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 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: New Kenwood TS590SG, will it be any better?  (Read 109861 times)
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: October 07, 2014, 06:15:23 AM »

Just because you made some contacts with your dummy load of an antenna does not mean that it is a good antenna or even a fair antenna.

It is amazing how you are a expert on a antenna you have never seen and used first hand.  I am not sure why it works so well on 40 but it does. Perhaps its the 7 foot fence pole with large spade at base driven 6 feet in ground, maybe above average soil conductivity. Maybe it the hill it is on as ground drops rapidly 5 to 75 feet from SE to SW thru NW but it works well and better than it should. I had a TA 33 up years ago but took it down after a storm broke rotor and bent mast. I was going to put it back up in a new location but never did. The tower sections and a TA33 and TA34 in down in barn in storage.  I like 40m so I am in no hurry. Those that say it will never work may have never bothered to use more than a 3 foot mounting pole. Mine is far from a dummy load as you do not get 10 over 9 or better at times down under on 40m on a dummy load.  I do no think it a strong performer on 20 and above though.

When it comes to BS, you working DX with a dummy load is right up there at top of list.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
HB9PJT
Member

Posts: 411


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #31 on: October 07, 2014, 06:27:28 AM »

The RX Ant connector of the TS-590S is for RX only. But not for the TS-590SG. So just wait for the manual of the new TRX and don't be mislead by the old manual. Or look here: http://www.jvckenwood.co.jp/en/press/2014/10/press_141002.pdf

Page 3 on top: "Antenna output function (shared with DRV connector)

Or in another PDF which I cannot find by google anymore I have seen that info:

It’s possible to use DRV OUT terminal as ANT OUT. This terminal provides divided antenna output via internal power splitter. So easy to connect external RX such as a Pan-adapter.

73, Peter - HB9PJT

The TS-590SG does not have an IF out but as a better solution it has an ANT Output for an RX.
Maybe I misunderstand your post, but the "RX ANT" panel connector on the back of the TS590 is an INPUT, and on page 9, the manual states it is for a receive antenna. Do you suggest connecting an auxiliary receiver output to this RX ANT connector?
« Last Edit: October 07, 2014, 06:38:17 AM by HB9PJT » Logged
SWL2002
Member

Posts: 895




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: October 07, 2014, 06:30:24 AM »

Just because you made some contacts with your dummy load of an antenna does not mean that it is a good antenna or even a fair antenna.

It is amazing how you are a expert on a antenna you have never seen and used first hand.  I am not sure why it works so well on 40 but it does. Perhaps its the 7 foot fence pole with large spade at base driven 6 feet in ground, maybe above average soil conductivity. Maybe it the hill it is on as ground drops rapidly 5 to 75 feet from SE to SW thru NW but it works well and better than it should. I had a TA 33 up years ago but took it down after a storm broke rotor and bent mast. I was going to put it back up in a new location but never did. The tower sections and a TA33 and TA34 in down in barn in storage.  I like 40m so I am in no hurry. Those that say it will never work may have never bothered to use more than a 3 foot mounting pole. Mine is far from a dummy load as you do not get 10 over 9 or better at times down under on 40m on a dummy load.  I do no think it a strong performer on 20 and above though.


You obviously are too full of yourself and your BS to get the point - just because you make some contacts on that dummy load of an antenna of yours, it does not mean that it is a good antenna or a good idea.  I can make DX contacts running CW on 40 meters using a hamstick on my vehicle if I work at it.  Does that mean it is a good antenna?  No.  It is basically a dummy load, but it will allow me to work DX on CW IF and WHEN the conditions are right.  Arguing that your dummy load of an antenna is a good antenna makes you look like a dummy.  Cheesy

Quote
When it comes to BS, you working DX with a dummy load is right up there at top of list.

Why? You claim to work DX on your dummy load.

Not that this will have any impact on you since you will defend your silly posts to the point of ridiculousness, I used the dummy load as a TRANSMIT antenna.  I used my dipole as the RECEIVING antenna.  

This is for the benefit of those who do not have a closed mind like you, W8JX: I tried this because I read this thread on eHam:  http://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,37426.0.html and it got me interested in trying to work DX on CW via a dummy load.  I knew it was theoretically possible if you used a separate receive antenna.  Have you ever worked DX via QRPp CW?  Well, running 2kW from my AL1500 into the dummy load gave me a hundred milliwatts or so of ERP, which I calculated from FS measurement and a rough estimation of the loss/leakage in the 100 feet of RG58 cable I used to connect to the dummy load.  

Still think it is BS and that your dummy load of an antenna is a good antenna? Look up the July 2000 article in QST by N6BT titled "Everything Works" (starts pg 47).  His point is the same as mine - just because you can make contacts does not mean you have a good antenna.  You can even make contacts on a dummy load.  N6BT worked all continents on a light bulb dummy load.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2014, 07:21:04 AM by SWL2002 » Logged
HB9PJT
Member

Posts: 411


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #33 on: October 07, 2014, 07:54:39 AM »

To my taste the ergonomics of the TS-590 is very good and much better than the Icoms.

And the poplarity of the TS-590 is much higher today than Icom 756. The Kenwoods are selling very good compared to the Icoms and the performance of the 590 is much better.

73, Peter - HB9PJT

Unfortunately the small  mindset ergonomics of the TS590S does not suite the mindset of most contesters view of what good ergonomics represent.

All the current micro to mini radio releases  while selling  well because they are cheap are not the kind of radios that most hams want to have on their desks at home. The Icom 756 series of radios are more on the mark. The popularity of this radio size and its success speaks for itself.
Logged
K9IUQ
Member

Posts: 2966




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: October 07, 2014, 08:19:36 AM »

It is amazing how you are a expert on a antenna you have never seen and used first hand.  .


One does not need to be an expert to understand that a no radial vertical is not an efficient antenna system. Anyone without a closed mind can find pages and pages of very good and PROVEN information about radials and vertical antennas.

A ground mounted vertical antenna with a good radial system will always outperform a no radial vertical.
I believe you have bought into the Vertical antenna manufacturer advertising BS. Since the beginning of hamradio time, companies that make verticals have been advertising no radial vertical antennas. And hams like you buy them because they are too lazy to put down radials.

Will a no radial vertical radiate and make QSOes? Of course. Any thing conductive will radiate and make QSOes. Doesn't make it a good antenna. Heck, it is poor antenna system. But it will radiate and make shortsighted, closed mind, know it all hams like you happy.

Stan K9IUQ
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: October 07, 2014, 09:01:03 AM »

One does not need to be an expert to understand that a no radial vertical is not an efficient antenna system. Anyone without a closed mind can find pages and pages of very good and PROVEN information about radials and vertical antennas.
Stan K9IUQ

Again Stan it is black or white with you as you have narrow vision. I never said that radials would not help some installation but they are not as life or death as you suggest. One day I will replace and relocate my vertical and when I do I will put down a few radials but not the 40 or 60+ some think you must have. When I erected my hustler it was a experiment and never meant to be up so long. I had several wire antennas and a beam up at time and had some RFI in house and vertical was placed far away as possible at time as a test. I never expected it to work so well. Storm took out beam years ago and deer took out wire antenna guys leaving vertical. I plan on possibly putting up a ZS6BKW (better 40m resonance than G5RV) i have before winter but it is low on priority list. Next year want to get a ta34 up.  

The link below best describes you Stan...  A legend in your own mind too...

Click Here
« Last Edit: October 07, 2014, 09:09:59 AM by W8JX » Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
K9IUQ
Member

Posts: 2966




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: October 07, 2014, 09:17:08 AM »

Again Stan it is black or white with you as you have narrow vision

Actually my narrow vision says it is a choice of the right way or the wrong way to install a vertical antenna.

Stan K9IUQ
Logged
W9CW
Member

Posts: 156




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: October 07, 2014, 02:19:55 PM »

This thread has drifted far off from the OP's original query.  Come on guys, take your personal attacks elsewhere, specifically direct e-mails.  Why do well-meaning threads always tend to end up with one person attacking another?
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #38 on: October 07, 2014, 05:54:53 PM »

Actually my narrow vision says it is a choice of the right way or the wrong way to install a vertical antenna.

Like I said your way or no way at all. Even the manufacture says that it is acceptable to use without radials when ground mounted on a good ground rod. The Hustler BTV series is one of the few verticals that will. But according to the book of Stan it is a Dummy load. Well your book is wrong but you will never admit it ever. Would radials help my install? likely some but based on signal reports I do not see it raising it several S units and likely not even one on 40m.  How it works at my location on my ground and my terrain me be different than in a city plat but it works here.  

The link below again still best describes you Stan...  

Click Here
 
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
SWL2002
Member

Posts: 895




Ignore
« Reply #39 on: October 08, 2014, 03:13:45 AM »

W8JX:  If radiating only 10% of the power you put into the end of your coax is acceptable to you, then more power to you.  I am sure the worms in your yard appreciate the warmth in the winter.   Cheesy

The reason why the manufacturer says it is OK to use without ground radials is they want to sell antennas.  They know that the thought that they might have to run even one ground radial will dissuade some lazy Hams from buying the antenna.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2014, 03:27:04 AM by SWL2002 » Logged
K9IUQ
Member

Posts: 2966




Ignore
« Reply #40 on: October 08, 2014, 04:39:38 AM »

The reason why the manufacturer says it is OK to use without ground radials is they want to sell antennas.  They know that the thought that they might have to run even one ground radial will dissuade some lazy Hams from buying the antenna.

I still remember the Gotham Vertical that was advertised profusely in my early ham career. No radials needed and vast numbers of hams bought them because like W8JX they were too lazy to properly install one with radials. They used ham testimonials in their ads. W8JX's no radial needed rants  remind me of those testimonials  "A sucker is born every minute" is the phrase that comes to mind.

Thru out my long ham career I have used verticals. They can be wonderful antennas - properly installed and with radials. Have I ever installed one without radials? Sure. I was once a lazy ham myself. However I found out very quickly that a no radial vertical was not a competitive antenna..

This thread has drifted far off from the OP's original query.  Come on guys, take your personal attacks elsewhere, specifically direct e-mails.  Why do well-meaning threads always tend to end up with one person attacking another?

When I see the moderator credentials on your post I will comply. Until then go back on the hambands and play Policeman.

Stan K9IUQ
Logged
NR9R
Member

Posts: 172




Ignore
« Reply #41 on: October 08, 2014, 08:37:25 AM »

The best information on the hardware differences between the TS-590S and TS-590SG is on Nevada's website in the UK.  I don't believe I can attach a PDF to a post here, but just do a search for the following in Google (BTW, Nevada is a large dealer in the UK):

TS-590S_NPRI_latest

Click on the Nevada link, and the PDF outlines the hardware differences.  IMO, the most significant update with the upcoming TS-590SG is a hardware redesign of the 1st LO, which reduces phase noise/composite transmitter noise, and improves 2kHz spacing 3rd order dynamic range. From a Kenwood release: "revised the circuitry around 1st Mixer which improves C/N characteristic of 1st LO." This should be interesting, as this was the point of contention and major complaint from those in other camps (E and T) who panned the 590S as being somewhat of a broadband transmit noise generator in field day or multi-multi operations.

Evidently, they are using a different, or dedicated, display board CPU, as the new 590SG will display CW on the LCD screen.  I wish them luck with that, as I've really not seen a decent algorithm yet that can handle all fists on CW.

According to the Kenwood Japan website, the TS-590SG MSRP, converting from Yen to $, is going to be $2K, but who knows what the street price will be. The typical amateur manufacturer to dealer margin, without any quantity or special purchase discounts, etc., is 25%. We will just have to wait to see what the street price will be, but I imagine it may be higher than the original 590S price point.

73
Don W9CW

This is a very interesting comment because according to the ARRL lab results the TS-590 is one of the cleanest 12V transmitters with regard to composite noise:
Logged
K9IUQ
Member

Posts: 2966




Ignore
« Reply #42 on: October 08, 2014, 10:16:20 AM »

This is a very interesting comment because according to the ARRL lab results the TS-590 is one of the cleanest 12V transmitters with regard to composite noise:


There was a lengthy eham discussion recently started by K9IUQ about this very topic. The Ts-590s came in just behind the K-3 for low xmit phase noise.

There is much more information and charts in the .pdf link given by K9IUQ in the first post. Quite interesting and informative.

http://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,98790.0.html

Stan K9IUQ
 
Logged
KX2T
Member

Posts: 1037




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: October 08, 2014, 03:30:32 PM »

I feel that the SG is a band aid for some of the problems they had from the S model, the new RX section remains to be seen, many times companies will overstate what the radio will do in real world use. They should be trying to bring an in between rig out between the 590 and the 990, the 990's are showing up allot on the used market and the prices are dropping, what they need is a radio around the $3k mark like a TS890, something with some desk presence not some tinny radio like the 590 or K3 which both are smallish toy like rigs. You would hope Kenwood is reading these post but after the ARRL Hartford shindig and talking with the so called Kenwood Rep I would say they don't seem to care. After all its not Trio anymore its JVC, kinda like when Yaesu was bought by Standard/Vertex, they had no idea of what ham's wanted but since Yaesu Musen purchased the company back there trying real hard to get back on track.
Logged
K9IUQ
Member

Posts: 2966




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: October 08, 2014, 04:00:47 PM »

I feel that the SG is a band aid for some of the problems they had from the S model,

desk presence not some tinny radio like the 590 or K3 which both are smallish toy like rigs.

Please elaborate on the problems you feel that need a band-aid on the TS-590s.

I would hardly call the TS-590s tinny or toy like. Or small for that matter. I have seen the innards of one and it is typical high quality Japanese Radio. I can not speak for the K-3 as I have not had the opportunity to examine one closely.

If you judge performance by the size of the radio, there are plenty of huge radios to pick from. Waiting for a bigger radio in the $3K range from Kenwood may be a long wait.

Stan K9IUQ
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 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!