eHam Forums => Station Building => Topic started by: WM6Q on May 24, 2014, 02:28:15 PM

Title: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: WM6Q on May 24, 2014, 02:28:15 PM
I have a 5000 but was wondering if anyone had compared it to a 9000.


Bob WM6Q

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: NI8R on May 26, 2014, 03:29:26 PM
 I have a 9k , but have never compared it to a 5k. I could have bought a 5k, but I wanted the mp 400 watts, the micro tuners internal and the identical A & B Receivers. That's not to say the 5k does not have some features that are better, they are just different radios. The 9k is a tremendous HF rig. I owned a k3 for a month, about like putting a plastic knife next to a sword.
Yes the filters are better just a smidge , but the 9k exceeds the k3 in many ways. I am a cw op, not sure what the rest of the world thinks.

Greg kc8iir

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: KC9Q on June 05, 2014, 07:22:47 PM
Here's a couple of comparisons on YouTube: shows the FT-9000 vs FT5000 shows FT-9000 vs FT-5000 vs K3

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: NI8R on June 08, 2014, 12:58:39 PM
Bob , thanks for the post.

The 9k is  a great rig , but it is all user and environment. I live in a quiet area and do not contest. almost no phone, rare digital , I like the dual receivers. filters and MTU units

Many k3 owners and 5k owners have reasons for liking the rig they choose. Not many folks have owned the 9k. cost prohibitive. The w1aw review from eric is just his opinion even if its the same as mine. I have never played with a ftx5k.

Greg kc8iir

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: ZENKI on June 21, 2014, 03:57:47 PM

The data for the FTDX9000 is far from impressive. Lack of receiver and transmitter performance versus the price should be of concern. Many hams seem not to be interested in performance and seem to think that the highest price radio is the best. The FTDX9000 would fall into the poor performance category.

As for comparisons, what  aspect of performance do you want to compare?

If I was going to compare these 2 radios I want to know how  well the radio receives a very weak signal with a very very strong nearby.
Then I want to be sure the receiver sounds good and has no inherent distortion or a poor audio amplifier with distortion and hiss.
Then I also want to be sure the transmitter is properly designed and puts out a clean signal.
Both radios have a good ergonomic front panel with a thing called knobs that most hams prefer.

We can go on and on about all the shortcomings of these radios, however at the end of the day you have to be an informed consumer and tick the boxes that are important
to you. There are no miracle voodoo radios on the market, there are only  radios that perform better because they have better measured technical performance advantages.
A radio with the best technical specifications might also be the worst radio if its annoying to operate and sounds like crap because of audio IMD and distortion. In my opinion
the newer generation of direct sampling SDR radios are getting closer to delivering a product to the ham market that is perfect in all regards. I dont see much evidence of this
desire for design perfection from the Japanese designers. A good example is that you pay 5000  to 10,000 dollars for a radio and you still have to buy a keying buffer box. What planet are the designers on when you  cant included a  1 dollar mosfet in a 10,000 dollar radio? If  these engineers worked for me they would be fired for being incompetent! 

While the FTDX5000 has impressive IMD figures in Class A and and its general TX signal can be good when driven properly. Unfortunately like  many transceivers available,
the FTDX5000 suffers from  ALC compression which causes splatter. The FTDX9000 has poor TX IMD. For such an expensive radio to have such poor IMD specifications
is really pathetic. Looking at the performance of the  FTDX9000,  its specifications is not much better than a  cheap mobile radio like the FTDX450. A lot of money to pay for big box with poor performance and a lot   of knobs with no performance advantage in the real world.

Specifications separates the men radios from the boy radios that have all bells and whistles in a big box with no performance. If it was me making the decision the FTDX5000 would be the winner. However I would not buy a radio that has ALC compression transmitter design problem. I will wait till Yaesu fixes this design issues in the FTDX6000. Unfortunately the Japanese designers dont seem to build on what was good products. Rather than fix the minor issues with the FTDX5000 they willl design a completely new product and repeat the same tragic mistakes. I can never understand this short sighted design stupidity especially  with analog electronic products. If the product  was designed properly and met specifications in 1980, it could still be produced today. They seem to want to sabotage their designs just for the sake of producing something new rather than something better.

If the FTD9000 had the   specifications of  the FTDX5000  it would have been  an easy choice. Maybe Yaesu will produce a FTDX9000 with the receiver of the FTDX5000, a clean transmitter with no ALC compression, a calibrated S-meter and a decent bandscope. That would just about  make  it close to the most technically perfect radio available. I would not hold your breath waiting for this radio because all the Japanese companies dont appear to understand the market that they designing products for. They treating hams like silly fools who have no technical skills to  see through their shallow marketing and poor performance products. Any company that is  still producing crap products like the FTDX9000 that are expensive white elephants with no performance is not really serious about being in the ham performance market. The ham companies are becoming like CB radio makers, who produce the same crap year after and year and just put a new name on the box. They must just think  " that will fool em!" I could be wrong maybe they will release the President FTDX9000 soon and it will have super receiver and transmitter specifications. Yaesu does however get a A for producing radios with knobs and decent front panels. They certainly know how to design a VFO knob thats smooth and silky. Unfortunately I could not spend that amount of money for the performance of the knob alone!

I have a 5000 but was wondering if anyone had compared it to a 9000.


Bob WM6Q

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: NI8R on June 21, 2014, 06:03:32 PM
Zenki, the ftdx9kmp model has 100 watt class A amp and 400 watt class AB, not sure about poor transmit stat you are referring to. Nice 50V system. Also poor receiver as compared to what?

I have video of the k3 and the ftdx9k on weak signal work here at the qth. I flat out bought the k3 to replace the 9k and free up some table space, what I ended up with was a sold k3.
Don't waste my time telling me how great or poor a radio is that you have not compared side by side with another radio on the same antenna. The FTDX9000mp with the mtu units is a great radio and will compete against any rig in its class. Yes including and right down to the Apache Labs Anan 100D sdr sitting next to the 9k. Far exceeded the k3 and kx3 I audio quality and copy quality.

I can buy any radio I desire, if it has a great receiver and 10 watts , I can live. That being said, the k3 is for a different user than myself. I might as well buy my old ic9100 back as to keep the k3.

Zenki , real world operation is more than what is written on the spec lines. Yes, I owned a 450d also at one time, but please don't assume they mean anything unless operating the radio confirms a defect in the rig spec that affects your ability to make a qso.

The ARRl states that the ftdx5k has the best specs it has ever tested. The op in the video above stated in his real world use, the 9k out performed. watch some of his videos, he is a seasoned operator.

I have never used a ftdx5k, I may be just great. The 9k is a legendary rig, hands down.

Greg kc8iir

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: KE2TR on June 26, 2014, 08:50:43 AM
real world operation is more than what is written on the spec lines!
Yes agreed Greg and if you go threw your ham life buying from Sherwoods list then you really never know what other radio's might offer. I bought two radio's when I got back into the hobby from Sherwood's lists, had a very good FT1000MP with all filters and the roofing mod then sold that to go with a TS590, nice but after 9 months I got tired of the noise in the front end of the RX, even with no pre amps I just didn't like operating the radio for more than a few hours. I also bought a K3 at the same time and it was very selective but RX & TX audio was IMO harsh, never liked the way that radio sounded so I sold that after one month. I really thought for the money the Kenwood was a better value. Then I bought the FTDX3000 and had it side by side to the 590 for over a monthand sold the 590. This radio was more like a buddies FTDX5000 which I wanted but the budget was not set for a $5K radio. I have only once played with the 9000, its nice and maybe if I was into ESSB that would be my call but I felt the 5000 had a better RX section, more selective front end and a lower noise floor on the front end which allows you to use the radio for many hours and not get tired. As far as the ALC issue with Yaesu's rigs in general well there is one simple rule don't run the ALC all the way up to its max on the meter scale, run it 2/3rd the way up the scale and believe me even when looking at a spectrum analyzer it will look very good but please dont try to use someones fish finder on there radio or SDR, there are way to many variables, I mean if you have or can barrow a real spectrum analyzer that is the only real way to see. I use the ARRL lab tests for giving me an idea of the radio performance but make the judgment in real world. The DSP in both the 3000/5000/9000 is about the same but the 9000 has a front end dating back to the FT1KMP's and I feel that its not as robust as whats in the 5000 or even the 3000 and if you have an amp that only needs around 50w to make 1500W then the 5000 will give 75W in class A. Yes the new crop of SDR's are getting real nice in TX IMD but I feel that I am really operating a computer not a radio so I still like knobs and a decent size of a radio as well, my money would be on the FTDX5000 and if you really need a fish finder buy the DMU and a nice monitor.

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: NR9R on July 23, 2014, 01:35:49 PM
The FTDX-5000 has the best performing receiver I have every experienced in terms of both dynamic range and audio quality--it is very easy on the ears.  I liked it so much I tried two of them, but gave up after experiencing to many issues.  

My first 5000D was an early 2010 model.  It was received with the misprinted label and QSK issue.  I also had an issue with RF feedback sneaking into the headphone jack that required multiple trips to Yaesu to fix.  Since this one felt like a lemon I returned it.

My second 5000D purchased in 2012 developed the OLED failure.  Then the internal antenna tuner failed the first time I used it.  After getting it fixed I sold it and decided to take a break from the 5000.

Both 5000Ds that I owned showed slight but noticeable receive audio distortion when both receivers where engaged as if the audio amp became overloaded. This is known by many owners and a general work around is to use an external audio mixer to drive the speakers and headphone.

NC0B did some measurements of the transmitter IMD and showed that with the processor engaged the IMD performance falls similar to 12V transistors, even in class A.  

Another issue that seems to be increasing in frequency is failure of the VFO-A digital encoder.  This has been reported by several owners on the FTDX-5000 Yahoo group.  

Interestingly, there is a recent review of the FTDX-5000 that acknowledges all of the failures I have mentioned but the reviewer still gives a 5/5.  I guess the good receiver performance is enough to make up for the reliability concerns for some. advice would be that if you have had solid reliability from your 9000 I cannot recommend moving to the 5000.  Lets be real about receiver performance, unless you have multiple towers with stacked monobanders you won't tell the difference in the close spaced dynamic range between the 5000 and 9000 on CW.  On SSB, you're almost guaranteed NOT to notice any difference (due to transmitter IMD of neighboring signals becoming the limiting factor) .

In my case I decided to move to the FTDX-3000D.  It has a similarly nice sounding receiver and if it ever develops a problem it won't be an issue to ship (the 5000D costs $150 to ship one way).

-Anthony, NR9R

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: KE2TR on July 24, 2014, 01:22:42 PM
I did get a chance to hear a FTDX9000D in real life use but didn't have my 3000 or a 5000 to compare side by side. Like the other radio's the RX audio was excellent and it was sitting next to a IC7800, both radio's sounded very good on CW but the 9K seemed to edge out the Icom in both CW and SSB, the DSP filtering seemed just a bit better in the 9K plus the RX audio was fantastic, very low IMD in the audio amp in the 9K. I found the 9K to be better in it's control layout than the 5K is, there is more real estate on its front panel, also found that the U tune units that are built in worked very well, just a bit better than the VRF controls. I think if the 9K was priced around $6K they would sell a hellove allot more of them. I also found the 9K display very nice as well, it was a late production radio and the fish finder was every bit as good as the IC7800. After playing with the 5K about a year ago and owning the 3K for over a year if I was in the market and the price of the 9K was lowered to around $6K I rthink I would buy one, it has the U tune already in the box, nice display and fish finder tools, the control layout is very nice and easy to use, thye DMU is also built in the box, the audio on RX was one of the best I have heard and the only thing I would change is the filters in the 455Khz IF, I would place a good 10 pole collins 2.3 Khz filter to peplace the Murata ceramic stock filter. Its not that hard and have done that on the second RX board of the ole MP's and to me that small mod would make a big difference in even improving SSB just a little bit better and nicer before it goes to the DSP. One thing is for sure there is allot more to how radio perform in REAL LIFE compared to Lab tests, yes some radio's measure better but in most cases you may never be able to tell, even during a contest weekend and BTW I used the 9K during a SSB and CW contest weekend, now if I could only pick those 6 numbers right by the weekend for POWERBALL, lol. Jim

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: NI8R on July 24, 2014, 07:19:54 PM
Jim , now you sound like the w1aw station. Real life use is why the 9k is still the flagship of yaesu.  The user features when in combination with others can combat just about anything.
Jim , I am sure the difference between real life and paper means nothing because the rig is out of reach from the price standpoint. I have seen a mp used for 7k recently. Not willing to sell mine for that but folks do. I can say beyond a doubt, I am sold.

Greg kc8iir

Title: RE: Yaesu 9000 vs. 5000
Post by: AF5CC on July 24, 2014, 07:31:23 PM
Don't forget that the 9000 is the only radio that lets you listen on a second band while you are transmitting on a different band.  That is doing SO2R in only 1 box!

73 John AF5CC