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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: TS-590SG or IC-7300 in the long Term?  (Read 78119 times)
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: December 18, 2017, 12:12:43 PM »

Exact opposite for me. The Kenwood TS-590SG was better for pulling out weak SSB signals. I could clearly hear the weak SSB that was lost in the noise on the IC-7300. No amount of adjusting the controls could pull the weak signal out. I also use same outboard speaker on both rigs side by side.

I think you need to read operators manual on 7300. The 590 has a nosier mixer too. My testing was with weak signals right at noise floor and 7300 pulled them out way better than 590 hands down. I also thru a 480 into mix with the testing that day and it even did a bit better than 590 in that scenario as its mixer has a lower noise level than 590 in those conditions. 590 was a great rig 7 years ago and even 3 or 4 years ago but playing field has changed and 590 is no longer the tip of the sword.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
N8FVJ
Member

Posts: 867




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: December 18, 2017, 02:45:06 PM »

Exact opposite for me. The Kenwood TS-590SG was better for pulling out weak SSB signals. I could clearly hear the weak SSB that was lost in the noise on the IC-7300. No amount of adjusting the controls could pull the weak signal out. I also use same outboard speaker on both rigs side by side.

I think you need to read operators manual on 7300. The 590 has a nosier mixer too. My testing was with weak signals right at noise floor and 7300 pulled them out way better than 590 hands down. I also thru a 480 into mix with the testing that day and it even did a bit better than 590 in that scenario as its mixer has a lower noise level than 590 in those conditions. 590 was a great rig 7 years ago and even 3 or 4 years ago but playing field has changed and 590 is no longer the tip of the sword.

The TS-590S you are referring to is 7 years old. However, we are talking about the TS-590SG that was released 3 years ago. The TS-590SG is a far better receiver vs the older TS-590S. It has a 100kHz dynamic range of 137 vs the IC-7300 of only 123db. 123db is same as 1980s-1990s receivers.
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: December 18, 2017, 06:00:12 PM »

Exact opposite for me. The Kenwood TS-590SG was better for pulling out weak SSB signals. I could clearly hear the weak SSB that was lost in the noise on the IC-7300. No amount of adjusting the controls could pull the weak signal out. I also use same outboard speaker on both rigs side by side.

I think you need to read operators manual on 7300. The 590 has a nosier mixer too. My testing was with weak signals right at noise floor and 7300 pulled them out way better than 590 hands down. I also thru a 480 into mix with the testing that day and it even did a bit better than 590 in that scenario as its mixer has a lower noise level than 590 in those conditions. 590 was a great rig 7 years ago and even 3 or 4 years ago but playing field has changed and 590 is no longer the tip of the sword.

The TS-590S you are referring to is 7 years old. However, we are talking about the TS-590SG that was released 3 years ago. The TS-590SG is a far better receiver vs the older TS-590S. It has a 100kHz dynamic range of 137 vs the IC-7300 of only 123db. 123db is same as 1980s-1990s receivers.

No I am talking about the SG. It is still a 7 year old design with a few tweaks. And exactly how is it you are trying to equate dynamic range with mixer noise? You can have good AGC range and a noise mixer and poor noise performance. The 590SG may indeed perform well with stronger signals but with weak signal near noise level and usable sensitivity limits, the 7300 clearly out performed the 590SG and even the 480 did somewhat better than 590 did in that scenario. 590 front end is nosier than 7300 when you get down to weak signal you can hear the difference. Never compared them with stronger 59 signals 
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
N8FVJ
Member

Posts: 867




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: December 18, 2017, 08:57:43 PM »

Exact opposite for me. The Kenwood TS-590SG was better for pulling out weak SSB signals. I could clearly hear the weak SSB that was lost in the noise on the IC-7300. No amount of adjusting the controls could pull the weak signal out. I also use same outboard speaker on both rigs side by side.

I think you need to read operators manual on 7300. The 590 has a nosier mixer too. My testing was with weak signals right at noise floor and 7300 pulled them out way better than 590 hands down. I also thru a 480 into mix with the testing that day and it even did a bit better than 590 in that scenario as its mixer has a lower noise level than 590 in those conditions. 590 was a great rig 7 years ago and even 3 or 4 years ago but playing field has changed and 590 is no longer the tip of the sword.

The TS-590S you are referring to is 7 years old. However, we are talking about the TS-590SG that was released 3 years ago. The TS-590SG is a far better receiver vs the older TS-590S. It has a 100kHz dynamic range of 137 vs the IC-7300 of only 123db. 123db is same as 1980s-1990s receivers.

No I am talking about the SG. It is still a 7 year old design with a few tweaks. And exactly how is it you are trying to equate dynamic range with mixer noise? You can have good AGC range and a noise mixer and poor noise performance. The 590SG may indeed perform well with stronger signals but with weak signal near noise level and usable sensitivity limits, the 7300 clearly out performed the 590SG and even the 480 did somewhat better than 590 did in that scenario. 590 front end is nosier than 7300 when you get down to weak signal you can hear the difference. Never compared them with stronger 59 signals 

A strong signal next to a weak signal needs a high dynamic range receiver like the TS-590SG. The TS-590SG was redesigned 3 years ago, not 7 years ago. It is not a TS-590S, the TS-590SG is a different receiver and easily outperforms the TS-590S. That is evident as both receivers are measured at Sherwood Engineering.
Logged
K6JH
Member

Posts: 511




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: December 18, 2017, 09:46:53 PM »

I wonder how much sample to sample variation there is?

Maybe in one comparison the 590SG is better. Maybe with another pair the 7300 is better.
Logged

73
Jim K6JH
N8FVJ
Member

Posts: 867




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: December 19, 2017, 06:55:00 AM »

I wonder how much sample to sample variation there is?

Maybe in one comparison the 590SG is better. Maybe with another pair the 7300 is better.

That may be possible. I wonder if I received a new IC-7300 with an issue. It was very noisy receiver. And, perhaps my TS-590SG is performing at absolute top of performance variations of stock radios.
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: December 19, 2017, 08:21:10 AM »

A strong signal next to a weak signal needs a high dynamic range receiver like the TS-590SG. The TS-590SG was redesigned 3 years ago, not 7 years ago. It is not a TS-590S, the TS-590SG is a different receiver and easily outperforms the TS-590S. That is evident as both receivers are measured at Sherwood Engineering.

Once again you try to shift focus. There is more to a rig than Sherwood ratings and my test was not with a weak signal near a strong one. It was pulling a weak signal out of noise floor and 590SG came in last on 3 rigs I tested that day. The point I am making that you keep trying to skate around is like it or not, the 590 i a 7 year old design with a few tweaks for SG version. It is not a all new radio and 7 years in IF DSP technology, which is still maturing,  is a very long time. 590's front end has not been changed and it mixer is much nosier than 7300 and even somewhat moreso than 480 too. You do not hear this when you are working with stronger signals well above the mixer noise level but you do here it picking weak signals out of mud and here 7300 is a clear winner over 590SG. You can try to shift to dynamic range or what have you but that does not change its lacking performance in pulling weak signals out of noise.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
AC4RD
Member

Posts: 1485




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: December 19, 2017, 09:25:30 AM »

I wonder how much sample to sample variation there is?
Maybe in one comparison the 590SG is better. Maybe with another pair the 7300 is better.

Possibly.  Or possibly "confirmation bias" is a major factor in users' reviews and opinions. :-)
Logged
VK3BL
Member

Posts: 1789


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: December 19, 2017, 11:39:04 AM »

I've personally never heard a signal on any radio that I couldn't make out on my Yaesu FT-101E, and its 40 years old.

They're both fine radios, but the Kenwood is just too pricey for what it offers compared with the IC-7300.
Logged

J.D. Mitchell BA  - VK3BL / XU7AGA - https://www.youtube.com/ratemyradio - Honesty & Integrity
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: December 19, 2017, 12:22:58 PM »

I've personally never heard a signal on any radio that I couldn't make out on my Yaesu FT-101E, and its 40 years old.

A good old analog receiver can still play well with signals in mud even today and if it has some nice tight xtal filters in it it can still run with most of the better IF DSP rigs today.  IF DSP is not fully mature (work in progress) and tends to have somewhat nosier front end/mixer too. Icom 7300 uses a different approach than 590 does and not have lower noise and is better at picking signals out of the noise.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
KT0DD
Member

Posts: 450




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: December 19, 2017, 06:02:48 PM »

Well, I guess I can try both at my QTH. I'll buy the 7300 first, and if I don't like it in a short time, I can always sell it at a small loss and then try a TS590SG.

Thanks for all replies. 73.

Todd - KT0DD
Logged
HB9PJT
Member

Posts: 413


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #26 on: December 20, 2017, 02:25:34 AM »

For small and medium antennas the IC-7300 is fine. But with large antennas many hams have problems with the IC-7300. The rig receives goast signals. This happens also when the DSP overdrive indicator is not on. The TS-590 has a rock solid receiver.

73, Peter - HB9PJT

http://funkperlen.blogspot.ch/2017/12/der-icom-ic-7300-und-seine-macken.html
https://youtu.be/R4s2_-VHogk
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: December 20, 2017, 04:46:18 AM »

For small and medium antennas the IC-7300 is fine. But with large antennas many hams have problems with the IC-7300. The rig receives goast signals. This happens also when the DSP overdrive indicator is not on. The TS-590 has a rock solid receiver.

Interesting. I will have to try that next time I hands on a 7300. But, I assume that is when you always use max gain on rig. I rarely do and by default pre-amp is off on 20m and below and I even use the built in attenuator on my rigs with very strong signals and would do same with a 7300 if I had it so myself I do no see it as a problem
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
WD0EGC
Member

Posts: 29




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: December 20, 2017, 09:39:03 AM »

I want to thank KT0DD for starting this thread, and thanks to all who have replied so far.  I have had my General license for 40 years, but have been completely inactive for the past 30.  My SSB rig, Tempo 2020, didn't survive 30 years in the basement, but my HW-8 did, so I am back on the air again with a whopping 2 watts, snagging a few QSOs on the weekends on 20 meters.

My search for a new SSB rig led me to the same consideration as KT0DD....'7300 or '590sg.  So, I'd value any comments based on my situation...

1.  I don't have a good-enough antenna for DX (just a 90 foot doublet, 600 ohm ladder-line, into a balanced tuner), and I'm not into contests (although I do take part in some of the SKCC events).  The rig will just be for ragchewing.  Having a nice QSO with someone in the lower 48 or Canada is DX enough for me.

2.  I'm mostly a CW guy, but I do enjoy SSB, too.

3.  Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see the virtues of the digital modes, which are even slower than CW.


So, based on that background, which is a better fit for me?  For example, bands like 40 meters are crazy noisy where I live.  Which has a better receiver for pulling a CW signal out of the QRM? 

Or....maybe either rig is more than I need (remember, my current rig is a HW-8).  Maybe a FT-450D is good enough???   Seems like a fine rig to me.  Or, maybe a used rig?


Thanks to all who would reply.  Jay    wd0egc.net   



Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: December 20, 2017, 11:02:53 AM »


So, based on that background, which is a better fit for me?  For example, bands like 40 meters are crazy noisy where I live.  Which has a better receiver for pulling a CW signal out of the QRM? 


QRM or QRN?  On QRN I would give 7300 the clear edge but on QRM I have no comment because I have not really tested that aspect much. For CW though even a old analog rig with a nice tight CW filter can do pretty good in bad conditions.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next   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!