Manager


Manager - NA4M
Manager Notes
Reviews Home

Reviews For: CQ Magazine

Category: Amateur Radio Periodicals

eMail Subscription

Registered users are allowed to subscribe to specific review topics and receive eMail notifications when new reviews are posted.
Review Summary For : CQ Magazine
Reviews: 163MSRP: 42.95/yr
Description:
The Radio Amateur's Journal
Product is in production
More Info: http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/
# last 180 days Avg. Rating last 180 days Total reviews Avg. overall rating
151633.2
KE6JIG Rating: 2007-03-17
Poor at best... Time Owned: 3 to 6 months.
I've been a ham for 13 years and read most of the ham magazines that are out there. CQ has got to one of my least favorite. Looks like the authors hastily threw the articles together, not to mention the writing is mediocre at best. Plus how many pictures of people do we need to see standing in front of their equipment and/or antennas? I thumbed through the March '07 issue and as usual, not much substance. Into the trash it went.

How about some in depth, unbiased reviews of equipment, general interest articles, maybe something humorous or real life stories of how hams help in times of a disaster instead of pages and pages of DX contest results in 2 point type!

W2RDD Rating: 2006-10-09
October issue no contest results Time Owned: 0 to 3 months.
I just picked up a copy from Barnes and Noble. It was really a nice issue. I wonder if the fact that 80 percent of it was not devoted to contest results may have contributed to my positive review.
N4MWY Rating: 2006-08-25
I look forward to getting CQ every month. Time Owned: N.A.
I look forward to getting CQ every month.

It has interesting articles. There are interesting advertisements to read. It has a lot of material on contests.

I get QST also; they are both worth the money.

n4mwy
Mobile, AL
W4ABW Rating: 2006-08-25
I look forward to receiving CQ Time Owned: more than 12 months.
Good DX section and good awards section. I enjoy the contest results too. I do wish they did more product reviews. Their annual calendar is well done too. I like it !
VE6JJO Rating: 2006-08-25
Dangerous Article Time Owned: 0 to 3 months.
Recent construction article:

Build a small, stealthy aviation frequency receiver. Attempt to carry it on board a commercial airliner. Pull it out of your carry on luggage and put it on the pull down tray and listen to the cockpit transmissions.

At this point one could expect a number of things to happen.

1. Sudden arrival of Air Marshall at your seat with a very large gun.
2. Sudden deviation from flightpath to nearest airport.
3. Sudden removal of your person from aircraft.
4. Sudden incarceration.
WA4DOU Rating: 2006-08-12
I'm happy with CQ Time Owned: more than 12 months.
CQ revolves around contesting, dx, awards, hf, antennas, homebrew articles, qrp, propagation, etc. These comprise the bulk of my interest in amateur radio. There is nothing on the Internet that is even close, for me.
KI0KM Rating: 2006-04-29
Good Magazine Time Owned: more than 12 months.
I have been a subscriber to CQ since 1977 and have found it to be a good magazine. It is a fine complement to the others: QST and Worldradio to which I also subscribe. There are always interesting articles and its about ham radio!
The ads I find invaluable. Since I have all my old issues, they are a great reference to what equipment was available and when, which, along with the product reviews are a great guide when purchasing used equipment.
I have been very satisfied.
NE0P Rating: 2006-04-10
I'm cancelling my subscription Time Owned: more than 12 months.
In general, CQ has some good articles, and actually prints contest scores-something QST should learn to do again. So why am I canceling my subscription? I can no longer take editorial after editorial on how we need to remove CW, dumb down the written test to something a 6 month old could pass, and the name calling if you don't agree with them. I am using the refund (if they ever send it, since I still have 2 years left) to renew my Worldradio subscription. That is a publication that believes we need to maintain licensing standards.
WB6NVH Rating: 2006-03-01
Weak Content, Horrible Delivery Time Owned: 6 to 12 months.
I subscribed to CQ for a few years in the 1970's and again in the early 1990's, and thought I would try it again in summer 2005. What a mistake!

The issues arrive sporadically. Usually near the end of the cover month, if at all. Here it is March 1 and I have yet to receive the February issue. Based on the comments of others on this topic, this seems to be a common problem for anyone living more than a few hours from the distribution point.

The content is nearly all advertising and contest results. In the 7 issues I have received so far, there was a total of two interesting technical articles. Apparently the magazine has decided to utilize the very cheapest distribution contractor and then handle the complaints on a piecemeal basis instead of doing it right the first time.

A couple others have commented that we should "support" CQ Magazine regardless of shoddy delivery and content. "Support" what? CQ is owned by a for-profit corporation, not a church or political party. It isn't a charity. The ads may indeed partially pay for the magazine, but the subscription isn't free either.

In my opinion, unless you like to see pages upon pages of contest results and MFJ ads in the issues you are lucky enough to receive, the subscription price is a waste of money. I am going back to ARRL-QST next time.
KB2NAT Rating: 2005-09-26
It IS about ham radio... Time Owned: 6 to 12 months.
Yes, CQ could be larger, better, etc.; however, what's its competition? The point is, that there isn't much. It should be supported based on what it's trying to do. Certainly it could be more complete, but with so few amateur publications left, I would hate to see this one drop off the screen, too. Hang in there, CQ!