| IK0OZD |
Rating:      |
2010-11-06 | |
| THE RADIO FOR EXCELLENCE |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
THE RADIO FOR EXCELLENCE.
I have no words to describe this radio.
The hard thing is to give a score from 1 to 5,
much higher rate would not be enough.
I have a ELECRAFT k3 on my desk since 2009,
and it is my radio par excellence, now with this new Yaesu
I can not figure out which radio is less efficient. |
|
| KC0PMO |
Rating:      |
2010-10-22 | |
| SIMPLY THE BEST!!! |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
| People will read in the December issue of a leading magazine that this radio is the GOLD STANDARD for those operators that seek the BEST receiver performance and value in a HF radio. This radio has the HIGHEST close-in IMD dynamic range and third order intercept of any radio they have tested! The impressive test results speak for themselves. If you desire the best, spoil yourself with a Yaesu FTdx-5000, and own the new GOLD STANDARD in radio! Enjoy, I know I am!!! |
|
| W4ZW |
Rating:      |
2010-10-17 | |
| Follow-up Review vs K3 & TS-590S |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
Wrote this for my FCG gang, but of interest to many
Received the K-3 back from Elecraft with a note that said it exceeded specs.
Since they knew I was doing comparison reviews, they asked me to turn off
the 2nd receiver because there is a 3dB loss when both receivers are active
since they share the same front end and the signal is split. They also
asked that I set all radios to the same NR/DSP/filter/ etc.
So I did. I completely revamped the shack since it had grown in stages as I
added gear and was becoming somewhat of a rat's nest of cables and wires,
many without tags so that I was constantly tracing cables to see what when
where. Removed everything, designed a layout, and marked every cable. I
have pictures of the setup; three rigs in a line with an "ABC" switch to
quickly switch from one to other.
Some minutiae:
YAESU FTDX-5000 K-3 Kenwood TS-590S
Knobs 90/8 Concentric 45/2 Conc 47/2 Concentric
(Most are dual/multiple function)
Antenna Ports 4/1 RX 2/1RX 2/1RX
(Not incl Transverters, etc)
Size/Weight
Yaesu 18.2x5.3x15.3/ 46.3lbs
K-3 11.1x4.4x11.8/9.5lbs
Kenwood 10.63x3.78x11.46/16.3lbs
(Width/height/depth ", Lbs)
SW Updates 2 1 0
(Since purchase 8/10)
Cost: $5,600 (w/300Hz Roofing) $4,100(2nd RX/Filters) $1,800
See the respective manuals for the details. Many ask about the TX/RX EQ
capabilities. Both the Yaesu and the K-3 use parametric EQ, but with
different methods. The K-3 uses a more traditional 8 segment band with
adjustments of -16 to +16dB in each segment; while the Yaesu uses a nine
segment matrix of center frequency, parametric gain, and Q (bandwidth) with
-20dB to +10dB in the matrix. There is a completely separate matrix for
"Processor On." The Kenwood sounds absolutely great out of the box, but
offers seven different preset selections separately for both TX and RX, or
you can roll your own with their ARCP-590 software designed for the
TS-590S.
Unique features:
Yaesu FTDX-5000: Control your Yaesu rotor from the front panel; sloped AGC
setting which preserves the "relative" signal strength of stations;
individually programmable CW key ports; built-in voice/cw keyer/RX
recorder; bandscope w/ hi fi speakers (D & MP models); DMU-2000 with the
FTDX-5000 updated SW gives you finals temp, SWR chart across band, most
radio settings, bandscope, etc etc.
Elecraft K-3: Built-in PSK-RTTY-CW decoder; super-fast ATU; phase locked
dual diversity receivers (2nd RX option - tks Lu and Joe); built-in voice/CW
keyer (option);
Kenwood TS-590S: Excellent ATU. Fast and tunes almost anything. Intuitive
front panel with great graphical display of bandwidth/filtering; very good
NB and NR; really great audio out of the box
How do they work? Remember, I'm primarily a CW guy so my opinion is
somewhat biased.
Spent the first evening sorting through the pile-ups on 40CW, mainly to see
how effective they were at digging out the weak signals sandwiched between
big signals. And when the DX wasn't working split, that was real work. I
did use Joe's recommended settings for the K-3, because like Will, I just
can't get used to the high pitched noise hiss. Lu calls it "edgy", but my
ears were trained on old tube rigs, and I guess I'm just dragging OOTC ears
into this fray. Joe's settings weren't that far away from the ones I used
before, but I still find the K-3 tiring to listen to. Rob Sherwood did an
excellent analysis of the K-3 and found it superior in almost every aspect,
but he did find the 9th order harmonics could be tiring for extended use.
High impedance headphones should significantly reduce this. I tried my Heil
Pro Plus, Bose QC3's, my favorite Optimus Titanium 'phones, and various
others here in the shack, but just couldn't get used to that "edgy" sound.
I have no lack of ESP signals up here in the high mountains of the "black
hole", especially from EU and AF; nothing like those great signals in
Florida! Set up on 40CW with a huge pile-up on a weak African, and once
again, I am amazed to barely hear the weak signal muddled in the noise level
on the K-3 and on the Kenwood, but it's Q5 when switched to the Yaesu
FTDX-5000; still weak, but perfectly readable. This was repeated time
after time, first on 40CW and then on 80CW. 20M wasn't really open or
suitable, so stuck with 40M and 80M. The Kenwood TS-590S was the equal to
the K-3 in every test, able to hear the weak CW signal, but not able to copy
like the Yaesu. After Elecraft's assurances that my K-3 "exceeded specs", I
can only conclude that the FTDX-5000 is much better than I had expected.
And the TS-590S proved to be worthy of the fan-fare preceding its release.
I don't think it's a K-3 "killer", but it is a very serious competitor,
especially at its price point.
The two most important things for a CW contester are noise floor and dynamic
range. All three have excellent dynamic range, at least in my ABC
comparisons in crowded conditions and published specs, but I still found the
noise floor of the K-3 too high to my ears, at least compared with the Yaesu
and the Kenwood. I'm going to drag out my TS-570SG and TS-2000 for a quick
comparison, since comparing these three high tech, quasi-SDR radios to each
other will probably be on another plateau from my older rigs. They are all
three marvelous radios and represent a quantum leap forward. I wish I had a
FLEX5000 to compare. My friend, W4MO, has been trying to get me to buy one
for two years now.
Switched to SSB, where close in spacing is not such a big deal as with CW,
and there the difference was not so obvious. The Yaesu still did a
wonderful job isolating the weak signals, but the difference was not so
evident. The Kenwood had that great "broadcast" audio sound that is a
Kenwood tradition but could use one more roofing filter (maybe 1.8), but
the K-3 was a very effective SSB radio; very crisp audio and great signal
isolation with the filtering system. I can see why it is a favorite with
SSB contesters; but I still preferred the Yaesu over the K-3 or the Kenwood;
for me it was just more comfortable to use. In on air tests, almost
everyone gave all three very high marks for the audio. I had a round-table
on 75SSB and they were delighted to compare ABC without my telling them
which was which. Some liked the Yaesu because it "sounded bigger", but they
were the weaker stations and the Yaesu's slightly higher power was more than
likely the difference.
I have been very impressed with this Kenwood TS-590S. With its price point,
it is a lot of radio for the money. It has great audio and very pleasant to
listen to like the Yaesu. I could probably get used to the K-3, but
listening to the other two for extended periods on CW would not be as tiring
as I find the K-3 on CW.
Which is the best? Depends on what you want. As Charlie, 'VUD, pointed
out, they are more similar than different. The value rig is the Kenwood
TS-590S which is an amazing radio for the money. I predict they will sell
tons of them! The do-everything, Swiss Army knife K-3 is a great SSB
contesting rig that you can tailor to your desires but that may take a
while. Lu pointed out that he is finally comfortable with his after almost
a year. But my personal choice is the Yaesu FTDX-5000 for all around
operation. Almost every feature you could want, tailoring to whatever you
wish, and solid feel and build. It was my go-to radio every time conditions
and copy got rough. You won't go wrong with any of these three. |
|
| K4TB |
Rating:      |
2010-10-16 | |
| Studio Quality |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
Just received my 5000D model and the optional 300 Hz filter a week ago and I am totally satisfied. This radio is more like a precision studio instrument than merely a radio. There's an adjustment for every parameter imaginable. I haven't found a signal that I couldn't dig out of the QRM or QRN with this radio by one adjustment or other.
I moved up from an FT950 so the learning curve with the FTdx5000D wasn't too difficult although there was still a lot more to learn than with the 950. Like others have commented, I've found the FTdx5000D is very quiet by comparison with other radios I've used. When you do tune across a signal it jumps out with crystal clarity. Yaesu has finally perfected their DSP, and the DNR and NB are especially effective now. Comparing the FTdx5000D to my Icom 756P3 which I still have, I believe the FTdx5000D DNR sounds better, and I used to hold the Icom as the standard.
I use the DMU-2000 and two of the Mu-Tune outboard preselectors (80/40 & 30/20) with the FTdx5000D and for me they definitely add to the utility of the radio. The SMU-5000 is not much of a scope when compared to the DMU-2000 but it does allow me to use the DMU-2000 for some of the other things it does while still being able to keep an eye on the band with the SMU-5000. The speakers are very good with the SMU but I found my little Radio Shack speaker plugged into the SMU provided louder audio. Nevertheless, I think the SMU-5000 is a good value for the price.
My unit is a recent version with the correctly-spelled "Transceiver" label. I applied the latest firmware updates for the CPU, DSP and the DMU-2000. I did not find any of the problems with pops or dual-receiver swishing noises that some reported with the early versions.
About the only nits I can think of is that I wish the VFO RX and TX LED buttons were a little bigger so I could push them more easily with my fat fingers and so I could better notice which VFO I was transmitting on (my duh). Also, the antenna tuner is a little slow and noisy when compared to an Icom for example. With all the pluses of the radio I hesitate to say I have any nits however. This is an excellent radio. |
|
| OH1JO |
Rating:      |
2010-10-01 | |
| The best HF rig available |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
| Just a short review.. I have FT-1000 MK V Field (Vy good rig!) I had FT-2000D for 1,5 years.. and now the FTDX-5000D with 300hz roofing filter. Dsp works like a dream.. roofing filters too.. I wd rate these three radios (1-5 scale): FT-2000(D): 2.9 FT-1000 MK 5 Field (with filters installed): 4.0 and FTDX 5000: 5.0. If you want the best HF radio.. here it is.. You will not regret if you will buy the FTDX-5000.. The price of FT-5000 is not too high.. vy good value for the money! De OH1JO/OH1K |
|
| K3UR |
Rating:      |
2010-09-29 | |
| FTdx5000 Outstanding Radio |
Time Owned: 6 to 12 months. |
Most of the reviews here were done shortly after the new owners of the FTdx5000 received their new radios, as attested by the fact that all but one review was done after they had it from 0-3 months. Only one review was done between 3-6 months.
So I will post my second review now after owning my FTdx5000MP for over 6 months. My first review on March 10, 2010 was done after I had the radio completely setup and running after 2 days of ownership.
One major change is that I have since found that the Noise Blanker on my FTdx5000MP is just as effective as the NB on my Flex-5000 SDR.
After owning three FT-2000 radios for several years, I can reiterate the fact that my FTdx5000MP is far superior to the FT-2000, especially with the receiver. I have worked DX and contests with both radios and the difference is astounding, with the FTdx5000 able to pull weak stations out of the mud and pileups.
Two receivers was the icing on the cake, with the ability to hear 2 different bands at the same time and utilizing the SM-5000 Station Monitor to locate the strong stations.
Being a former music teacher and musician for for many years, along with being one of several thousand audiophiles in "ham radio", I can declare that the speakers in the SM-5000 are outstanding. The monitoring circuit for headphone use is among the best in the business.
My bio on QRZ has the complete setup for the FTdx5000 and also the TTBF setup, which I discovered several months ago. The audio guys/gals will love this feature of the FTdx5000, which is not covered in the manual.
For looks, performance and dependability, the FTdx5000 is one of the best "bangs for the buck" that you can buy. Thank you and contact me anytime for any further assistance.
John Occhipinti, K3UR
http://www.qrz.com/db/k3ur
The Setup Specialst, W2IHY Audio Gear
The Voice of Atlanta
|
|
| XE1ZLG |
Rating:      |
2010-07-22 | |
| Excellent ergonomics, wonderful DSP contour control !!! |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
| Ok I have the FTDX 5000D, I agree with others that the station monitor has delay, but it is very useful for Dx, also it works for see your bandwidth transimiting audio-radio-microphone features. The DSP.. uhmm .... Icom noise reduction is better, but APF and contour control works really nice, Contour control works better for noise reduction than the NR control....Very sensitive reciever !!! , most of the time I use the receiver in IPO1 position, stock microphone MH-31 works very good. Secondary receiver is high quality, always shows more background noise than the main receiver. I think this radio will become a classic !! 73.... Luis Gtz. |
|
| VA2AM |
Rating:      |
2010-07-14 | |
| High quality design |
Time Owned: 3 to 6 months. |
I own my Ftdx5000D just over 3 months and I used their basic brochure and downloaded their operator manual to decide for this radio instead a competitor brand. I will not repeat what was written on main receiver. So far I have been through 4 main CPU, EDSP upgrades . Like others I reported few software glitches to Yaesu service by phone and by e-mail and let me tell you they are very customer focus. It never took more than one week to get a bug fix. At the same time in one occasion they got a problem with an early installer program and my dsp went dead. Yaesu through my radio dealer covered the shipping cost to speed-up the repair with a new installer version 0107 done in few days and that is good service. This latest installer version works very well, friendly to use and nothing else needed to be replaced.
To get a good picture I should recommend you to download their latest brochure found under files. Only high quality parts are used and very clean lay out. The die-cast main frame keeps each of 4x pcb’s from bottom side fully shielded from each other and there are 26 screws to remove this cover. The top side is also fully shielded by two covers, each one like the power supply, RF power driver, preamp and first 9 mhz IF have their own box for interference free. Yaesu has adopted the down dual conversion known for its low noise level. The dual quad balanced front end mixer preamp shines on 15 meters and up you must select preamp 2 to hear some static noise (yagi PRO-67B at 25 meters). DSP phone audio sounds like analog without any hiss background, in strong qrm selecting narrow position I can perfectly copy as narrow as 1.35 khz SSB. CW 300 hz roofing filter no ringing heard with dsp at 200 down to 50 hz. Each roofing filter is very sharp with >80 db attenuation at twice their width. The second receiver is an up-triple conversion it uses similar Ft9k architecture with the same DSP circuit and nothing like Ft-2k. By selecting both RX, each S-meter gives exactly the same reading and audio level. Each time you make a knob setting change, the luminescence display will give you the setting. This is important for me for linear amplifier drive, selecting different mike and cw speed without any guessing. The cw zero-in works very well without any jumping seen on other radios. The front panel is very crowded and nice thing about it is you don’t have to return to one of 176 menus. There are also more than 300 service menus to calibrate and other.
Third order intercept (IP3), dynamic range (IMD3) and blocking figures are outstanding with the appropriate Roofing filters selected by refering to the latest Yaesu brochure. IMD +33 dbm, IP3 +36dbm spacing 2 khz with 600 hz filter. These numbers have already been tested by Radcom magazin. I am sure later this automn we will get some official results and any new radio needs 6 months time to be fair against the competition. It will qualify among the best 3 radios available on the market sold at higher price.
Yes I am an happy owner and I look later on to dig out weak signal on 160 m and major contests.
73, Rejean (va2am) |
|
| N8RR |
Rating:      |
2010-06-30 | |
| Super Receiver |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
I have had the FTDX-5000 for about 10 days and am posting my initial impressions, because many people have asked for a comparison between the FTDX-5000 and FT-2000. My primary interests at the moment are 160 meter CW DX (for the last 2 years) and now 6 meter DX (for the past year). However, I am an active DXer on all of the other HF bands.
My primary rig since April 2008 was the FT-2000. I have had great DX results on 160 and other bands with the FT-2000. My review of the FT-2000 is on eHam.
In some of the very largest/strongest pileups within 1 to 5 khz, the FT-2000 is prone to overload. This has not cost me a QSO, but a stiffer front end would, at times, make copy easier. I purchased the FTDX-5000 based on the RADCOM receiver test results. So far, a suitable pileup situation has not developed sufficient to do a side by side test of the FT-2000 and FTDX-5000 in terms of front end overload during operation. There are other features of the FTDX-5000 receiver which are superior to the FT-2000 from my initial on the air comparisons.
The major difference with the FTDX-5000 is in the noise reduction/signal enhancing capability on CW. The FT-2000 has a hot receiver on 6 meters, and I have been comparing it to the FTDX-5000 on a daily basis with WA3TTS Pittsburgh beacon, which is located about 185 miles from me and is running 1 watt ERP. I can hear this beacon 90 to 95% of the time. It almost never moves the S meter on either receiver, but it is usually Q5. With no power line noise, the copy on both receivers is equal. Occasionally I get local power line noise that can run S5 to S7. When this particular noise is on, I can't tell the signal is there with the FT-2000, even with the noise blanker and DNR engaged. Without the noise blanker and DNR engaged on the FTDX-5000, the signal is buried as well. However, with the NB and DNR engaged on the FTDX-5000, I can copy the beacon Q5. It is possible to extract a signal that is not moving the S meter in the presence of S5 to S7 power line noise. This situation is repeatable.
The DNR control on the FTDX-5000 is very effective, much better than the FT-2000. The adjustment range is 1 to 15. You can engage the DNR on CW at the lowest levels and hear a white noise reduction, without distorting or reducing the volume of the signal. Up to about 10 to 11 on the DNR adjustment range, you hear additional background noise reduction, but it does not start making obvious changes in the signal level until you get beyond that. After position 11, the volume drops on the received signal, but it does not distort a cw signal. On 6 meter CW while tuning, I find myself leaving the DNR engaged at a low level, to lower the background noise. The effect is to make a signal seem to pop out of the noise. I almost never use the DNR on the FT-2000, but have regularly used the control on the FTDX-5000. This is a major difference between the receivers.
The APF control also works well on the FTDX-5000. If more than one CW signal is in the passband, you can use this control to selectively tune in the signals. It makes the desired signal seem to pop out from the others. One other effect of this control is additional noise reduction. The signal level has to be above a threshold in strength for this control to work. On the very weakest signals the APF might not be useful. I need to spend more time playing with this control.
The rest of the receiver is great. It is smooth, as one would expect from a premium rig. The sound of the receiver audio is more reminiscent of my FT-1000D than it is of the DSP FT-2000. My first reaction when tuning in an SSB signal was to think the rig sounded like my analog FT-1000D.
I have made a few SSB QSO's with the rig. I set the equalizer on the same settings as the FT-2000 and have received great reports from the locals. Mostly the rig has been used on CW, as this is where my primary interests are. In fact, the first QSO was on 6 meter CW with JH0RNN, not a bad haul from WV. This was my first JA/Asia on 6 meters.
Summarizing, I believe the FTDX-5000 receiver is a step up from the FT-2000, which has a great receiver in my view. So far, I have no nits to pick with the new rig. I am looking forward to 160 this coming season, and testing the FTDX-5000 in some big pileups.
The FTDX-5000 has generated a lot of interest and questions, and I hope the info provided, from an operating perspective,is useful.
73 Charlie N8RR |
|
| W2SL |
Rating:     |
2010-04-26 | |
| good middle range radio |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
| I bought the FT5000D and put it beside my Ft9000 contest for a basic comparision on SSB,Cw.I would say the receiver is equal to a FT9000.Yaesu said this radio was a mid range radio and thats exactly what it is.Its better than a FT2000/D but not a Ft9000.It lacks the bells & whistles of the Ft9000 and that professional feel you get when you sit in front of a Ft9000.The SM-5000 has a serious lag time between the Signal heard and the signal displayed on the SM5000.Its pretty much a toy like the DMU2000 but by the time you buy all those options available you will have as much invested as you would in a Ft9000D and its not self contained in one box like a Ft9000D.I was disapointed enough im concidering having the 2nd receiver put into my contest.The Ft5000D is too much money for what you get to me.You still will want the SM5000 tho because of the speakers as the ft5000 only has one speaker in it.It does not compare to the Sp9000 speaker however. |
|