|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
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
|
|
You can
write your own review of the QST Magazine.
|
VE3TMT
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Mar 2, 2009 03:53
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Good monthly read
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
|
I renewed my membership back in November and look forward to another year of QST. I really enjoy the magazine. In my opinion way too much advertising. In the March issue, the first article doesn't start until page 30. And the advertising starts at page 103. That is almost 90 pages of ads and 100 pages of articles. Just about split down the middle. My preference would be 70% articles, 30% ads, but I am aware advertising is what pays for the magazine. Also, I have to question "The Doctor Is In" column. Are you guys making these questions up? Some of the questions I see might sound okay coming from a grade 3 student, not someone who supposedly took an exam to get their license. I guess it is meant to be the comic section of the paper.
|
|
W8GX
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Mar 1, 2009 20:17
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
The Best!
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
|
Absolutely the best! I wouldn't be without it each month!
|
|
KB7XU
|
Rating: 4/5
|
Nov 11, 2008 10:25
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Pretty good
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
QST is pretty good considering the large number of sub-hobbies included under the rubric of "ham radio." Editors are tasked with including interesting content that will be read by 160 meter DX'ers and microwave enthusiasts alike.
I love the large amount of ads. Ads are a quick way for me to see what's new and most include a web site for further info.
QST is not perfect however, I still resent the loss of the Section News, hence, the "4" rating. C'mon editors, bring it back.
|
|
W5DWH
|
Rating: 4/5
|
Nov 11, 2008 09:28
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Worth Reading
|
Time owned: 6 to 12 months
|
I enjoy QST magazine. As a new ham (7 months) I subscribed to both QST and CQ.
Both mags are nearly identical in coverage except for QST's in depth coverage of ARRL and its activities.
When CQ expires I will not renew.
I will continue my support for both the ARRL and QST.
My only complaint about the magazine is the ads. Every issue is approximately 25-30% ads. It's not that I don't mind reading them,it's just that with that much revenue coming in from ads the magazine and ARRL membership should be lower in cost.
|
|
ZOULAS
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Nov 11, 2008 06:49
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Great Magazine
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
|
Nice articles, very informative, worth the money. You GOTTA support the hobby! Bills don't get paid with air.
|
|
N2QQF
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Nov 11, 2008 05:50
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Fun Reading
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
|
So, QST is certainly my favorite magazine out of all. I subscribe to Monitoring Times, Popular communications which does not do it for me anymore and a few others. I enjoy the articles written the projects posted as well as a flurry of other features in the monthly magazine. I think it has a lot of good information for the new guys as well as old. Always interesting and I look forward to getting my copy every month.
|
|
KB6YH
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Oct 10, 2008 11:08
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Only one "problem"
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
|
I can't bring myself to throw a QST away. I find them to be too interesting. I guess it is partially my fault. I love ham radio!
|
|
WX4O
|
Rating: 4/5
|
Oct 10, 2008 10:28
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Good Mag
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
I still like QST. I read it cover to cover.
But - I have to agree about way too much coverage of APRS (I have no need for anyone to see my location, or to see anyone else's), EMCOMM pushed and made to sound mandatory every issue (I'm 64 and retired now and mostly am satisfied to leave it to younger hams) and repeated articles on simple antennas etc. for 'new hams'. I also agree that ham radio is not dying. The constant recruitment dialogue is becoming boring.
|
|
AA5JG
|
Rating: 3/5
|
Oct 10, 2008 09:55
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
OK magazine
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
"My biggest gripe is that there is too much copy devoted to 'ham recruitment', PR, and 'Emcomm whackers'."
Couldn't agree more. I get pretty sick and tired of reading about how ham radio is going to die if we don't get more kids involved? What is wrong with getting people of all ages involved? Also, I have been hearing that it was dying since 1980 when I got licensed, and it is still here.
I also get tired of the obsession with Encomm and APRS. Some ARRL members are actually doing other things instead. Give it a break once in a while.
Overall, the last couple of issues have actually improved where there is actually some decent articles to read.
Still, the "Doctor is in" column and quite a few of the articles show how much ham radio has been dumbed down. It is getting about time for another bi-monthly "How to build a dipole" article.
|
|
K8YZK
|
Rating: 3/5
|
Oct 10, 2008 09:02
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
so-so
|
Time owned: 0 to 3 months
|
"ARRL membership and QST should be "required reading" for every ham -- we need them and they need our support. 73 de Ken -- "
It's good as a basic mag, but required to be a member and read it, hey lets bring back the draft while we're at it.
|
|
If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions about Reviews,
please email your Reviews Manager.
|
|
|
|
|
