"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Michael Lawson wrote:
wrote in message
...

What is it about the 75's that is so special?


My guess is the dual passband tuning, because I've
heard mixed things about the sync and DSP.

--Mike L.




R-75 handles a bit easier than R-71. Audio is more pleasant. And
it
tends to be a bit quieter in the headphones.

So, between the two, if the cost came up for the same
used, the R75 is the smarter buy? I always figured
that the R71 would be.

R-71, by receiver standards, is very long in the tooth, and
though it
still acqits itself well, it's nowhere near current, technically
speaking, and is easily outperformed in deep DX by younger models.
And
by now, is beginning to show it's frailties.

Younger kilobuck models, or younger $500 models?
I'd figure that it still had the DX capabilities over
the new competition in it's price range, the R75 and
Sat 800 (and now E1).

--Mike L.

Michael Lawson wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Michael Lawson wrote:

wrote in message
...


What is it about the 75's that is so special?


My guess is the dual passband tuning, because I've
heard mixed things about the sync and DSP.

--Mike L.




R-75 handles a bit easier than R-71. Audio is more pleasant. And

it

tends to be a bit quieter in the headphones.


So, between the two, if the cost came up for the same
used, the R75 is the smarter buy? I always figured
that the R71 would be.



There will be some tech work required if you go that way....caps need
to be replaced on the DC-DC and display boards, trimmers on the PLL will
probably need to be replaced. And there will be some solder joints that
need to be touched up due to the huge heat output of the regulator. And
you may need to replace the lithium cell.


Some parts will be hard to come by soon. If you're up to the
challenge, R-71 is a higher quality build. If you're not, R-71 can be a
bit much.


My preference was with R-71. But that's my preference. I like the
feature set, performance is still superior to most of what's out there.


It really depends on what your intentions for the radio are.



R-71, by receiver standards, is very long in the tooth, and

though it

still acqits itself well, it's nowhere near current, technically
speaking, and is easily outperformed in deep DX by younger models.

And

by now, is beginning to show it's frailties.


Younger kilobuck models, or younger $500 models?
I'd figure that it still had the DX capabilities over
the new competition in it's price range, the R75 and
Sat 800 (and now E1).

--Mike L.


Sat 800 and E1 aren't in the same class. Not by far. Because they
were not built to the same purpose as R-71. Sat 800 and E1 are
entertainment radios, with DX performance -- such that it is -- a bonus.
R-71 was created as a high performance communications radio, with DX
performance a priority.

As for price class, remember that R-71 was pushing the high side of
$1700 by the time it was discontinued. But newer technology has made
quantum improvements in performance, often at less cost. So, you're
question has no real definitive answer.


Against younger comm receivers, R-71 holds its own, $500 or kilobuck
models. Not was well as it used to. But it does well.

Against program listening models, like SAT 800, E1 or even HF-150,
R-71 is a more robust performer in many environments, but that can be as
much a matter of taste as it is actual numbers. And it is often a matter
of environment.

"Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Michael Lawson wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Michael Lawson wrote:

wrote in message
...


What is it about the 75's that is so special?


My guess is the dual passband tuning, because I've
heard mixed things about the sync and DSP.

--Mike L.




R-75 handles a bit easier than R-71. Audio is more pleasant.
And

it

tends to be a bit quieter in the headphones.


So, between the two, if the cost came up for the same
used, the R75 is the smarter buy? I always figured
that the R71 would be.



There will be some tech work required if you go that way....caps
need
to be replaced on the DC-DC and display boards, trimmers on the PLL
will
probably need to be replaced. And there will be some solder joints
that
need to be touched up due to the huge heat output of the regulator.
And
you may need to replace the lithium cell.


Some parts will be hard to come by soon. If you're up to the
challenge, R-71 is a higher quality build. If you're not, R-71 can
be a
bit much.

Doesn't Icom still provide service for the IC-R71A? I thought
that was a main difference between Kenwood's R-5000 and
the IC-R71A.

My preference was with R-71. But that's my preference. I like
the
feature set, performance is still superior to most of what's out
there.


It really depends on what your intentions for the radio are.

Definitely would be for DXing and adjacent channel
rejection. I use 5980 Radio Marocaine as a standard
point for rejection, as the selectable sideband sync
on my Sat 800 has tremendous trouble with bleedover
from 5975 BBC. At least one other person said that
they have no trouble using their Sat 800's sync to
lock in Marocaine easily (without having to constantly
tinker with the filters and whatnot), but that's not
been my experience. It'll lock for about a minute or
two, and then get bleedover, and that's all she wrote.
Going the ECSS route helps a bit, but the Sat 800
simply doesn't have the full toolset or the specs
that a real DXing machine has. If a radio can
handle that requirement, then I'd be set. As for DXing,
hell, any band has it's faint signals; if a radio can dig
out more of them, the more the merrier.


R-71, by receiver standards, is very long in the tooth, and

though it

still acqits itself well, it's nowhere near current, technically
speaking, and is easily outperformed in deep DX by younger models.

And

by now, is beginning to show it's frailties.


Younger kilobuck models, or younger $500 models?
I'd figure that it still had the DX capabilities over
the new competition in it's price range, the R75 and
Sat 800 (and now E1).

--Mike L.


Sat 800 and E1 aren't in the same class. Not by far. Because they
were not built to the same purpose as R-71. Sat 800 and E1 are
entertainment radios, with DX performance -- such that it is -- a
bonus.
R-71 was created as a high performance communications radio, with DX
performance a priority.

Bingo.

As for price class, remember that R-71 was pushing the high side
of
$1700 by the time it was discontinued. But newer technology has made
quantum improvements in performance, often at less cost. So, you're
question has no real definitive answer.

True, but I often think of the R71A as a $350-$400
used radio now, not the original price. It's a legacy
product nowadays.

Of course, as a measure of how good it was, it
outlasted the IC-R72. Which is why I was asking
about the R75; was it going to be another R72,
or would it really match the R71A in DX-ing
performance?

Against younger comm receivers, R-71 holds its own, $500 or
kilobuck
models. Not was well as it used to. But it does well.

Against program listening models, like SAT 800, E1 or even
HF-150,
R-71 is a more robust performer in many environments, but that can
be as
much a matter of taste as it is actual numbers. And it is often a
matter
of environment.

True, but then again, I already have a Sat 800 for
program listening (as well as that SX-100, when I
get done working on it). The DXing machine is
where I've a gap in my shack; and short of spending
$800 or so for an R8B, I'd like a good DXing piece
of equipment that I can purchase without too much
pain in the next year or two.

--Mike L.

I'd like to know where I could pick up an R8B for $800...



"Michael Lawson" wrote in message
...

"Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Michael Lawson wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Michael Lawson wrote:

wrote in message
...


What is it about the 75's that is so special?


My guess is the dual passband tuning, because I've
heard mixed things about the sync and DSP.

--Mike L.




R-75 handles a bit easier than R-71. Audio is more pleasant.
And

it

tends to be a bit quieter in the headphones.


So, between the two, if the cost came up for the same
used, the R75 is the smarter buy? I always figured
that the R71 would be.



There will be some tech work required if you go that way....caps
need
to be replaced on the DC-DC and display boards, trimmers on the PLL
will
probably need to be replaced. And there will be some solder joints
that
need to be touched up due to the huge heat output of the regulator.
And
you may need to replace the lithium cell.


Some parts will be hard to come by soon. If you're up to the
challenge, R-71 is a higher quality build. If you're not, R-71 can
be a
bit much.

Doesn't Icom still provide service for the IC-R71A? I thought
that was a main difference between Kenwood's R-5000 and
the IC-R71A.

My preference was with R-71. But that's my preference. I like
the
feature set, performance is still superior to most of what's out
there.


It really depends on what your intentions for the radio are.

Definitely would be for DXing and adjacent channel
rejection. I use 5980 Radio Marocaine as a standard
point for rejection, as the selectable sideband sync
on my Sat 800 has tremendous trouble with bleedover
from 5975 BBC. At least one other person said that
they have no trouble using their Sat 800's sync to
lock in Marocaine easily (without having to constantly
tinker with the filters and whatnot), but that's not
been my experience. It'll lock for about a minute or
two, and then get bleedover, and that's all she wrote.
Going the ECSS route helps a bit, but the Sat 800
simply doesn't have the full toolset or the specs
that a real DXing machine has. If a radio can
handle that requirement, then I'd be set. As for DXing,
hell, any band has it's faint signals; if a radio can dig
out more of them, the more the merrier.


R-71, by receiver standards, is very long in the tooth, and

though it

still acqits itself well, it's nowhere near current, technically
speaking, and is easily outperformed in deep DX by younger models.

And

by now, is beginning to show it's frailties.


Younger kilobuck models, or younger $500 models?
I'd figure that it still had the DX capabilities over
the new competition in it's price range, the R75 and
Sat 800 (and now E1).

--Mike L.


Sat 800 and E1 aren't in the same class. Not by far. Because they
were not built to the same purpose as R-71. Sat 800 and E1 are
entertainment radios, with DX performance -- such that it is -- a
bonus.
R-71 was created as a high performance communications radio, with DX
performance a priority.

Bingo.

As for price class, remember that R-71 was pushing the high side
of
$1700 by the time it was discontinued. But newer technology has made
quantum improvements in performance, often at less cost. So, you're
question has no real definitive answer.

True, but I often think of the R71A as a $350-$400
used radio now, not the original price. It's a legacy
product nowadays.

Of course, as a measure of how good it was, it
outlasted the IC-R72. Which is why I was asking
about the R75; was it going to be another R72,
or would it really match the R71A in DX-ing
performance?

Against younger comm receivers, R-71 holds its own, $500 or
kilobuck
models. Not was well as it used to. But it does well.

Against program listening models, like SAT 800, E1 or even
HF-150,
R-71 is a more robust performer in many environments, but that can
be as
much a matter of taste as it is actual numbers. And it is often a
matter
of environment.

True, but then again, I already have a Sat 800 for
program listening (as well as that SX-100, when I
get done working on it). The DXing machine is
where I've a gap in my shack; and short of spending
$800 or so for an R8B, I'd like a good DXing piece
of equipment that I can purchase without too much
pain in the next year or two.

--Mike L.

Jim Hackett wrote:

I'd like to know where I could pick up an R8B for $800...

The one I have currently I think I paid around $850 and the two previous were
around $800.

eBay or rec.radio.swap

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 14:32:07 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



Jim Hackett wrote:

I'd like to know where I could pick up an R8B for $800...

The one I have currently I think I paid around $850 and the two previous were
around $800.

eBay or rec.radio.swap

dxAce
Michigan
USA

You purchased yours while they were still being made; now that they
are discontinued the prices are moving up. Saw one recently ~$1200
and I expect to see them go higher than that.

Howard

Howard wrote:

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 14:32:07 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



Jim Hackett wrote:

I'd like to know where I could pick up an R8B for $800...

The one I have currently I think I paid around $850 and the two previous were
around $800.

eBay or rec.radio.swap

dxAce
Michigan
USA

You purchased yours while they were still being made; now that they
are discontinued the prices are moving up. Saw one recently ~$1200
and I expect to see them go higher than that.

I'm hoping to spot one in the thrift store for $20.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

In article ,
dxAce wrote:

Howard wrote:

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 14:32:07 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



Jim Hackett wrote:

I'd like to know where I could pick up an R8B for $800...

The one I have currently I think I paid around $850 and the two previous
were
around $800.

eBay or rec.radio.swap

dxAce
Michigan
USA

You purchased yours while they were still being made; now that they
are discontinued the prices are moving up. Saw one recently ~$1200
and I expect to see them go higher than that.

I'm hoping to spot one in the thrift store for $20.

You should look for one of those big 18 tube boat anchor radios to keep
warm with this winter. Heating oil looks to be pricey this year.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
dxAce wrote:

Howard wrote:

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 14:32:07 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



Jim Hackett wrote:

I'd like to know where I could pick up an R8B for $800...

The one I have currently I think I paid around $850 and the two previous
were
around $800.

eBay or rec.radio.swap

dxAce
Michigan
USA

You purchased yours while they were still being made; now that they
are discontinued the prices are moving up. Saw one recently ~$1200
and I expect to see them go higher than that.

I'm hoping to spot one in the thrift store for $20.

You should look for one of those big 18 tube boat anchor radios to keep
warm with this winter. Heating oil looks to be pricey this year.

Natural gas here, but that'll be going up as well.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

The problems with the R-75 sync are based on
early users who didn't know how to apply it. It's
not like the Drake. It's a bit fiddly. Follow the
instructions in the manual, it works fine.


I took a look at the online manual, and there's
a lack of description in the manual for the sync,
which surprised me. Unless I was looking in
the wrong place, that is; I just checked again
to make sure, and the only thing as far as
setting is concerned is the configuration whether
the S-AM gets turned on automatically at
low signal levels or whether it's always on.

Oh, now, that's interesting. I got my instructions from the Icom
Rep
at a hamfest. I may still have them around here somewhere. I wasn't
aware there was so little in the manual. But Icom manuals are like
that.
I've discovered half a dozen functions on my R10 that aren't in the
manual, either. Only acknowledged by Icom in supplements released
through limited channels.

If you have those instructions around, it might
not be a bad idea to post them, since as you said,
Icom's manuals aren't the greatest in the world.
(They do make the Sat 800's manual look nice,
tho.)

::snippage::

Yes, if I can find the time for it this winter. Anything
will be worth it to keep the internal noise from the
television at bay and get a bit of directionality so
I can pick up UD basketball games on WHIO 1290
at nighttime.



If it's MW you're primarily interested in, you may consider a
shielded ferrite loop, like the Justice antenna (which can be
mounted
outdoors and elevated for noise avoidance), or, if you can find one,
a
McKay -Dymek DA-5. Amazing how quiet reception can be with the
McKay.
Even indoors.

When I was living downtown, there was no way to get a reliable AM
signal in my building. Even on the 52nd floor, WGN was often buried
in
the noise and WLS wasn't even on the dial. I bought a
Select-A-Tennna.
It takes some careful tuning, but that cleaned up my AM dial in
short
order, not only boosting signal, but reducing noise as well.

It doesn't work that dramatically with every receiver, but in
this
case, it was quite the find.

I'll have to think about that for BCB AM. I'm more
interested in the HF bands, but when the leaves
turn color and college basketball season heats up,
it's time for another season of get-my-heart-broken
time by the Flyers. (At least we don't suck anymore,
like the early 90's.)

True, but then again, I already have a Sat 800 for
program listening (as well as that SX-100, when I
get done working on it). The DXing machine is
where I've a gap in my shack; and short of spending
$800 or so for an R8B, I'd like a good DXing piece
of equipment that I can purchase without too much
pain in the next year or two.



R-71 may be a reasonable choice for you. Although it
WILL need attention before long. Bellevue does good
work, though. A trip there might be wise to build into
the budget if you choose to go that route. They can
return it to factory performance. The hourly rate is
deceptive. They're so well versed in this radio, with
immediate access to parts, that service will be done
quickly. In the big picture, it's often cheaper to get
factory service than it is from independents offering
a lower hourly rate.


Thanks for the info, Peter. Good as always. I figure I
can live with the audio, since I used to have an IC-R70
before I bought the Sat 800. I know, however, that the
IC-R71A had DXing advantages and fewer idiocyncracies
than the R70 had. I got rid of the R70 more due to the
idiocyncracies surrounding the ergonomics more than
the performance itself, although I didn't see the need
at the time to hang onto more than one working tabletop
or portatop at one time, either. (Silly me.)



Silly indeed. Actually, R-71 audio can be made more tolerable

with a

decent speaker.


Yeah; I built one for the R70, which improved things
a bit. I should still have it lying around somewhere
after we moved to our current house.


KIWA offers an audio upgrade kit for R-71. Craig will install it
for
you for a fee, as well. And even installed, it's not very expensive.
That's actually a mixed blessing. The audio problems with R-71 and
it's
stablemates is not related to poor design of the audio stage. In
fact,
as was pointed out in this forum a couple of years ago, the audio
stage
of R-71 is actually surprisingly clean for a comm radio and quite
robust.

Most of the distortion comes from the mixing and detector stages.
And
for that, there's little remedy. Doing an audio upgrade merely swaps
out
the ceramic caps in the audio path, which are notoriously poor for
audio, replacing them with higher grade, audio friendly caps, which
does
make for a cleaner audio path. But that, in turn, makes the
distortions
more distinct and well defined. The audio goes from 'woolly' to
harsh.
Noticeable particularly on consonants. In the case of R-71, ceramic
caps
in the audio path actually work to your benefit, by smearing the
harsher
elements of the audio across a comparatively wide time
interval,---still
very small, actually---softening the more irritating elements.

So the audio upgrade might not be the best idea,
but definitely the external speaker is. Is that the
case with the R70 as well, or just the R71A? It
might be easier to get that R70 back before I get
an R71A.

Now if Kenwood were as good at helping out with
the R-5000, I'd probably have them first on my list...



When I bought my R-71, I did a side by side
with R-5000. Picked the R-71 for it's ergonomics,
and more substantial build.


Are the better filters on the R71A worth it, like they
were/are for the R-5000?




Absolutely. I installed the FL-44 premium filter for SSB. Made a
huge
difference in rejection on crowded bands. ICOM filters are going to
be
hard to come by, but InRad makes crystal filters for it, that have
received considerable praise. Cost effective, and higher performance
than most factory and aftermarket filters. Too.

I seem to recall that Kiwa made some, too. I'll have
to go check their website for info again. I know
that the R-5000 filters come up regularly on eBay,
however.

You may benefit from a factory alignment after you install them,
though.

You probably know that R-71 originally released with PBT. And a
heated patent infringement battle got that removed. But what's not
widely known, is that removal only consisted of removal of the PBT
components. The map on the board is still there. And the service
manual
still has the PBT section depicted, in detail, on it's schematics.
So,
with a little time inside, and nominal cost, you can restore PBT to
a
non PBT R-71. You'll want to install a premium filter for this at
the
same time.

If you ask real nice, Bellevue may actually still have a PBT
faceplate for this radio.






For the most part, in the dark, they're the same radio.


They were the 1-2 punch in the late 80's, if you couldn't
spring for a JRC. The FRG-8800 always seemed to be
a step behind the R71A and R-5000, and when the 535D
and R8 hit the scene, the 8800 was simply outclassed.


R-71 was sold by the thousands for monitoring stations worldwide.
Most of the big broadcasters used them. Many government agencies
used
them. Some may have seen limited military service by accounts I've
heard. It was the 'it' radio, to be sure. More trouble free than
the
JRC's. And more robust in heavy service applications than most
anything
out there.

More trouble-free than the JRC's? I always thought
that the JRC's (like the 515) were built like tanks.

--Mike L.