- Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Friends Remembered
Survey Question

DX Cluster Spots

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

Reviews Categories | Amateur Radio Periodicals | QST Magazine Help

Reviews Summary for QST Magazine
QST Magazine Reviews: 293 Average rating: 3.9/5 MSRP: $34
Description: Subscription comes with membership to the American Radio Relay League
Product is in production.
More info:
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this review.

My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

You can write your own review of the QST Magazine.

<— Page 2 of 30 —>

KB2SMS Rating: 4/5 Jan 11, 2018 16:39 Send this review to a friend
Worth the money IMHO  Time owned: more than 12 months
I really like the new format. It's easier to read. The online version stinks however, it's a PITA to navigate.

I've been a member since I got my ticket. I don't agree with everything they do but we don't have any other voice for amateur radio other than the ARRL.
K1AZG Rating: 2/5 Jan 11, 2018 12:51 Send this review to a friend
Needs help  Time owned: more than 12 months
The older online version was by far better for me. I could download the issues and keep them and I did not have to rely on downloading each time I wanted to read an article. I hope this is not an attempt to sell the cd archives. I've been a Lifetime Member since it was offered. If you go back to 50s, 60s and 70s QST there seemed to be more technical and less social. Just the comments from a crabby old ham.
N5XJT Rating: 3/5 Jan 11, 2018 09:02 Send this review to a friend
Not So Great Anymore  Time owned: more than 12 months
I feel guilty about not supporting ARRL so each year I pay the fee which is now about $50. The online version is not exactly easy to use and is very slow. The printed version varies in quality from month to month and often seems like a MFJ catalog. It is what it is but it ain't what it used to be.
W1GOV Rating: 5/5 Jan 11, 2018 08:23 Send this review to a friend
It is a great magazine  Time owned: more than 12 months
I personally think that the ARRL, including QST, does a fine job of supporting amateur radio. I've enjoyed a lot of hobbies over my not quite 75 years and every hobby magazine I have subscribed to, MR, FSM, etc. have had their share of detractors. The usual complaint is that they don't write about “what I am interested in”. The answer is
1: The magazine is not for you personally it is for all enthusiasts.
2. If you want articles that interest you, write them.

I expect that QST is not soliciting articles, it is just taking what readers submit. If the editorial content or columns are not what you want, write them a letter with specific constructive criticism. Explain what it is you are looking for and why it would interest a large portion of the community. I for one have no interest in contesting, but I understand that others are interested and I have no issue with the space that QST provides to the subject; it is a nice balance. I dropped my CQ subscription because ½ the pages were lists of contest winners. I am sure the contest participants love that, but it isn't for me.
If you are having trouble with the on-line version, I expect it is your computer or browser that is at fault. I have never had any issues reading online magazines on my Apple computers.

As for advertising—who do you think pays for the magazine; it sure isn't the subscribers. Advertisements are the life blood of the periodical industry, I personally enjoy the ads as they keep me informed about the latest technology and provide some nice dream fodder. Oh wouldn't it be nice to have that big tower, the 1.5 KW Amp and a $10,000 transceiver.

The $49 per year for the basic ARRL membership is is like 13 cents per day. How can you complain about that? You probably loose that much in the sofa.

ARRL—keep up the good work.
QRPNEW Rating: 2/5 Jan 11, 2018 00:35 Send this review to a friend
QST Online Terrible  Time owned: more than 12 months
Who in their right mind lets users log in onto their webpage with an unsecured connection. This is what you have do to log onto the QST online edition. Its very irresponsible for the ARRL to compromise a users identity and security with their online edition.

I wont use this webpage until they fix this security flaw.

The web page is very slow and clunky. It has a terrible interface and the main problem is that the company the hosts the content has got very slow servers. Its pathetic really.

As much as I like online content reading the online QST is an exercise in torture. Not recommended.
KD0ZV Rating: 4/5 Dec 26, 2017 16:08 Send this review to a friend
Big improvement  Time owned: more than 12 months
I have subscribed to QST on and off for 35 years. Have to say I have never been happy with it and Ham Radio and 73 were always my favorites with CQ close behind.

This issue with the new formatting and content was a big change and I think QST might be heading the right direction. The last issue had articles that fit my needs and the format was much improved.

Thanks ARRL
WA6KYR Rating: 5/5 Mar 19, 2017 14:34 Send this review to a friend
A very nice magazine and Congressional representative  Time owned: more than 12 months
I think the ARRL supports our interests rather well. I like QST’s diverse technical articles, the contest and DX information and the honest Product Reviews. I appreciate the tactful product improvement suggestions in QST. This is done without trashing items that may need some improvement. I think QSTs advertisements are extremely helpful in order to figure out where resources may be found for my next project. Besides the magazine we get Logbook of The World and representation in Congress. Without this organization ham radio would have been discontinued shortly after WW2 etc.
K1PJR Rating: 5/5 Mar 19, 2017 08:40 Send this review to a friend
Kudos to ARRL  Time owned: more than 12 months
I agree with N2LSO's comments below. I'm a CPA and completely understand where the league is coming from regarding the ads in QST. How do you thing they generate revenue? It doesn't grow on trees.

They are the only US organization that supports ham radio. They protect our hobbies interests. No one else does. You can access thousands of QST articles online. LOTW is free and is used worldwide. It even Integrates with your QRZ logbook. I enjoy QST in print and on my phone. All this and more for about 35 bucks a year. That's $3 a month. Are you kidding me?

I'll always support the league. Rather than complain be proactive. If there is something you don't like the contact them and ask questions. You will get answers. They are not perfect but nothing is. Be happy they are in your corner.

WB8NUT Rating: 5/5 Mar 19, 2017 05:10 Send this review to a friend
More than a magazine  Time owned: more than 12 months
QST is more than just a magazine. There are tremendous membership benefits with an ARRL membership and the ARRL is the only organization representing the interests of the American amateur radio licensee. The magazine has great articles for all interest from beginner to highly technical. Also an electronic version of QST is available to all members at no additional charge. There is also a good balance between ads, articles and contest information. Unlike other magazines for the amateur, QST actually arrives each and every month on time without fail so any date sensitive information is always early before an event. QST and an ARRL membership is well worth our support. Other magazines like RadCom are great, but for US hams, QST should be your first choice.
KB3ZVR Rating: 1/5 Mar 10, 2017 19:00 Send this review to a friend
QST Sucks  Time owned: more than 12 months
The printed product is just okay with so so content, however the online version has a very poor UX, but that's true of the entire ARRL website. Both suffer from poor navigation. The search function on the QST site is almost non-existent. Oh and the phone app is even worse.

So for a technical organization it's downright embarrassing that the web based components are so poorly executed.
<— Page 2 of 30 —>

If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions about Reviews, please email your Reviews Manager.