actual usage, I can honestly say that NONE of those radios are "WONDER RADIOS" in comparison with the others. The all have their strengths, but none of them will work miracles in comparison to other ones. They are all capable radios. Of all of those radios, the one that I'd prefer to have for DX'ing and or utility would be the R-75. For program listening, I'd take the R8b. The audio quality itself is not all that much better then my Kiwa modified R-75, but the ssb selectable AM sync on the R8b can be a marvel for cutting out not just fade distortion but cutting out QRM completely from a signal above or below. I can also do the same thing with QRM using my Sony 7600gr too !!!! So.... Those are facts. The R-75 is a good performer in some categories and an OUTSTANDING performer in most others. How can you say it is not an absolute value ??? In reading posts from people that COMPULSIVELY malign the R-75 and obsess over the perceived AM sync deficiency ad nausium, it seems like it is the self justification of a person who spent way more money then the R-75 costs on their rig. Or is it self justification on your part because you either don't have or don't want to spend the money for a better rig? No... Not true at all. I'd spend more money on a better rig. I was going to buy an NRD-545 not too long ago. I tried one out on loan from a friend. Although I loved the way it looked and I loved the way the controls were set up, I thought the weak audio was a serious distraction. Still... That is not why I didn't get one. I was primarily looking for a better DX'ing radio. I'd deal with lesser audio if the DX'ing abilities were better then my R-75. I came to the realization after testing out the NRD-545 that noting could help me DX' any better due to the high noise floor here in north NJ. I dont need a new rig, I need to move to another area. I always did want to see the American southwest. May be Arizona :-) Yes, it's an OK radio, but come on... OK.. I know you like your R8 series, but do you really think the R8 series is better then the R-75 for DX'ing. ??? Absolutely. If they weren't I'd have been one of the first to get R75 The R8 series is only WAY better then the R-75 for one thing and one thing only. And not... not program listening. With my Kiwa mods and external speaker, it does well for program listening. Although not too many people mention it when comparing the R8 with the R-75 because everyone is pointing out the synch thing, the R-75 SUCKS ON ICE for medium wave DX'ing. It's way too noisy. I loved using all of the R8 series for MW, especially the R8b. I thought the R8b's AM synch was the cats ass. Regardless, you cant tell me the R8 or R8a or R8b is better at SW DX'ing then the R-75. I believe I already did. Several times! Tell me again and tell me why. Haven't I wasted enough time on you already? You really need to learn how to pay attention. Start off by gazing at that front panel and try to commit to memory the fact that you're using a R75 vs. an R-75. Oh... the front panel. I see it... Your wrong again... It reads "IC-R75". I wasn't wrong at all, 'tard boy... PLEASE try to pay attention. It DOES NOT say R-75 does it, 'tard boy? It doesn't read R75, nimrod. If you insist on mocking people for a petty oversight, I suggest that you should take more care not to make any oversights yourself as you have just done. It reads IC-R75. Now be reasonable and stop casting stones from your glass house. Simply put to your stone casting frustration... The IC-R75 is a better radio for DX'ing and SSB/utility then the R8 series. Yield to the facts. I promise you'll feel better once you do so. Your facts have no basis in reality. Feel better? -- Telamon Ventura, California |
"dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Not only is the R-75 a good value for dollar, it is a good absolute value as well. Price aside, it is a good radio period. It is well built, sensitive, selective, has a good user interface, is adequate for program listening, can be very good for program listening with simple mods, and it is outstanding for utility and DX'ing. For me, it doesn't make the sense god gave a mule to malign the R-75 because after market mods can improve the performance of the audio definition and the function of the sync detector should you decide to do so. The R-5000 is a great radio and it doesn't even have a sync detector. The NRD 545 is a good radio and to my ear, even through an external speaker the audio is hollow and tinny for any radio, let alone one with a price tag that is so high. I have used the R-75, R-5000, R8, R8b and have some time on an NRD-545. Going by actual usage, I can honestly say that NONE of those radios are "WONDER RADIOS" in comparison with the others. The all have their strengths, but none of them will work miracles in comparison to other ones. They are all capable radios. Of all of those radios, the one that I'd prefer to have for DX'ing and or utility would be the R-75. For program listening, I'd take the R8b. The audio quality itself is not all that much better then my Kiwa modified R-75, but the ssb selectable AM sync on the R8b can be a marvel for cutting out not just fade distortion but cutting out QRM completely from a signal above or below. I can also do the same thing with QRM using my Sony 7600gr too !!!! So.... Those are facts. The R-75 is a good performer in some categories and an OUTSTANDING performer in most others. How can you say it is not an absolute value ??? In reading posts from people that COMPULSIVELY malign the R-75 and obsess over the perceived AM sync deficiency ad nausium, it seems like it is the self justification of a person who spent way more money then the R-75 costs on their rig. Or is it self justification on your part because you either don't have or don't want to spend the money for a better rig? No... Not true at all. I'd spend more money on a better rig. I was going to buy an NRD-545 not too long ago. I tried one out on loan from a friend. Although I loved the way it looked and I loved the way the controls were set up, I thought the weak audio was a serious distraction. Still... That is not why I didn't get one. I was primarily looking for a better DX'ing radio. I'd deal with lesser audio if the DX'ing abilities were better then my R-75. I came to the realization after testing out the NRD-545 that noting could help me DX' any better due to the high noise floor here in north NJ. I dont need a new rig, I need to move to another area. I always did want to see the American southwest. May be Arizona :-) Yes, it's an OK radio, but come on... OK.. I know you like your R8 series, but do you really think the R8 series is better then the R-75 for DX'ing. ??? Absolutely. If they weren't I'd have been one of the first to get R75 The R8 series is only WAY better then the R-75 for one thing and one thing only. And not... not program listening. With my Kiwa mods and external speaker, it does well for program listening. Although not too many people mention it when comparing the R8 with the R-75 because everyone is pointing out the synch thing, the R-75 SUCKS ON ICE for medium wave DX'ing. It's way too noisy. I loved using all of the R8 series for MW, especially the R8b. I thought the R8b's AM synch was the cats ass. Regardless, you cant tell me the R8 or R8a or R8b is better at SW DX'ing then the R-75. I believe I already did. Several times! Tell me again and tell me why. Haven't I wasted enough time on you already? You really need to learn how to pay attention. Start off by gazing at that front panel and try to commit to memory the fact that you're using a R75 vs. an R-75. Oh... the front panel. I see it... Your wrong again... It reads "IC-R75". I wasn't wrong at all, 'tard boy... PLEASE try to pay attention. It DOES NOT say R-75 does it, 'tard boy? It doesn't read R75, nimrod. Sure it does 'tard boy... look at it again! It sure as hell doesn't say 'R-75' now does it? If you insist on mocking people for a petty oversight, I suggest that you should take more care not to make any oversights yourself as you have just done. It reads IC-R75. Now be reasonable and stop casting stones from your glass house. Like I said, your skull sure is thick! Simply put to your stone casting frustration... The IC-R75 is a better radio for DX'ing and SSB/utility then the R8 series. Your fantasy, not mine! Yield to the facts. I promise you'll feel better once you do so. I faced up to the facts many, many, years ago, 'tard boy. That's why I don't use ICOM radios! Get a frickin' clue, and try not to cry yourself to sleep tonight. Clearly, your prone to antagonistic gestures when your compulsion drives you agaisnt facts. Your commentary is a Freudian delight. It's crawling with clues. I strongly recommend you relax your compulsion and spend a few hours with the R8 and the IC-R75. Do a few side by side comparisons for DX'ing and utility. I promise that self discovery will be far more fullfilling over denial. Michael LMAO dxAce Michigan USA "I swear by, not at, Drake receivers" © http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
Michael wrote:
Other then a few computer controlled alternatives, there are no other choices other then the R-75. That's the larger point. The radios in the list I'm asking for don't have to meet your "PRACTICAL improvement" criteria. What does "statistically significant PRACTICALLY speaking" mean? craigm Meaning exactly as stated. Here is an example: The Drake R-8 was tested to have a sensitivity of 0.25 and 0.18 with the pre amp on. The R-75 was tested to have a sensitivy of 0.5 and .02 with the first level pre amp on The Kenwood R-5000 was tested to have a sensitivity of .02 The NRD-525 was tested to have a sensitivity of .02 OK, what do you say ???? You can see what receiver gets the better test numbers here. Think it matters PRACTICALLY speaking given what typical noise floors are ??? Would you feel it was worth it to spend a few thousand dollars to get that extra decimal ??? This applies equally to other values. Do you understand my point yet ???? Michael Hold it Mike. Didn't you say that you are in a noisy area? Sensitivity (then) becomes the least important papameter you should consider (it's actually not a very important parameter for most of us since we are usually limited by atmospheric noise that is much greater than the receiver noise floor). Worry more about ultimate selectivity, dymanic range, etc. Also I think you have your decimal points badly screwed up above. (.02 should be 0.2) -- Brian Denley http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html |
In article ,
"Brian Denley" wrote: Michael wrote: Other then a few computer controlled alternatives, there are no other choices other then the R-75. That's the larger point. The radios in the list I'm asking for don't have to meet your "PRACTICAL improvement" criteria. What does "statistically significant PRACTICALLY speaking" mean? craigm Meaning exactly as stated. Here is an example: The Drake R-8 was tested to have a sensitivity of 0.25 and 0.18 with the pre amp on. The R-75 was tested to have a sensitivy of 0.5 and .02 with the first level pre amp on The Kenwood R-5000 was tested to have a sensitivity of .02 The NRD-525 was tested to have a sensitivity of .02 OK, what do you say ???? You can see what receiver gets the better test numbers here. Think it matters PRACTICALLY speaking given what typical noise floors are ??? Would you feel it was worth it to spend a few thousand dollars to get that extra decimal ??? This applies equally to other values. Do you understand my point yet ???? Michael Hold it Mike. Didn't you say that you are in a noisy area? Sensitivity (then) becomes the least important papameter you should consider (it's actually not a very important parameter for most of us since we are usually limited by atmospheric noise that is much greater than the receiver noise floor). Worry more about ultimate selectivity, dymanic range, etc. Also I think you have your decimal points badly screwed up above. (.02 should be 0.2) Don't confuse him with facts as he is on a good rant besides this is a your radio sucks thread now. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
dxAce wrote:
Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Not only is the R-75 a good value for dollar, it is a good absolute value as well. Price aside, it is a good radio period. It is well built, sensitive, selective, has a good user interface, is adequate for program listening, can be very good for program listening with simple mods, and it is outstanding for utility and DX'ing. For me, it doesn't make the sense god gave a mule to malign the R-75 because after market mods can improve the performance of the audio definition and the function of the sync detector should you decide to do so. The R-5000 is a great radio and it doesn't even have a sync detector. The NRD 545 is a good radio and to my ear, even through an external speaker the audio is hollow and tinny for any radio, let alone one with a price tag that is so high. I have used the R-75, R-5000, R8, R8b and have some time on an NRD-545. Going by actual usage, I can honestly say that NONE of those radios are "WONDER RADIOS" in comparison with the others. The all have their strengths, but none of them will work miracles in comparison to other ones. They are all capable radios. Of all of those radios, the one that I'd prefer to have for DX'ing and or utility would be the R-75. For program listening, I'd take the R8b. The audio quality itself is not all that much better then my Kiwa modified R-75, but the ssb selectable AM sync on the R8b can be a marvel for cutting out not just fade distortion but cutting out QRM completely from a signal above or below. I can also do the same thing with QRM using my Sony 7600gr too !!!! So.... Those are facts. The R-75 is a good performer in some categories and an OUTSTANDING performer in most others. How can you say it is not an absolute value ??? In reading posts from people that COMPULSIVELY malign the R-75 and obsess over the perceived AM sync deficiency ad nausium, it seems like it is the self justification of a person who spent way more money then the R-75 costs on their rig. Or is it self justification on your part because you either don't have or don't want to spend the money for a better rig? No... Not true at all. I'd spend more money on a better rig. I was going to buy an NRD-545 not too long ago. I tried one out on loan from a friend. Although I loved the way it looked and I loved the way the controls were set up, I thought the weak audio was a serious distraction. Still... That is not why I didn't get one. I was primarily looking for a better DX'ing radio. I'd deal with lesser audio if the DX'ing abilities were better then my R-75. I came to the realization after testing out the NRD-545 that noting could help me DX' any better due to the high noise floor here in north NJ. I dont need a new rig, I need to move to another area. I always did want to see the American southwest. May be Arizona :-) Yes, it's an OK radio, but come on... OK.. I know you like your R8 series, but do you really think the R8 series is better then the R-75 for DX'ing. ??? Absolutely. If they weren't I'd have been one of the first to get R75 The R8 series is only WAY better then the R-75 for one thing and one thing only. And not... not program listening. With my Kiwa mods and external speaker, it does well for program listening. Although not too many people mention it when comparing the R8 with the R-75 because everyone is pointing out the synch thing, the R-75 SUCKS ON ICE for medium wave DX'ing. It's way too noisy. I loved using all of the R8 series for MW, especially the R8b. I thought the R8b's AM synch was the cats ass. Regardless, you cant tell me the R8 or R8a or R8b is better at SW DX'ing then the R-75. I believe I already did. Several times! Tell me again and tell me why. Haven't I wasted enough time on you already? You really need to learn how to pay attention. Start off by gazing at that front panel and try to commit to memory the fact that you're using a R75 vs. an R-75. Mostly because they are IC-R75 (and IC-R8500). There's a hyphen in there, somewhere... I need the "R" to distinguish between the R8500 and my FT-8500, just in case I get confused. :-) That would be a good start. Now you get back to me tomorrow and we'll see if you've made any progress and then perhaps we might proceed from there. dxAce Michigan USA Okay, if you want to dig into the stone age, you can go look up Message-ID: Where I had the R75 and the R8B side-by-side under the bad conditions that soured me on the R75. While the R8B couldn't handle the situation well there, either, it handled it a great deal better than the '75. The R8B is also noted to have a better choice and better shaped filters. Finally, the audio is far superior on the '8B. Me, the '8500 has wonderful audio. ****ty filters, wonderful audio. :-) Can't have everything... Now a comparable new product to the '75 would be the WR G303. Yes, it needs a computer, but the SDR has incredible capabilities. It also has similar weaknesses to the '75, so if you have no problem with the '75 you'll have no problems with the '303... plus you'll have incredible filters and audio as good as your sound card (which can be very good). An old product? Well, my R-392 is the Ultimate Bulletproof Receiver with all those tuned stages in it. It's also portable, especially compared to the better big brother R-390. Mine cost $100. ....you can always add a sherwood engineering detector, connect it to the I.F. out, and get that sync detector you want. You get a better sync detector, too... :-) -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 |
"Lucky" wrote:
"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... D Peter Maus wrote: Nothing replaces good basics. Amen. I agree with that last sentence wholeheartedly. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 So true. You can have the best rig money can buy but without good basics, the money is wasted on it. Well, "the best rig money can buy" ought to have good basics, or, by definition, it isn't "the best rig." Say rather, a $5000 radio with a fatal flaw in the basics is sorrier than a $700 radio with the basics right but no frills. My FRG-100 was that radio. Not as pretty as the '75... I think many people leave the hobby or not get into it because they didn't set things up right. I know I did a lot of things wrong when I first started out and I'm still learning. Lucky -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 |
"Michael" wrote:
Clearly, your prone to antagonistic gestures when your compulsion drives you agaisnt facts. Your commentary is a Freudian delight. It's crawling with clues. Okay, you two, lollipops all around. You're just getting into weenie waving wars at this point. I strongly recommend you relax your compulsion and spend a few hours with the R8 and the IC-R75. Do a few side by side comparisons for DX'ing and utility. I promise that self discovery will be far more fullfilling over denial. I did just that. I also posted a link to it. My admittedly radio-hostile environment was the subject; the question was (at the time), what the hell is wrong here? Ironically, the radio-hostile environment was swamping the radios with RF on a... ....wait for it... ....radio quiet zone! -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 |
Telamon wrote:
Don't confuse him with facts as he is on a good rant besides this is a your radio sucks thread now. ....beats the hell out of a your political party sucks thread... -- Eric F. Richards "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." - Winston Churchill, from RNW |
Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Not only is the R-75 a good value for dollar, it is a good absolute value as well. Price aside, it is a good radio period. It is well built, sensitive, selective, has a good user interface, is adequate for program listening, can be very good for program listening with simple mods, and it is outstanding for utility and DX'ing. For me, it doesn't make the sense god gave a mule to malign the R-75 because after market mods can improve the performance of the audio definition and the function of the sync detector should you decide to do so. The R-5000 is a great radio and it doesn't even have a sync detector. The NRD 545 is a good radio and to my ear, even through an external speaker the audio is hollow and tinny for any radio, let alone one with a price tag that is so high. I have used the R-75, R-5000, R8, R8b and have some time on an NRD-545. Going by actual usage, I can honestly say that NONE of those radios are "WONDER RADIOS" in comparison with the others. The all have their strengths, but none of them will work miracles in comparison to other ones. They are all capable radios. Of all of those radios, the one that I'd prefer to have for DX'ing and or utility would be the R-75. For program listening, I'd take the R8b. The audio quality itself is not all that much better then my Kiwa modified R-75, but the ssb selectable AM sync on the R8b can be a marvel for cutting out not just fade distortion but cutting out QRM completely from a signal above or below. I can also do the same thing with QRM using my Sony 7600gr too !!!! So.... Those are facts. The R-75 is a good performer in some categories and an OUTSTANDING performer in most others. How can you say it is not an absolute value ??? In reading posts from people that COMPULSIVELY malign the R-75 and obsess over the perceived AM sync deficiency ad nausium, it seems like it is the self justification of a person who spent way more money then the R-75 costs on their rig. Or is it self justification on your part because you either don't have or don't want to spend the money for a better rig? No... Not true at all. I'd spend more money on a better rig. I was going to buy an NRD-545 not too long ago. I tried one out on loan from a friend. Although I loved the way it looked and I loved the way the controls were set up, I thought the weak audio was a serious distraction. Still... That is not why I didn't get one. I was primarily looking for a better DX'ing radio. I'd deal with lesser audio if the DX'ing abilities were better then my R-75. I came to the realization after testing out the NRD-545 that noting could help me DX' any better due to the high noise floor here in north NJ. I dont need a new rig, I need to move to another area. I always did want to see the American southwest. May be Arizona :-) Yes, it's an OK radio, but come on... OK.. I know you like your R8 series, but do you really think the R8 series is better then the R-75 for DX'ing. ??? Absolutely. If they weren't I'd have been one of the first to get R75 The R8 series is only WAY better then the R-75 for one thing and one thing only. And not... not program listening. With my Kiwa mods and external speaker, it does well for program listening. Although not too many people mention it when comparing the R8 with the R-75 because everyone is pointing out the synch thing, the R-75 SUCKS ON ICE for medium wave DX'ing. It's way too noisy. I loved using all of the R8 series for MW, especially the R8b. I thought the R8b's AM synch was the cats ass. Regardless, you cant tell me the R8 or R8a or R8b is better at SW DX'ing then the R-75. I believe I already did. Several times! Tell me again and tell me why. Haven't I wasted enough time on you already? You really need to learn how to pay attention. Start off by gazing at that front panel and try to commit to memory the fact that you're using a R75 vs. an R-75. Oh... the front panel. I see it... Your wrong again... It reads "IC-R75". I wasn't wrong at all, 'tard boy... PLEASE try to pay attention. It DOES NOT say R-75 does it, 'tard boy? It doesn't read R75, nimrod. Sure it does 'tard boy... look at it again! It sure as hell doesn't say 'R-75' now does it? If you insist on mocking people for a petty oversight, I suggest that you should take more care not to make any oversights yourself as you have just done. It reads IC-R75. Now be reasonable and stop casting stones from your glass house. Like I said, your skull sure is thick! Simply put to your stone casting frustration... The IC-R75 is a better radio for DX'ing and SSB/utility then the R8 series. Your fantasy, not mine! Yield to the facts. I promise you'll feel better once you do so. I faced up to the facts many, many, years ago, 'tard boy. That's why I don't use ICOM radios! Get a frickin' clue, and try not to cry yourself to sleep tonight. Clearly, your prone to antagonistic gestures when your compulsion drives you agaisnt facts. Your commentary is a Freudian delight. It's crawling with clues. I strongly recommend you relax your compulsion and spend a few hours with the R8 and the IC-R75. Do a few side by side comparisons for DX'ing and utility. I promise that self discovery will be far more fullfilling over denial. Gee, I already did that some time back! Keep trying. dxAce Michigan USA |
Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When= I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it = to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There a= re several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no = one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean t= he signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this wi= th my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out= as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 a= re about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW rad= io with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-a= mp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to= a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and t= hat it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, F= OR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-7= 5's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it = was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? =C5nd you don't= see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the applicati= on you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could= be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performan= ce built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the rad= io, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has s= aid more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Not only is the R-75 a good value for dollar, it is a good absolute va= lue as well. Price aside, it is a good radio period. It is well built, sensitive, selective, has a good user interface, is adequate for program listenin= g, can be very good for program listening with simple mods, and it is outstanding for utility and DX'ing. For me, it doesn't make the sense god gave a m= ule to malign the R-75 because after market mods can improve the performance = of the audio definition and the function of the sync detector should you deci= de to do so. The R-5000 is a great radio and it doesn't even have a sync detector. The NRD 545 is a good radio and to my ear, even through an external speaker the audio is hollow and tinny for any radio, let alone one with a price tag that is so high. I have used the R-75, R-5000, R8, R8b and have some time on an NRD-545. Going by actual usage, I can honestly say that NONE of those radios are "WONDER RADIOS" in comparison with the others. The all have their strengths, but none of them will work miracles in comparison to other ones. They = are all capable radios. Of all of those radios, the one that I'd prefer to have for DX'ing and or utility would be the R-75. For program listening, I'd take the R8b. The audio quality itself is not all that much better then my Kiwa modified R-75, but the ssb selectable AM sync on the R8b can be a marv= el for cutting out not just fade distortion but cutting out QRM completely fr= om a signal above or below. I can also do the same thing with QRM using my Sony 7600gr too !!!! So.... Those are facts. The R-75 is a good performer in some categori= es and an OUTSTANDING performer in most others. How can you say it is not an absolute value ??? In reading posts from people that COMPULSIVELY malign the R-75 and obs= ess over the perceived AM sync deficiency ad nausium, it seems like it is = the self justification of a person who spent way more money then the R-75 costs on their rig. Or is it self justification on your part because you either don't have = or don't want to spend the money for a better rig? No... Not true at all. I'd spend more money on a better rig. I was going to buy an NRD-545 not too long ago. I tried one out on loan from a frien= d=2E Although I loved the way it looked and I loved the way the controls were = set up, I thought the weak audio was a serious distraction. Still... That is not why I didn't get one. I was primarily looking for a better DX'ing radio. I'd deal with lesser audio if the DX'ing abilities were better th= en my R-75. I came to the realization after testing out the NRD-545 that noting could help me DX' any better due to the high noise floor here in north NJ. I dont need a new rig, I need to move to another area. I always did want to see the American southwest. May be Arizona :-) Yes, it's an OK radio, but come on... OK.. I know you like your R8 series, but do you really think the R8 series is better then the R-75 for DX'ing. ??? The R8 series is only WAY better then the R-75 for one thing and one thing only. And not... not program listening. With my Kiwa mods and external speaker, it does well for prog= ram listening. Although not too many people mention it when comparing the R8 with the R-75 because everyone is pointing out the synch thing, the R-75 SUCKS ON ICE for medium wave DX'ing. It's way too noisy. I loved using = all of the R8 series for MW, especially the R8b. I thought the R8b's AM synch was the cats ass. Regardless, you cant tell me the R8 or R8a or R8b is better at SW DX'ing then the R-75. Michael Do you have an opinion as to whether the R75 is superior to the AOR 7030+ for DX purposes? I ask because the 7030+ and the R8B are usually described as about even in this regard. (I'd actually give a slight edge to the R8B, but that may just reflect some of my own personal preferences.) If this is correct, and if the R75 "beats" the R8B, then it should also beat the 7030+. Does that seem right to you? If so, which receiver currently on the market would one have to buy to beat the R75? An RX-340 maybe? Steve |
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Michael Lawson wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Michael Lawson wrote: I keep telling myself that an R-5000 is just as good. More or less, it is. Okay, Peter, I'm curious. What do you think of the R71A vs. the R-5000?? Some year I'm going to spring for one of them or one of the R8/R8A/R8B's (depending on price point used). Since you were in lurk mode when the last discussion on that happened, what's your opinion?? --Mike L. When I made my choice, I played with each for more than a day, and did all the reading I could on each model. What I found was that it's a virtual dead heat between the two. Performance differences are insignificant, and pretty evenly balanced between the two. Build quality is nearly the same. Ergonomics for each are uneven. I preferred the keypad of R-71 over R-5000 for it's more standard layout, but the buttons on R-71 are smaller. In the dark, one is as easy/difficult to use as the other. Audio quality is better on the Kenwood. Prices on the used market are about the same. And both have excellent pedigrees. The RAM battery on the ICOM is only as much of an issue as you want to make it. Mine was still the original battery, and the guy who bought mine is still using it as it was sold to him. The WillCo board eliminates that issue entirely. But diligent preventative attention prevents calamatous loss of function, too. Now, looking at each as an aging example of a long discontinued product, R-71 seems to have fewer debilitating foibles than R-5000. Seems to be more readily repaired or reconditioned than R-5000. R-5000 displays are tough to come by, encoders are starting to fail. Then again, the DC-DC converters for R-71's display are starting to need rebuilding, the trimmers on the PLL unit need to be replaced, and the heat around the regulator is causing solder joints to fail. What it really comes down to is how much you want to screw with one, today, and which one you personally prefer. In real world usage, what you would gain by switching from one to the other is a matter of taste, not hard performance. Thanks for the info, Peter. Well thought out. --Mike L. |
"Brian Denley" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: Other then a few computer controlled alternatives, there are no other choices other then the R-75. That's the larger point. The radios in the list I'm asking for don't have to meet your "PRACTICAL improvement" criteria. What does "statistically significant PRACTICALLY speaking" mean? craigm Meaning exactly as stated. Here is an example: The Drake R-8 was tested to have a sensitivity of 0.25 and 0.18 with the pre amp on. The R-75 was tested to have a sensitivy of 0.5 and .02 with the first level pre amp on The Kenwood R-5000 was tested to have a sensitivity of .02 The NRD-525 was tested to have a sensitivity of .02 OK, what do you say ???? You can see what receiver gets the better test numbers here. Think it matters PRACTICALLY speaking given what typical noise floors are ??? Would you feel it was worth it to spend a few thousand dollars to get that extra decimal ??? This applies equally to other values. Do you understand my point yet ???? Michael Hold it Mike. Didn't you say that you are in a noisy area? Sensitivity (then) becomes the least important papameter you should consider (it's actually not a very important parameter for most of us since we are usually limited by atmospheric noise that is much greater than the receiver noise floor). Worry more about ultimate selectivity, dymanic range, etc. Also I think you have your decimal points badly screwed up above. (.02 should be 0.2) The point I was trying to make is that using minimal differences in stats is not a good way to demonstrate which is the superior raido. There are statistics and then there are statistics. Michael |
wrote in message oups.com... Michael wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... Lucky wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message ... "Lucky" wrote: "Eric F. Richards" wrote in message m... "Michael" wrote: I find that there isn't anything that I can hear with the R-75 that I can hear with more expensive radios. That's true. Images, birdies, artifacts, intermodulation products -- it's all there. The R-75 is dumpster fodder. Value? yep. Value for money? yep. Absolutely a good value? Not even close. You need to experience a truly good radio. See http://www.sherweng.com for some guidelines. I personally think you made a fool out of yourself with your drivel and that's about it. Lucky You can believe that all you want. I owned an R75 for years. When I was selling it at a hamfest, Bob Sherwood came by and I offered it to him, and he just laughed. I'll say it again: It *is* value for the money, but it is *not* an absolute value. For me, the issue that is important is front-end overload. There are several flamethrowers that put millivolts worth of signal on my antennas. I don't have problems with close-in dynamic range... no one should really have problems with sensitivity on HF. The R75 was nothing but images below 10 MHz without both preamps off and the attenuator on. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 Hi I have about 10 radios. For $425, the R75 is my best rig. I have no problem with images here in Miami. There are many Hams down here and lots of the time the bands are terrible. But, with my R75, I can clean the signal up very well and enjoy the conversations. I can't do this with my other rigs. Here they. They are not all very good but I started out as a novice. 1] Kenwood 5000 2] Lowe HF-150 3] JVC NRD 525 4] Yaesu FRG-7 5] TenTec 320-D for DRM 6] Yaesu FRG-7700 7] Nasa Target HF3 8] Kenwood QR-666 {really the R300} 9] Degen 1103 10] Icom R75 I would say the next best rig is the HF-150 then the 5000 and 525 are about equal with the 525 giving you a few more options. If I mean business I use the R75. All I know is that I bought a brand NEW radio with **DSP and **dual PBT plus easy computer control for $425. Just being able to mix and match filters is superb. The built in 2 level pre-amp works great. How in the freaken world can you argue this point? How? Point me to a decent receiver for $425. Please, show me so I can buy it. Not to state the obvious, but he did concede that, for the money, R-75 is a value. What he's saying, what I've said, and what has been repeated here over the last few years, is that R-75 is not an absolute value. For $425, yes, it's a good deal. But as an absolute value, it's like most ICOM's (of which I've owned several and loved every one of them): It's potential is not realized until it's been modified. No one is saying that it's a bad radio. No one is saying that it's not worth having, and that it's not a strong player, and to reiterate for those in Rio Linda, FOR THE MONEY, it's a good value. It's just not all it can be. As much as I loved my R-71, I was very much looking forward to R-75's release. And was ready to close a deal with Universal as soon as it was available. But after playing with one for the better part of a day, I was less than impressed. And went in another direction. A direction I've been very pleased with. In fact, I've not bought a new radio since. I liken ICOM's to cars at the drag strip. Do you know why there are so many Fords and Chevy's are used as racing platforms? Ånd you don't see so many Lincoln's and Cadillacs? Not because the Fords and Chevy's are superior, but because they're a good buy for the money. For an economical outlay, you can buy a platform, that when modified to taste becomes precisely the car you want. Exactly built and tuned to the application you've chosen for it. A Lincoln would be a better platform. Sturdier, more finely tuned suspension. But with fewer mods available, and at dramatically higher cost. I"ve seen Lincoln's at the race track. And I watched one mop up a Taurus in the quarter mile, but at 20 times the outlay for a dragstrip car. ICOMs are solidly built, and decent performers. Like entry level domestic cars, their design has great potential for performance. But production cost shortcuts and economies produce a product that could be far more than it is. Requiring modification to extract the performance built into the design. When you're finished, add up price of the radio, the cost of the mods, shipping, old battery and recappable tires, and you've got a radio that's actually more expensive than it would have been had they not cut the production corners in the first place. But then, at least, the absolute value of the radio would be established. There's nothing wrong with you loving your R-75. And as Eric has said more than once, it IS a good value for the money. It's just that as it comes out of the box, it's potential is not realized. And for many users, that's a deterrent to ownership. Not only is the R-75 a good value for dollar, it is a good absolute value as well. Price aside, it is a good radio period. It is well built, sensitive, selective, has a good user interface, is adequate for program listening, can be very good for program listening with simple mods, and it is outstanding for utility and DX'ing. For me, it doesn't make the sense god gave a mule to malign the R-75 because after market mods can improve the performance of the audio definition and the function of the sync detector should you decide to do so. The R-5000 is a great radio and it doesn't even have a sync detector. The NRD 545 is a good radio and to my ear, even through an external speaker the audio is hollow and tinny for any radio, let alone one with a price tag that is so high. I have used the R-75, R-5000, R8, R8b and have some time on an NRD-545. Going by actual usage, I can honestly say that NONE of those radios are "WONDER RADIOS" in comparison with the others. The all have their strengths, but none of them will work miracles in comparison to other ones. They are all capable radios. Of all of those radios, the one that I'd prefer to have for DX'ing and or utility would be the R-75. For program listening, I'd take the R8b. The audio quality itself is not all that much better then my Kiwa modified R-75, but the ssb selectable AM sync on the R8b can be a marvel for cutting out not just fade distortion but cutting out QRM completely from a signal above or below. I can also do the same thing with QRM using my Sony 7600gr too !!!! So.... Those are facts. The R-75 is a good performer in some categories and an OUTSTANDING performer in most others. How can you say it is not an absolute value ??? In reading posts from people that COMPULSIVELY malign the R-75 and obsess over the perceived AM sync deficiency ad nausium, it seems like it is the self justification of a person who spent way more money then the R-75 costs on their rig. Or is it self justification on your part because you either don't have or don't want to spend the money for a better rig? No... Not true at all. I'd spend more money on a better rig. I was going to buy an NRD-545 not too long ago. I tried one out on loan from a friend. Although I loved the way it looked and I loved the way the controls were set up, I thought the weak audio was a serious distraction. Still... That is not why I didn't get one. I was primarily looking for a better DX'ing radio. I'd deal with lesser audio if the DX'ing abilities were better then my R-75. I came to the realization after testing out the NRD-545 that noting could help me DX' any better due to the high noise floor here in north NJ. I dont need a new rig, I need to move to another area. I always did want to see the American southwest. May be Arizona :-) Yes, it's an OK radio, but come on... OK.. I know you like your R8 series, but do you really think the R8 series is better then the R-75 for DX'ing. ??? The R8 series is only WAY better then the R-75 for one thing and one thing only. And not... not program listening. With my Kiwa mods and external speaker, it does well for program listening. Although not too many people mention it when comparing the R8 with the R-75 because everyone is pointing out the synch thing, the R-75 SUCKS ON ICE for medium wave DX'ing. It's way too noisy. I loved using all of the R8 series for MW, especially the R8b. I thought the R8b's AM synch was the cats ass. Regardless, you cant tell me the R8 or R8a or R8b is better at SW DX'ing then the R-75. Michael Do you have an opinion as to whether the R75 is superior to the AOR 7030+ for DX purposes? I ask because the 7030+ and the R8B are usually described as about even in this regard. (I'd actually give a slight edge to the R8B, but that may just reflect some of my own personal preferences.) If this is correct, and if the R75 "beats" the R8B, then it should also beat the 7030+. Does that seem right to you? If so, which receiver currently on the market would one have to buy to beat the R75? An RX-340 maybe? I cant answer that one... I have no experience with the 7030+ Michael |
Michael wrote:
The point I was trying to make is that using minimal differences in stats is not a good way to demonstrate which is the superior raido. There are statistics and then there are statistics. Michael Michael: BTW, I agree with you that the R-75 is a pretty damn good buy for the money. The only place we don't agree is that it's SSB perfomance is somehow better than the kilobuck receivers. They have all the ECSS tools too. The real shame is that all these manufacturers apparently don't think SWL has a future and have dropped out. -- Brian Denley http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html |
Michael wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... Well, if we're going to compare receivers I guess I'll put in my 2 cents worth after dicking with radios for over 40 years. I have an R-75 (second one) and I find it to be the best overall receiver for what I use it for. I modified the AGC and sync detector similar to the Kiwa scheme, and ,I've found with the various controls that I can pull DX out of the muck easier than with the other receivers Yes.... I agree 100 %. Prices and stat sheets asside, I prefer it for DX'ing over every other radio that I have tried. I admit I have not used any megabuck professional receivers but I have used the R8, R8a, R8b, R-5000, NRD-545. I've had short of the NRD-535D. The latter was a GREAT receiver but the audio sounded like **** even with an external speaker. I thought exactly the same thing of the NRD-545. I'm gratefull I got to test one out before I spent the money on one. I must say though, it was solid as a tank and was the best looking radio I ever saw. I also loved the way the user interface was set up. Michael Yes and that NRD interface is very computer controllable. By that I mean you can set all the user functions through the RS-232 port as well as the front panel. Even the NRD-535Db bandwidth control unit could be set to just about any bandwidth from 6 KHz to 500 Hz in 10 hz steps. I still find the NRD receivers to have the best 'feel' of any of the ones I have owned. Great tuning knob and easy to use controls. -- Brian Denley http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html |
dxAce wrote:
m II wrote: ...yawwwnnnn.... Seems as though you have a problem, 'tard. Next time you visit Health CanaDuh you'd better mention it to them. It's DANCE TIME at the Ace household! Start the strobe lights!! ============================================= Well, you can tell by the way I use my walk, I'm a womanly man, no time to talk. Music bad and women worse, I've been dumb enough since I was born. And now it's all right, it's OK. And you may look the other way. We can try to understand the illegal war's effect on man. Whether you're a sister or whether you're a mother, you're stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Feel my brain a'breaking and everybody shaking, and I'm stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Ah, ah, ah, ah, stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Ah, ah, ah, ah, stayin' a bore. Well now, I get low and I get high, and if I can't get either, I really try. Got the wings of heaven on my shoes. I'm a dancing man and I just can't lose. You know it's all right, it's OK. I'll live to see another day. We can try to understand the illegal war's effect on man. Whether you're a sister or whether you're a mother, you're stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Feel my brain a'breaking and everybody shaking, and I'm stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Ah, ah, ah, ah, stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Ah, ah, ah, ah, stayin' a bore. Aah. Life going nowhere. Somebody help me, somebody help me, yeah. Life going nowhere. Somebody help me, yeah. I'm stayin' a bore. Well, you can tell by the way I use my walk, I'm a womanly man, no time to talk. Music bad and women worse, I've been dumb enough since I was born. And now it's all right, it's OK. And you can look the other way. We can try to understand the illegal war's effect on man. Whether you're a sister or whether you're a mother, you're stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Feel my brain a breaking and everybody shaking, and I'm stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Ah, ah, ah, ah, stayin' a bore, stayin' a bore. Ah, ah, ah, ah, stayin' a bore. Life going nowhere. Somebody help me, somebody help me, yeah. Life going nowhere. Somebody help me, yeah. I'm stayin' a bore. Life going nowhere. Somebody help me, somebody help me, yeah. Life going nowhere. Somebody help me, yeah. I'm stayin' a bore... Composed and perormed by that most famous of ALL the Barely Glib Brothers, dxAce! ================================== mike |
"Brian Denley" wrote in message ... Michael wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Well, if we're going to compare receivers I guess I'll put in my 2 cents worth after dicking with radios for over 40 years. I have an R-75 (second one) and I find it to be the best overall receiver for what I use it for. I modified the AGC and sync detector similar to the Kiwa scheme, and ,I've found with the various controls that I can pull DX out of the muck easier than with the other receivers Yes.... I agree 100 %. Prices and stat sheets asside, I prefer it for DX'ing over every other radio that I have tried. I admit I have not used any megabuck professional receivers but I have used the R8, R8a, R8b, R-5000, NRD-545. I've had short of the NRD-535D. The latter was a GREAT receiver but the audio sounded like **** even with an external speaker. I thought exactly the same thing of the NRD-545. I'm gratefull I got to test one out before I spent the money on one. I must say though, it was solid as a tank and was the best looking radio I ever saw. I also loved the way the user interface was set up. Michael Yes and that NRD interface is very computer controllable. By that I mean you can set all the user functions through the RS-232 port as well as the front panel. Even the NRD-535Db bandwidth control unit could be set to just about any bandwidth from 6 KHz to 500 Hz in 10 hz steps. I still find the NRD receivers to have the best 'feel' of any of the ones I have owned. Great tuning knob and easy to use controls. -- Brian Denley http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html Hi Brian! Yeah, I love the way the solid feel of the NRD-525 controls. It's a well built receiver and it pulls signals out very nicely. The only problem I have is the audio of course. Even thru great speakers, it can sound muddy and flat. Not good fidelity even with a very wide filter. Other then that I like my 525 a lot but use the R75 most of the time. Lucky |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com