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 9 10 11 ... 22 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Kenwood TS-890  (Read 62521 times)
ZENKI
Member

Posts: 1648




Ignore
« Reply #75 on: May 27, 2018, 01:37:11 AM »

Most of these techniques are old hat and are not covered by patents anymore.

The other point is  that you dont need to use predistortion or cartesian feedback to design clean PA's. Heck from the 80's and  onward, most  of the Commercial SSB market could produced wonderfully clean SSB radios without using  this technology.  Look at the wideband IMD performance of the Icom marine radios from the 90s they produced clean transmitters without all the mathematical wizardry.

Really all that the ham radio market requires is a professionally designed PA that has linearity in mind thats all. And lets not forget why ham radios mostly cause rotten splatter, they do so because we stuck to a stupid system called ALC that is not needed in a modern radio transmitter design.

Then what has linearity got to do with keyclicks, keyclicks and CW wave shaping of the  CW transmit signal is 60 years old. Its only a new generation of engineers that dont have the  ability to design a proper CW transmitter that does not produce keyclicks or proper transmit timing.

So with all due respect all that we have is excuses from hams and poor excuses from the ham radio manufacturers for reasons why they cant design decent transmitters  but they pour in hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars in receiver performance research chasing a stupid numbers game. Why do more receiver performance than neccesary even for the best contest stations? They are going well beyond what performance  receivers really need in the real world.

The manufacturers have their priorities wrong and are more interested in receiver bragging  rights than putting effort into producing a properly designed SSB or CW transmitter  design that not does not produce keyclicks and splatter.

Kenwood used to have decent IMD performance in some of their early models. Radios like the TS950SDX, TS930 and TS940 had half decent IMD performance. If you removed the ALC issue from the design  and produced such clean radios we would not be talking about this issue. Why could  Kenwood do this in the past and somehow cant do this now? Icom never had a decent transmitter design and likewise Yaesu, they always produced marginal IMD performance from their radios.

Anyway the time is over for excuses and apologizing for these companies that cant even do basic engineering right. Its not rocket science. Scan through the old Motorola design bulletins, in those bulletins there were numerous solid state PA designs  designed with IMD performance in mind. Those famous designs of Granberg. We just looking for excuses and are not looking for solutions to fix these  problems.

We have an unhealthy obsession with receiver performance numbers and need to swing the debate towards improving transmitter performance. The new Kenwood TS890 would be a brilliant radio if it had excellent transmitter IMD performance. I guess we will know soon enough whether Kenwood put some effort toward improving transmitter design, I wont be holding my breath and would be happy to shut my mouth and go away from this  simple subject when they start doing things right.

But really why should hams be fooled with this nonsense debate about receiver performance when we have more receiver performance than we need and the more critical issue about transmitter performance that allows you to successfully use this excellent performance is ignored. Its a  good way to hoodwink ignorant hams.

....The new Kenwood would be a brilliant radio if the transmitter IMD performance was such that IMD suppression at 5khz was at least 50db down and anything beyond 5khz greater than 50db using a real voice. Commercial SSB  HF radios could easily achieve such levels of performance without even using pre-distortion or cartesian feedback for IMD improvement. Kenwood can design clean radio PA's with excellent IMD performance if hams demand such performance.

......

Yes, the key words that were missing in your post, were "and pay for", as in "... excellent IMD performance if hams demand and pay for such performance."

Because Zenki, achieving and maintaining -50 dBc intermod products without digital predistortion (DPD) and peak clipping/filtering, isn't very likely in a 100W wideband PA.  And DPD isn't cheap.  And it's protected by a mountain of IPR (ie, Patents, of which I have several granted.. look me up in the uspto if you don't believe me).  Navigating the linearization technology minefield is treacherous at best.

73, Ed
[/quote]
« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 01:41:52 AM by ZENKI » Logged
VK3TEX
Member

Posts: 74




Ignore
« Reply #76 on: May 27, 2018, 07:05:36 PM »

Hi Zenki,

Out of curiosity, what are your 10 current top 10 radio's for IMD performance in your opinion?

Cheers,

Les, VK3TEX.
Logged
KA4KOE
Member

Posts: 357


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #77 on: May 29, 2018, 06:33:54 AM »

Totally agree with W6UV.  Panadapters are a must have when chasing DX.  Also good for contesting. 

I guess its amazing that anyone ever DXed or contested for decades without them huh. I guess there was better operators back then that did not need help aids that many do today. 

Hey, let’s go back to AM and spark because who needs newfangled stuff like SSB and CW, right?


A lot of us still use AM daily so there's no need to "go back". We're already there.
Logged
K9UW
Member

Posts: 24




Ignore
« Reply #78 on: June 01, 2018, 07:30:18 PM »

Does anyone know if the TS-890 has an input for a RX only antenna?

73,

Mike, K9UW
Amherst, WI
Logged
N5MOA
Member

Posts: 1720




Ignore
« Reply #79 on: June 01, 2018, 07:45:12 PM »

Does anyone know if the TS-890 has an input for a RX only antenna?

Looking at a pic of the back on qrz, and going by the buttons seen in a front view, is has

RX OUT
RX IN
ANT OUT
DRV
REF IN (10mhz)
ANT 1
ANT 2
Logged
VE3WGO
Member

Posts: 451




Ignore
« Reply #80 on: June 15, 2018, 09:05:57 PM »

Kenwood says TS-890s production starts in August.

See for example at the 3:45 mark, an interview at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9hEcc19ELQ

Is that at the Friedrichshafen hamfest?

73, Ed
Logged
KA4DPO
Member

Posts: 1320




Ignore
« Reply #81 on: June 25, 2018, 12:05:05 PM »

Kenwood says TS-890s production starts in August.

See for example at the 3:45 mark, an interview at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9hEcc19ELQ

Is that at the Friedrichshafen hamfest?

73, Ed

I am having some doubts about the August release date.  It is just a week away from July and not a single word or advertisement out of Kenwood.  I tried to look it up on the FCC site but I don't know what the codes for Kenwood are.  So at this point, it looks like the TS-890S is still just a pretty box under glass at the hamfests.  I wonder if the release will be delayed until 2019?
Logged
WD9EWK
Member

Posts: 666


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #82 on: June 25, 2018, 08:45:32 PM »

I am having some doubts about the August release date.  It is just a week away from July and not a single word or advertisement out of Kenwood.  I tried to look it up on the FCC site but I don't know what the codes for Kenwood are.

Using the Advanced Search page for the FCC Equipment Authorization aatabase:

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

I didn't see anything recently approved for the grantee code normally used for Kenwood equipment (K44) that would be like a TS-890.

73!
Logged

Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/ - Twitter: @WD9EWK or http://twitter.com/WD9EWK
KA4DPO
Member

Posts: 1320




Ignore
« Reply #83 on: June 26, 2018, 09:24:32 AM »

I am having some doubts about the August release date.  It is just a week away from July and not a single word or advertisement out of Kenwood.  I tried to look it up on the FCC site but I don't know what the codes for Kenwood are.

Using the Advanced Search page for the FCC Equipment Authorization aatabase:

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

I didn't see anything recently approved for the grantee code normally used for Kenwood equipment (K44) that would be like a TS-890.

73!


Thank's Patrick.  By any chance, do you know the grantee code for the TS-590?  I am frustrated by the total secrecy surrounding this new radio.
Logged
WD9EWK
Member

Posts: 666


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #84 on: June 26, 2018, 04:32:31 PM »

Thank's Patrick.  By any chance, do you know the grantee code for the TS-590?  I am frustrated by the total secrecy surrounding this new radio.

Looks like the TS-590's FCC ID is K44407110 (grantee code K44, prodct code 407110). Google was helpful to track down that number.

Logged

Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/ - Twitter: @WD9EWK or http://twitter.com/WD9EWK
VE3WGO
Member

Posts: 451




Ignore
« Reply #85 on: July 07, 2018, 06:28:34 PM »

funny.  I went to look up the grantee codes of a few companies. MFJ, Elecraft, Palstar, Icom, Kenwood, Yaesu, Alinco can be found in the database search.

But not Flex or FlexRadio, or any Chinese company (Pofung, Wouxun, Xiegu, etc).  Maybe there are shell companies that have secret real names?

How is it that some companies do - and some apparently don't - have FCC certification for similar radios?  Is it optional for ham gear?  I would have at least thought Transmitters of 100 Watts or External PAs would need FCC certification.

73, Ed


ps. no new Kenwood HF is listed there yet.
Logged
W1VT
Member

Posts: 3401




Ignore
« Reply #86 on: July 07, 2018, 06:46:13 PM »

Certification: Requires submittal of an application that includes a complete technical description of the product and a measurement report showing compliance with the FCC technical standards. Devices subject to certification include: low power transmitters such as cordless telephones, garage door opener controls, radio control toys, and security alarm systems, scanning receivers and superregenerative receivers; and, TV interface devices such as VCRs.

Type Acceptance: Similar to certification, except that it typically applies to radio transmitter equipment that will be used in a licensed radio service. Devices subject to type acceptance include: land mobile transmitters such as cellular transmitters, or police, fire and business transmitters; transmitters used in the maritime and aeronautical safety services; and CB and other transmitters used in the Personal Radio Services. Amateur Radio transmitters do not require type acceptance although external HF power amplifiers and kits do require type acceptance.

Notification: Requires submittal of an abbreviated application for equipment authorization, that does not include a measurement report, to the FCC. However, a measurement report showing compliance of the product with the FCC technical standards must be retained by the applicant and must be submitted upon request by the Commission. Devices subject to notification include: point-to-point microwave transmitters; AM, FM and TV Broadcast transmitters; certain microwave auxiliary broadcast transmitters; and, other receivers (except as noted elsewhere).

From the ARRL's Part 15 page. To summarize, a typical 100W HF transceiver for Part 97 use does not require any paperwork with the FCC unless it has a scanning receiver.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2018, 06:50:26 PM by W1VT » Logged
KA4DPO
Member

Posts: 1320




Ignore
« Reply #87 on: July 07, 2018, 08:22:49 PM »

Certification: Requires submittal of an application that includes a complete technical description of the product and a measurement report showing compliance with the FCC technical standards. Devices subject to certification include: low power transmitters such as cordless telephones, garage door opener controls, radio control toys, and security alarm systems, scanning receivers and superregenerative receivers; and, TV interface devices such as VCRs.

Type Acceptance: Similar to certification, except that it typically applies to radio transmitter equipment that will be used in a licensed radio service. Devices subject to type acceptance include: land mobile transmitters such as cellular transmitters, or police, fire and business transmitters; transmitters used in the maritime and aeronautical safety services; and CB and other transmitters used in the Personal Radio Services. Amateur Radio transmitters do not require type acceptance although external HF power amplifiers and kits do require type acceptance.

Notification: Requires submittal of an abbreviated application for equipment authorization, that does not include a measurement report, to the FCC. However, a measurement report showing compliance of the product with the FCC technical standards must be retained by the applicant and must be submitted upon request by the Commission. Devices subject to notification include: point-to-point microwave transmitters; AM, FM and TV Broadcast transmitters; certain microwave auxiliary broadcast transmitters; and, other receivers (except as noted elsewhere).

From the ARRL's Part 15 page. To summarize, a typical 100W HF transceiver for Part 97 use does not require any paperwork with the FCC unless it has a scanning receiver.

You said "Type Acceptance: Similar to certification, except that it typically applies to radio transmitter equipment that will be used in a licensed radio service."

As far as I know, amateur radio transmitters are not part 15 devices.  I could be wrong but I don't think so.  Every amateur transmitter and receiver I have seen requires detailed technical specs and operational documentation be supplied to the FCC for review before certification can be granted.
Logged
W6RZ
Member

Posts: 365




Ignore
« Reply #88 on: July 07, 2018, 10:09:35 PM »

As far as I know, amateur radio transmitters are not part 15 devices.  I could be wrong but I don't think so.  Every amateur transmitter and receiver I have seen requires detailed technical specs and operational documentation be supplied to the FCC for review before certification can be granted.

Amateur radio transceivers are considered to be scanning receivers under part 15. See the TS-590SG grant.

https://fccid.io/K44407110#Grant-TCB-1
Logged
KA4DPO
Member

Posts: 1320




Ignore
« Reply #89 on: July 08, 2018, 09:57:33 AM »

As far as I know, amateur radio transmitters are not part 15 devices.  I could be wrong but I don't think so.  Every amateur transmitter and receiver I have seen requires detailed technical specs and operational documentation be supplied to the FCC for review before certification can be granted.

Amateur radio transceivers are considered to be scanning receivers under part 15. See the TS-590SG grant.

https://fccid.io/K44407110#Grant-TCB-1

Thank you, I didn't know that.  I recall seeing a section on the FCC web site where all sorts of documentation was required but I guess that is for part 15 acceptance.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 22 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!