Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ups.com... Michael wrote: Other then a few computer controlled alternatives, there are no other choices other then the R-75. That's the larger point. Michael Well, there's the Palstar R30C and R30CC: http://www.rffun.com/catalog/commrxvr/0330.html Steve Under $ 1,000 but still more then the R-75. I think they sell for about $ 650.00. I looked into this radio not too long ago. Obviously, there is a lack of interface features. Worse then that, ECSS tuning for DX'ing could be a bit problematic due to it's 20 Hz minumum tuning incraments. That will absolutely NOT due. Not even for $300.00 brand new. I'd take the R-75 over this ANY day of the week even if the Palstar wasn't more expensive. Michael |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
maybe because it is fact and not troll......
"Jim Hackett" wrote in message ink.net... You can't recognize a TROLL when you see one? "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 |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
I have no idea why I'm involving myself in this petty bickering. But this
is the ONLY comment I will make: I own BOTH and I disagree BUT I'm NOT gonna argue with ANYONE. Believe what you want. I already stated what I believe... "mike maghakian" wrote in message ... maybe because it is fact and not troll...... "Jim Hackett" wrote in message ink.net... You can't recognize a TROLL when you see one? "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 |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Michael wrote:
"craigm" wrote in message ... Michael 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. Let me get this straight..... "Dumpster Fodder ???" Your getting carried away.... Recommend a better radio that will have a PRACTICAL improvement over an R-75 without spending over $ 1,000.00 Please dont spit out specs that hardly differ from that of the R-75 and are not statistically significant PRACTICALLY speaking. Tell me what radio NEW out of the box will give me a PRACTICAL improvement on my R-75 for under $1,000.00 and I'll buy it this week. Remember, this is for DX'ing. I dont want a boom box. Michael Can you list the radios that fall in the $500-$1000 price range the might be candidates for comparison? They would have to be generally available within the US. Other then a few computer controlled alternatives, there are no other choices other then the R-75. That's the larger point. Then I think posing the challenge you expressed is a poor way to make a point. There are radios, in my opinion, that I find to be an improvement over the R75. Specifically, the IC-746Pro and g313i. However, they fall outside your dollar range. At any specific price point the number of radios to choose from is limited. The nature of the challenge you put forth guaranteed there would be no way to meet it to your satisfaction. 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 ???? Only one of those is possibly in current production. You can see what receiver gets the better test numbers here. All those that are out of production. You selected the list for comparison, so, from that list I see the R75 had the poorest number. Is that your point? Think it matters PRACTICALLY speaking given what typical noise floors are ??? That's a limitation on the user's antenna and location and not the radio. For some, the difference is significant. Would you feel it was worth it to spend a few thousand dollars to get that extra decimal ??? Well, you've skipped over the $1000 to $2000 range which covers several radios. Also, that extra cost goes into more than just improving one number. That makes your question pointless. This applies equally to other values. Do you understand my point yet ???? Yes, for you the R75 appears to work well. Others have found they prefer other radios for a variety of reasons. If you've found a radio that you like, listen to it. If others find that the radio you like doesn't work well for them live with that fact. Neither person is necessarily right or wrong, they have each found what works for them. Michael Hey, at least the thread is on topic for the group. craigm |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
DPM,
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael" 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. Let me get this straight..... "Dumpster Fodder ???" Your getting carried away.... Recommend a better radio that will have a PRACTICAL improvement over an R-75 without spending over $ 1,000.00 Please dont spit out specs that hardly differ from that of the R-75 and are not statistically significant PRACTICALLY speaking. Again, I said that it is good value for the money. I know -- I had one for quite a long time. Tell me what radio NEW out of the box will give me a PRACTICAL improvement on my R-75 for under $1,000.00 and I'll buy it this week. Remember, this is for DX'ing. I dont want a boom box. I use the R8500. It has a front-end like a tank. "Specs?" The '8500s close-in dynamic range is abysmal. Yet I've found it to be an amazingly useful radio. The '75 just couldn't pull anything out of all the crap internally generated below 10 MHz here, because my antennas happen to be in the way of the local flame-throwers. Michael -- Eric F. Richards "This book reads like a headache on paper." http://www.cnn.com/2001/CAREER/readi...one/index.html |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
craigm wrote:
Michael 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. Let me get this straight..... "Dumpster Fodder ???" Your getting carried away.... Recommend a better radio that will have a PRACTICAL improvement over an R-75 without spending over $ 1,000.00 Please dont spit out specs that hardly differ from that of the R-75 and are not statistically significant PRACTICALLY speaking. Tell me what radio NEW out of the box will give me a PRACTICAL improvement on my R-75 for under $1,000.00 and I'll buy it this week. Remember, this is for DX'ing. I dont want a boom box. Michael Can you list the radios that fall in the $500-$1000 price range the might be candidates for comparison? They would have to be generally available within the US. 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 Hmmm. Statistically significant here means nothing. "Significant?" Well, he doesn't know, but I'll take a shot at it... Sensitivity is overrated. Dynamic range is important. Ultimate rejection is underrated, unfortunately, and is the most important figure for my situation. It is also where the R75 falls short. Right now, there aren't any radios to discuss because the tabletop market has been swept clean. -- Eric F. Richards "The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts agree, is by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer professionals. We cause accidents." - Nathaniel S. Borenstein |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
"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 No crazier than saying the R75 is the ultimate radio without having exercised some other options. Had Drake been manufacturing the Sat 800, er, SW-8, still, it would be a respectible radio, still. -- Eric F. Richards "Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product." -Ferenc Mantfeld |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
PETE [KE9OA] 'status report' on the AM/MW Receiver Project | Shortwave | |||
RHF Displays His Card-Carrying Member Status in the Rat-Fink Society | Shortwave | |||
GCN Status? | Shortwave | |||
Restoring the status quo of Ham Radio | Homebrew | |||
Status of Shortwave. | Shortwave |