I have to believe that just about everyone here does considerable A/B
comparisons between their radios. You know - same antenna, same frequency,
both radios adjusted for optimal reception on that station - to see which
radio is "better". Of course, the term "better" is subjective, but you know
what I mean. Have you ever found that one radio that consistently
outperforms another turns out to be inferior, on one particular day?

When I got my Sat 800, I compared it to my Kenwood R-1000 many times, at
different times of the day, and at many different frequencies. I concluded
that the Sat 800 was a better radio. Not by much, probably because they are
both generally excellent receivers, but the Sat 800 gave consistently better
results and it is now my primary radio because of this direct comparison.

Last night, just for fun, I decided to do another A/B comparison, and this
time the R-1000 was MUCH better. More sensitive, quieter, and better in
every way. So much so that I thought there might be something wrong with
the Sat 800. However, today things are back to normal and the Sat 800 edges
out the Kenwood. Again, not by much, but if I had to choose just one to
keep, it would be the Sat 800. Last night I would have concluded otherwise,
based on only that one comparison.

What could account for this? Has anyone else experienced this?

Jeff

Atmospheric Propagation.
cuhulin

wrote:

Atmospheric Propagation.


...perhaps in Mississippi, but the rest of the world uses the Ionospheric
method. Whatsa matter? Your home State abandon the 'Ether' theory?





mike

I just now sent you some "propagation" m II,suck it up.
cuhulin

m II wrote:

wrote:

Atmospheric Propagation.

..perhaps in Mississippi, but the rest of the world uses the Ionospheric
method. Whatsa matter? Your home State abandon the 'Ether' theory?

The ionosphere is a part of the atmosphere, 'tard boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

I'm a little surprised that the Sat 800 would generally outperform the
R-1000, but anyway...

On the day the R-1000 had the 'edge', had either it or the 800 changed
position or orientation in any way? I'm wondering if, on this
particular day, you were using the R-1000 in a location that is quieter
than where it's usually situated.

Was there a change in the way either radio was powered?

I could be wrong, but I have the sneaking suspicion that something is
keeping the R-1000 from performing to its full potential most of the
time.

In article .com,
wrote:

I'm a little surprised that the Sat 800 would generally outperform
the R-1000, but anyway...

On the day the R-1000 had the 'edge', had either it or the 800
changed position or orientation in any way? I'm wondering if, on this
particular day, you were using the R-1000 in a location that is
quieter than where it's usually situated.

Was there a change in the way either radio was powered?

I could be wrong, but I have the sneaking suspicion that something is
keeping the R-1000 from performing to its full potential most of the
time.

Maybe this is a good place to put in that most radios inputs are not
flat 50 ohms and with the antenna not matched perfectly on the far end
of the connecting coax moving the near end from one radio input to
another is not an equivalent situation. With reflections on the coax
both radios may not see the same signal level so even if they both have
the same level of sensitivity the same signal may appear much weaker on
one as opposed to the other.

It's a must at the least to check several frequencies and get the
averaged results to declare one more sensitive than the other.

The antenna, coax and receiver input match could change from day to day
changing results. The antenna is probably is what is changing the
equation, where the over all match is better with one radio over the
other. Antenna characteristics can change with temperature and
humidity. Ground conductivity can also come into play for single
element antennas that have ground as the other half of the antenna.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Thanks for your reply. The antenna is an indoor longwire mounted in the
attic, connecting to the high-impedance inputs on both radios. Nothing has
changed with the antenna, but as you pointed out there could be some
condition that causes this particular antenna to work better with one of the
radios on one particular day.



"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
wrote:

I'm a little surprised that the Sat 800 would generally outperform
the R-1000, but anyway...

On the day the R-1000 had the 'edge', had either it or the 800
changed position or orientation in any way? I'm wondering if, on this
particular day, you were using the R-1000 in a location that is
quieter than where it's usually situated.

Was there a change in the way either radio was powered?

I could be wrong, but I have the sneaking suspicion that something is
keeping the R-1000 from performing to its full potential most of the
time.

Maybe this is a good place to put in that most radios inputs are not
flat 50 ohms and with the antenna not matched perfectly on the far end
of the connecting coax moving the near end from one radio input to
another is not an equivalent situation. With reflections on the coax
both radios may not see the same signal level so even if they both have
the same level of sensitivity the same signal may appear much weaker on
one as opposed to the other.

It's a must at the least to check several frequencies and get the
averaged results to declare one more sensitive than the other.

The antenna, coax and receiver input match could change from day to day
changing results. The antenna is probably is what is changing the
equation, where the over all match is better with one radio over the
other. Antenna characteristics can change with temperature and
humidity. Ground conductivity can also come into play for single
element antennas that have ground as the other half of the antenna.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

No, nothing at all changed. They both sit side by side, and neither one has
moved.

I'm relatively sure that the R-1000 is performing like it should. I know
it's popular here to "dis" the 800, but it really is a great radio. I got
it for a good price not too long ago, and with all the bashing it gets I was
pleasantly surprised. It's a later model (2004) so it has the improvements.
With the price I bought it for, I knew I could resell it on eBay and make a
few bucks, but I'm going to keep it after having played with it now.

Thanks.


wrote in message
oups.com...
I'm a little surprised that the Sat 800 would generally outperform the
R-1000, but anyway...

On the day the R-1000 had the 'edge', had either it or the 800 changed
position or orientation in any way? I'm wondering if, on this
particular day, you were using the R-1000 in a location that is quieter
than where it's usually situated.

Was there a change in the way either radio was powered?

I could be wrong, but I have the sneaking suspicion that something is
keeping the R-1000 from performing to its full potential most of the
time.

Hmm. Interesting. Well, maybe Telamon is on the right track. His theory
would at least account for unpredictability of it all.

As for the Sat 800, I certainly didn't mean to "dis" it. I just don't
believe that any receiver is immune to criticism. All receivers have
strengths and weaknesses. It doesn't matter whether they're made by
Sony, Grundig, Yaesu, JRC, Drake, Icom--or yes, even Eton.

I will now report to the nearest Sat 800 reeducation camp.