Sherwood Engineering updates receiver performance list
hallic...@collins.net
dave
>
> http://www.sherweng.com/table.html
>
> Interesting.
>
> Jim(MI)
It costs 3 times what I paid for my K3.
hallic...@collins.net
The Yaesu price is ridiculous. I am looking at the new Kenwood down
conversion TS-590S. It has good close-in performance and excellent
sensitivity for $1750.
Also, I notice sensitivity values apply for full hf band and it even
has sensitivity specs stated for longwave (Universal web site).
Jim(MI)
hallic...@collins.net
Does state that specs are guaranteed for ham bands only at bottom.
Does not say which specs they are referring to and why state specs for
longwave which are out of band?
We need a receiver review. Who will volunteer?
dave
Upconversion is only required for seamless general coverage.
Steve
hallic...@collins.net
hallic...@collins.net
It is up-conversion on 17 meters and close-in performance is not as
good. That's why I hope someone posts a review for use as a shortwave
receiver.
Steve
> On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:04:09 -0800, dave <da...@dave.dave> wrote:
>
> >On 01/07/2011 06:33 PM, hallic...@collins.net wrote:
> >> On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 18:08:18 +0800, dave<da...@dave.dave> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 01/08/2011 09:36 AM, hallic...@collins.net wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.sherweng.com/table.html
> >>>>
> >>>> Interesting.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jim(MI)
> >>>
> >>> It costs 3 times what I paid for my K3.
> >>
> >> The Yaesu price is ridiculous. I am looking at the new Kenwood down
> >> conversion TS-590S. It has good close-in performance and excellent
> >> sensitivity for $1750.
Definitely some interesting rigs in that price range, including the Ten Tec Eagle, Ten Tec Jupiter and Yaesu FT-950. Take your time and enjoy deliberating. Sometimes people get in a hurry when they're trying to decide which rig to buy. I'd take it slow and think carefully about which features these rigs have and which would be the best "fit" for you and your operating habits. There's a lot to consider. The data on the Sherwood list is only a first step. I envy you...it's fun trying to decide which rig to buy!
arthr...@webtv.net
> On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 21:33:32 -0500, hallicraf...@collins.net wrote:
> >On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 18:08:18 +0800, dave <d...@dave.dave> wrote:
>
> >>On 01/08/2011 09:36 AM, hallicraf...@collins.net wrote:
>
> >>>http://www.sherweng.com/table.html
>
> >>> Interesting.
>
> >>> Jim(MI)
>
> >>It costs 3 times what I paid for my K3.
>
> >The Yaesu price is ridiculous. I am looking at the new Kenwood down
> >conversion TS-590S. It has good close-in performance and excellent
> >sensitivity for $1750.
> >Also, I notice sensitivity values apply for full hf band and it even
> >has sensitivity specs stated for longwave (Universal web site).
>
> >Jim(MI)
>
> Does state that specs are guaranteed for ham bands only at bottom.
> Does not say which specs they are referring to and why state specs for
> longwave which are out of band?
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
How do we test them?
RHF
> On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 21:33:32 -0500, hallicraf...@collins.net wrote:
> >On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 18:08:18 +0800, dave <d...@dave.dave> wrote:
>
> >>On 01/08/2011 09:36 AM, hallicraf...@collins.net wrote:
>
> >>>http://www.sherweng.com/table.html
>
> >>> Interesting.
>
> >>> Jim(MI)
>
> >>It costs 3 times what I paid for my K3.
>
> >The Yaesu price is ridiculous. I am looking at the new Kenwood down
> >conversion TS-590S. It has good close-in performance and excellent
> >sensitivity for $1750.
> >Also, I notice sensitivity values apply for full hf band and it even
> >has sensitivity specs stated for longwave (Universal web site).
>
> >Jim(MI)
>
> Does state that specs are guaranteed for ham bands only at bottom.
> Does not say which specs they are referring to and why state specs for
> longwave which are out of band?
- We need a receiver review.
- Who will volunteer ?
eHAM -Reviews- Receivers : General Coverage {HF & SWL}
(Presently 349 of Brands and Models Listed)
http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/8
General Coverage Radio Receivers :
Radio High Frequency [HF] -aka- 'Shortwave'
.
.
hallic...@collins.net
A lot of amateurs are buying them. When I talk to somebody that has
one I will find out what they think. Hopefully they have done at least
some out of band listening. Also have to check on utube and see if
anyone posts a demo.
Jim
dave
> Hopefully it has at least some features that weren't on your stock K3?
I'm good with sharp crystal filters and digitally controlled AGC. I can
work the noise comfortably enough. I am a DXer not a contestant. I use
digital modes, some beneath the noise floor, so a real time panorama
display is superfluous. Besides the K3 is built up the road, not in Asia
somewhere.
dave
Unless you want a ham transceiver the only choice you have for a
high-performance SWL receiver is for one of the excellent black box
radios that require a host PC. I think there's one for about $500 that
Sherwood ranks well.
hallic...@collins.net
It's great to see two American companies with the lowest priced
transceivers right up near the top of the ratings. If you include
SDR's, you can make it three.
Steve
I say this not to disparage the high end rigs, but to celebrate the lower end rigs and what they're capable of!
D. Peter Maus
Once you reach a certain level, the difference is going to be a
function of your antenna performance.
But then, that's always true at any level.
During the heyday, Zenith T/Os were known for their exceptional
sensitivity and deep reach on crowded bands. With the built-in whip.
Truth is, that T/0's were good, but nothing special. With a hand
alignment, they could be made to be reasonably selective, but that
legendary sensitivity was merely a perception, and artifically
contrived, at that.
With Zenith's lowered threshold, increasing the operating range,
of the AGC, and reduced recovery time, T/O's would seem to be more
sensitive than the average receiver, when sitting side by side. The
deeper reach made quieter signals pop more lively on the T/O than
rigs in the same class. And most owners didn't realize that increase
in noise along with the signal was not a sign of increased sensitivity.
Even so, T/O's were often $75-100 more than similar radios in the
same class.
Real world...they were usually more radio than most listeners
would ever need.
Today, a modern rig can easily reach within striking distance of
that $5k rig for far less. The difference is often at the very
limits of performance, if not the limits of credibility. And the
number of features most users will never touch.
For a few thousand, you can improve your radio and improve your
performance by a few percent.
For a few hundred you can improve your antenna and improve your
performance tenfold.
RHF
The first two elements are very necessary :
# 1 the Radio
# 2 the Antenna
But without the third element : There may be
nothing for the first two to pick-up and hear.
# 3 the Location
+ The Right Location can make #1 & #2
a Joy to Use.
- The Wrong Location can make #1 & #2
a Frustrating Fruitless Endeavor.
imho ~ RHF
.
.
dave
> Today, a modern rig can easily reach within striking distance of that
> $5k rig for far less. The difference is often at the very limits of
> performance, if not the limits of credibility. And the number of
> features most users will never touch.
>
> For a few thousand, you can improve your radio and improve your
> performance by a few percent.
>
> For a few hundred you can improve your antenna and improve your
> performance tenfold.
>
Talk about hyperbole...
And we discuss these matters in Decibels and Microvolts not "tenfolds"
nor "percents". Close in dynamic range is very important for DXing in
crowded bands and there ain't an antenna made that'll improve that spec,
and a they make a few that can degrade it.
arthr...@webtv.net
I like 0 Db. Across a known impedance.
dave
dB rarely appears without a reference value. dBm, dBmV, dBw, etc.
Steve
dave
> It's all about operating habits. You operate almost exclusively digital modes like PSK-31, correct? If so, then you basically face contest conditions every day. Because all the digital activity tends to occur in a *very* small segment of each band, QRM from strong, nearby signals is way more of a concern for you than it is for someone who operates mostly voice, CW or a healthy combination of different modes. So, some specs are going to matter more for you than for someone with different interests and operating habits. This isn't to say that close in dynamic range is unimportant for anyone. It isn't. But it's definitely more important for some than for others.
Yes. I detune slightly to center the one 32 Hz wide signal I'm decoding
in the center of my 250 Hz crystal filter bandpass. But I did the same
thing with SSB and my R390-A mechanical filters 22 years ago ("Mainsail
Mainsail"). I call it "tuning the radio". I require a minimum amount of
operating controls and those are thoughtfully all represented by
hardware on the K3 front panel. I have to hold 2 buttons down for 2
seconds to switch off AGC and to switch from Watts to ALC on the meter.
Everything else defaults exactly how I like it. Those giant Japanese
radios remind me of Sansui stereos during Vietnam.