Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Fodder for Zenki - Trashy Ham Transmitters Rated  (Read 13259 times)
K9IUQ
Member

Posts: 1950




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: October 02, 2014, 09:26:12 AM »

If people can be sued for giving a hotel or restaurant a bad review on line, why not an individual who slams one product and endorses another?

If this was true EVERY politician in the USA would be sued.
They ALL tell lies and innuendos and spin on each other. It tis the season, have you had the TV on lately?
 Cheesy

Stan K9IUQ
Logged
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 817


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #31 on: October 02, 2014, 09:33:06 AM »

If people can be sued for giving a hotel or restaurant a bad review on line, why not an individual who slams one product and endorses another?

If this was true EVERY politician in the USA would be sued.
They ALL tell lies and innuendos and spin on each other. It tis the season, have you had the TV on lately?
 Cheesy

Stan K9IUQ
The statement is intended as a metaphor to make a point Stan.  I do agree with you on the politician point though Smiley  I try and stay away from TV
« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 09:35:28 AM by NK7Z » Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
W1JKA
Member

Posts: 1760




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: October 03, 2014, 04:21:38 AM »

  Who said amateur Radio and Politics don't go hand in hand? Anyone been on the air lately?
Logged
KK5DR
Member

Posts: 83


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #33 on: October 12, 2014, 05:36:37 AM »

Even the best designed, most expensive commercial grade radio available can be made to sound trashy by a bad operator.
Logged
SWL2002
Member

Posts: 345




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: October 12, 2014, 07:30:37 AM »

Even the cleanest transmitter can be crapped up by over driving a "linear" amplifier - something you hear all too often on the bands these days.  Nothing can replace the competence (or lack thereof) of the operator.

An SDR with a decent panadpter will show the splatter makers.  Forget about bringing this to the attention of the splattering operator though.  At best, they will say it is your receiver, and worse they will probably call you a F'ing SOB or something similar.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2014, 07:32:56 AM by SWL2002 » Logged
HB9PJT
Member

Posts: 272


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #35 on: October 12, 2014, 11:39:59 AM »

What is a F'ing SOB?

73, Peter - HB9PJT
Logged
SWL2002
Member

Posts: 345




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: October 12, 2014, 02:03:42 PM »

What is a F'ing SOB?

73, Peter - HB9PJT

Forking Son of a Biscuit.  Cheesy

Logged
K9AIM
Member

Posts: 1072




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: October 13, 2014, 08:18:39 AM »

A big issue that I always like to raise in the radio comparisons found on the web (both ranking transmitter and receiver performance) is that they are a single test sample. 

^this^ is a huge point.   just because rig X was cleaner than rig Y in the test does not automatically mean your rig X is cleaner than someone else's rig Y.  Factor in the variations created by individual operator xmt settings and measurable chaos ensues  Cheesy

were all the rigs in the test brand new or at least the same age and mileage?



Logged
W1JKA
Member

Posts: 1760




Ignore
« Reply #38 on: October 13, 2014, 12:51:44 PM »

"Fodder for Zenki"  He's to busy laughing to eat.
Logged
NR9R
Member

Posts: 155




Ignore
« Reply #39 on: October 17, 2014, 10:36:39 AM »

A big issue that I always like to raise in the radio comparisons found on the web (both ranking transmitter and receiver performance) is that they are a single test sample.

^this^ is a huge point.   just because rig X was cleaner than rig Y in the test does not automatically mean your rig X is cleaner than someone else's rig Y.  Factor in the variations created by individual operator xmt settings and measurable chaos ensues  Cheesy

were all the rigs in the test brand new or at least the same age and mileage?


Thanks for highlighting this.  With respect to manufacturing variability only, I haven't had the time to put together a comparison but there is sufficient data in QST reviews to get an idea of the differences.  For example, reviews exists for the Yaesu FT-897D/FT-857D, the ICOM IC-7410/IC-9100 and other such transceivers which have identical HF receiver/transmitter boards but show some differences in individual testing.  The comparison between the FTdx-9000 Contest and 9000D reviews is also insightful.

I once had two FTdx-5000D's in my shack and it was interesting to notice the differences between the two.  One could not just duplicate all of the settings and expect the same result.  One was very sensitive to RFI, the other was not.  One appeared to have gain compensation when the preselector was engaged.  The other showed gain on some bands and about 3 dB of loss on others (Yaesu didn't seem too interested in my findings, but that's another topic).  These differences were really concerning because I was only left to wonder how the performance varied in areas that I don't have equipment to measure, such as transmitter phase noise or receiver dynamic range.
Logged
ZENKI
Member

Posts: 956




Ignore
« Reply #40 on: Yesterday at 06:32:07 AM »

Well the ARRL in the last 2 issues has been showing off all their new Test  Equipment acquisitions. They  have the very best spectrum analyzers and signal source analyzers that can measure any of these problems. All this equipment from the house of Rohde & Schwarz. It will be interesting to see if the ARRL uses this advanced test equipment and actually reports on all these faults or just conveniently sweeps these issues under the carpet.

The ARRL should bring back the expanded test reports and place them in QEX magazine where the issues can be explored and discussed. This will place the subject matter way out of reach from the delinquent emotional brand groupies who make a lot  of noise when their expensive toys fail so miserably.

The ARRL also has released a new book on equipment performance testing. It will be interesting to see if they have raised the issue of spectral purity in this book.

Logged
NW1HR
Member

Posts: 15




Ignore
« Reply #41 on: Yesterday at 07:16:37 AM »

As a new 590 owner, it hold its own, very solid value at $1269.

But I love seeing USA-made Elecraft setting the standard.  Someday I'll buy one of their radios.
Logged
K9IUQ
Member

Posts: 1950




Ignore
« Reply #42 on: Yesterday at 05:02:35 PM »

As a new 590 owner, it hold its own, very solid value at $1269.

I have had mine since late 2010. It has been a real Workhorse. I keep thinking I need a new radio as I rarely keep a radio more than a couple of years. I like the bling and fun of a new radio on the desk.

The problem is I doubt I could get a better performing radio unless I spend at least twice or more than what I paid for the 590s. And I have this fear of maybe buying a new radio and finding out it is not an improvement over my TS-590s

Stan K9IUQ
Logged
NZ4ZN
Member

Posts: 36




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: Today at 03:40:59 PM »

.....just because rig X was cleaner than rig Y in the test does not automatically mean your rig X is cleaner than someone else's rig Y.
QFT.

I worked as a bench technician in a radio manufacturer's facility assembling and aligning surveillance receivers, measurement receivers, signal generators and time domain reflectometers. Phase locked loop circuits were used as base frequency oscillators and I used to use a spectrum analyzer to tune for maximum gain and minimum harmonic emissions through the various oscillator and amplifier circuits. I would get one unit that set up quickly and easily and acted like it 'wanted' to work, while a superficially identical unit would take two or three times the effort to get right and even then only barely made spec. I always felt like their performance was precarious, but if they met spec, they were OK and out they went. All of the units bore the same model number and a technical review of one that wanted to work may be a bit more flattering than a review of one of the marginal units.
Logged
W1JKA
Member

Posts: 1760




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: Today at 04:29:34 PM »

Re: NZ4ZN

I suspect those "marginal units" were still close enough for Government work. Wink
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!