"craigm" wrote in message
...
wrote:
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 I've had short
of the NRD-535D. The latter was a GREAT receiver but the audio sounded
like **** even with an external speaker. Surpirsingly, I've had 3 Icom
R-72s and I've found them to be excellent despite the poor reviews of
the past. They are the only decent sounding Icoms of them all and I
would put them pretty close to the top of my list except they run very
hot. The R-71A is a good receiver but a quality control nightmare with
poor audio. I liked the Lowe HF-225 and the FRG-100 but found I
couldn't use them here being within 5 miles of several 50 kW FM
stations which mixed directly into the 1st IF. It's a shame because the
FRG-100 is an excellent, and highly underrated receiver IMO. I've had 3
Drake R-8s and was not impressed with either of them considering what
they go for and the hype. The Palstar R-30 was the worst of all (tried
2); birdies galore, unstable IF, speaker/cabinet resonances and just
overall cheezy receiver. My simple Lowe HF-150 beat the pants off of
both R-30s hands down. Now, all you "space cadet" type SWLers can go
ahead and personally insult me because of my opinions! I can't wait to
see the comments!

Frank
Tucson


Frank,

I'll go first!

When you say "I find it to be the best overall receiver for what I use it
for" that is the right phrase. You have found the reciever that works best
for you. Congratulations.

There are many different receivers just as there are many different
listeners. Each listener may be looking for something different in a
radio.

Just because radio 'x' doesn't meet my need there is no reason for me to
be concerned that it satisfies your requirements. Nor is there any need
for me to tell you that my choice for a radio would also be the best for
you.

I may choose to tell you which radio I prefer to use. But if I don't
decribe my listening preferences, antenna, and conditions that existed
when I made my decision or comparison, I am not really saying anything of
value. For my opinion to mean anything, you have to know the context.

Your post indicates you go after DX. It also indicates that strong FM
stations have caused problems with some radios. That information adds the
context that explains why some radios didn't work for you. It may also
tell the reader who doesn't have nearby FM transmitters that the FRG-100
may be worth looking at. A reader that has nearby FM transmitters may want
to avoid the FRG-100.

You have also indicated that you have experience with many different
radios. This also is worthwhile as your comments carry more weight than
someone saying that radio 'y' is the best he's ever used only to find out
later that it was being compared to a $25 thrift shop special.

My bottom line: Good Comments.


craigm





Yes I agree,

great comments from Frank. It was good little read! I was surprised at the
reaction to the Palstar 30 though. I thought it was a decent receiver and
was ready to bid on a "Lowe HF-350" made by Palstar. But Frank has me happy
the auction got pulled.

Yes you are right. Without letting anyone know what your listening habits
and preferences are, the review and opinion means nothing.

All that wasted typing

Lucky

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
news
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