WINRADIO: Why Does Everyone Hate It?
Ron Boutwell
however, I would like to know why everyone hates it. Magazines give it
rave reviews. On the surface it seems like a good deal. I like the
fact that to make it a PC internal they were forced to physically
shield the receiver. That should also provide some valuable shielding
from other electrical interference (or so I would assume). But here in
the forums I hear people saying they wouldn't "...touch it with a
bargepole.". However, they never explain why they feel this way. I
would appreciate a little ellaboration shice it is a sizable investment
and one I am considering making. :-)
Thanks!
--
Ron Boutwell
--
Ron Boutwell
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Gurljo
All I know is - iCOM IC-PCR1000 is a much better receiver. In all respects.
If you want a PC-controlled radio then these are the choices (IMHO):
- DC to daylight: iCOM IC-PCR1000
- DC to 30 MHz: TenTec RX-320
Check the reviews at "Strong Signals" (Winradio, PCR1000):
http://www.strongsignals.net/htm/ss_reviews.htm
For the TenTec I don't have links - but a web-search should return several
reviews.
(Radio Netherlands has a review)
Best regards,
Rado
Joshua Buker
Check thier website to look at thier full product line and you will see
why. They offer alot of highly specialized radios for various govt.
purposes. Such a vertical market is hard to support due to increased R&D
and production costs and low volume of sales.
This is not a codemnation of the basic Winradio itself, but rather an
observation of thier marketing practices. In short, it forces them to
overprice the consumer end Winradios. But thats just MHO.
Josh
In article <91kg1e$4f0$1...@news.orion.ac.jp>, gur...@hotmail.com says...
G8jnz
PC internal they were forced to physically shield the receiver
inside a PC, close to a myriad of noise-producing boards was its undoing. No
person in their right mind would mount a sensitive radio receiver next to
processors and other oscillators that chuck out six buckets of crud all over
the spectrum.
The new WinRadio, I notice, is now an external box which suggests to me that
the internal version was a failure. I personally would never in a million
years buy any brand of radio that mounted inside a computer, it must be doomed
to failure.
de Bob M.
jukeboy
wrote:
>- DC to daylight: iCOM IC-PCR1000
Just a quick newbie question...I see this term "DC to daylight" used
when talking about receiver capabilities, but I can't find an
explanation of it anywhere. I assume DC is referring to a frequency
level instead of "Direct Current", and would "daylight" be the
frequency of light waves?
Mark
(Just a little behind the learning curve)
Ralf R. Radermacher
> I assume DC is referring to a frequency
> level instead of "Direct Current", and would "daylight" be the
> frequency of light waves?
Quite so. A nice metaphor for referring to a receiver with an extremely
wide tuning range.
73,
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
http://www.free-photons.de
e-mail from trash accounts (deja, yahoo) automatically rejected
Dave
Mark Holden
(snip)
> I like the
> fact that to make it a PC internal they were forced to physically
> shield the receiver. That should also provide some valuable shielding
> from other electrical interference (or so I would assume).
Hi Ron
Other folks have already pointed out the Winradio is relatively expensive
for the performance it provides, and have pointed out putting a radio that
close to multiple sources of RFI is a bad idea, but I'll expand to point
out the fact it fits inside the computer also limits the amount of
shielding they can use.
Back when I started looking at rack mount radios, someone suggested radios
with more weight generally have more shielding, and odds are I'd appreciate
the difference. It seems to have been good advice. My favorite radio (a
Harris RF-550) has quite a few PC boards, and groups of boards are shielded
from each other with aluminum that's about 1/16" thick, then the case is
made out of aluminum that's about 1/8" thick.
Regards,
Mark
Mark Holden
Dave wrote:
> But it's OK to mount a computer inside a radio?
When a radio is designed to include a microprocessor, it's very different. The
engineers know they're putting a likely source of RFI inside of a radio, so they
can adjust their design to minimize problems, and can test to make sure it's
working as they intended.
Even so, some people prefer analog tuning, because they feel the digitally tuned
radios have more internal noise.
Regards,
Mark
William L. Turini
>
> I do not own a WinRadio, but I have considered picking one up. First,
> however, I would like to know why everyone hates it.
I bought a WinRadio several years ago. It was quite nice having it in
my computer and being able to listen to FM stations and such. As for
scanning, it had too many spurious signals to be of much use. Also, it
seemed to lack sensitivity compared to my old Bearcat next to the
computer. I eventually sold it because of scanning problems.
The next year I spoke to the WinRadio folks at Dayton and commented
about the spurious signals that were recieved, and how I'd sold the
radio because of it. They allowed that it did have a lot of spurious
signals and that's why they came up with the external version.
As near as I can tell from my experiments, the spurious signals were in
the WinRadio, not the computer or monitor.
Bill
--
Bill Turini KA4GAV Tur...@hamanuals.com
Hamanuals www.hamanuals.com
Always looking for Signal/One Literature,Parts, and Accessories
Dave
>working as they intended.
On Mon, 18 Dec 2000 11:19:37 -0500, Mark Holden <msho...@ct2.nai.net>
wrote:
Mark Holden
Dave wrote:
> But engineers can't
> >adjust their design to minimize problems, and can test to make sure it's
> >working as they intended.
> when they put a radio in a computer????
They can to a degree, but there are limitations because they don't know the
characteristics of your particular computer. So their shielding needs to happen on
their board, and when they're done, the board needs to be small enough to fit inside
one slot.
If you checked the computers your friends own, you'd find that while most of them
work about the same, few if any of them would be made using identical parts.
While an engineer who was designing a radio could specify shielding to reduce RFI
from a microprocessor he or she included in the design, it would not be practical for
Winradio to develop shielding for users to install near the parts of their computers
that cause RFI.
The other point is the metal case on your computer does a lot to contain RFI so it
will pass the FCC certifications. Putting the radio inside of the case bypasses this
protection.
Regards,
Mark
Snot
When I tuned around looking for stations, it made a real annoying
zipper noise as a part of the digital tuning process which interfered with
the ability for me to separate the zipper noise from a real signal.
Also the software is dinky and the clicks, thunks and other stuff going on
let you know that without a doubt, this is a computer controlled radio and alot
of electronic switching is going on inside.
Also, its reception, dynamic range, rejection and sensitivity wasn't so hot either.
I sent it back where i bought it and bought an AOR-5000+3
"Ron Boutwell" <boutw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:91kcmk$2sq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Snot
its extremely expensive for such crappy, noisy performance when you
can get an external radio that looks better, sounds better, performs better
and has an internal noise reduction DSP and discriminator output at a considerably
lower price from a much more competent, popular, standard Japanese company (ICOM PCR-1000).
"Mark Holden" <msho...@ct2.nai.net> wrote in message news:3A3E3040...@ct2.nai.net...
Thomas R. Sundstrom
> I do not own a WinRadio, but I have considered picking one up. First,
Ron, the WiNRADiO series and the ICOM PCR-series receivers have wideband
coverage compared to the TenTec RX-320. These wideband units have only
one filter per bandwidth and the AM filter tends to be too wide on
shortwave. Further, the dynamic range typically is lacking compared to
the RX-320 and signal overloading on shortwave is quite noticeable.
We liked the WiNRADiO WR-1500e on VHF-UHF-SHF, but not on HF.
Given the AUS $ is about US $0.54 now, the Australian-radio tends to be a
bit pricey, thus the recommendations for the ICOM for price (if nothing
else).
The first decision you have to make is do you want SW only, or do you
want VHF-UHF-SHF? Also consider that you can buy an RX-320 and a RS
scanner for the price of a WiNRADiO.
It's not a completely simple question to answer. Sorta depends upon what
you want to listen to.
--
Tom Sundstrom
Contributing Editor, Radio Netherlands' Media Network
Contributing Editor, Radio and Communications Magazine
www dot trsc dot com
Martin Hayes
Not everyone hates it, I do love mine!
In fact there are not that many people who hate Winradio,
of those I know most love it, but those who do hate it are usually the
loudest. I observed that those who hate Winradio generally fall into
the following categories:
1. Icom and Optocom salespeople, or strong brand loayalists who
have already made their purchasing decision of a "respectable Japanese
brand" and need to justify it.
2. Self-styled gurus and knockers suspicious of any innovation
which changes the established status quo.
There is no doubt that Winradio created some controversy
by placing a radio into a PC, but they knew what they were
doing and IMHO they have done a very fine job of it. I have
an Icom PCR1000 too, but it collects dust while I enjoy my WR-1550e...
Martin
Martin Hayes
They make new ones which are internal too. But this is a very
superficial observation. There are thousands of "internal" receivers
where you have radio boards working alongside "myriad of
noise-producing boards" which have been used in military applications
and space missions for decades, and they obviously work well. So those
of us who have seen such receivers before have to wonder what the fuss
is all about.
Winradio have not been the first to do this, but they have been the
first to produce a commercial product. Good shielding is essential and
IMHO Winradio have done a very good job at it. BTW, I do in fact
remember the first review in the SWL magazine you are probably
refering to, which was remarkable by its rather hysterical bias. I
also happen to know the rather surprising reason why it had to be so,
but because this is rather sensitive information and I don't want to
get into trouble, I will only tell you when you email me.
Martin
Martin Hayes
ICOM PCR1000 is no match for Winradio WR-1550e.
I have both, so can comment from experience.
The "much more competent, popular, standard Japanese company"
has been utterly incompetent in this particular case. The Japanese
have never been good in software support anyway, and that's one of
the areas where Winradio shines.
Martin
Chris Robinson
You do have a point that groundbreaking innovation generally sparks
controversy and resistance from the "establishment" such as media and
traders, even though on the other hand is embraced by consumers.
But in WinRadio case this was only part of the "problem". When it was
launched, it was the only PC radio product, so everyone expected it to
do everything. The first WinRadio was a VHF/UHF scanner and never
intended for shortwave, but because it was the only PC radio
available, it was judged by its shortwave performance by hams, and by
its VHF/UHF performance by scannists. But you can't have
a radio which would do both equally well. Not that it would be
technically impossible, but it would be uneconomical.
Now when there are more choices available (both from WinRadio
and others), let's hope that PC radios will be judged by their true
merit in their respective application areas.
If there was a Nobel Prize for radios I would still give it to
WinRadio because they gave us the first and only major innovation
in radios in decades. To keep this hobby alive, we need precisely
that.
Chris
On Fri, 22 Dec 2000 14:29:45 GMT, Marti...@usa.com (Martin Hayes)
wrote:
J. Harley Davidson
a portion of the controversy. The WinRadio comes off very very
short on the sensitivity and selectivity end. Basically it is too much
money for receiver delivered.
BUT that's why there are blondes, brunettes and redheads... Fords,
Chevrolets and Cryslers... Personally I like redheads but I don't insist
that you like them....
"Martin Hayes" <Marti...@usa.com> wrote in message
news:3a4a638e.3181217@news-server...
Roger
I would'nt be able to give my own opinion on these PC Card radio's as I
myself have never owned or tried one. But, I have read MANY postings on this
group from people who appear to be more than pleased with them. I can't
honestly remember reading ANY bad postings about this radio.
Rog
Chris Robinson <ser...@ibm.net> wrote in message
news:3a4405ca...@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net...
Bill Meacham
>
> Hi
> I would'nt be able to give my own opinion on these PC Card radio's as I
> myself have never owned or tried one. But, I have read MANY postings on this
> group from people who appear to be more than pleased with them. I can't
> honestly remember reading ANY bad postings about this radio.
> Rog
>
My first impression was "it can't be" given the way my
computer trashes any radio in the house. In fairness, most
of the garbage is from the monitor.
The TenTec 320 Model has certainly proven its acceptability
with an outboard unit and I hear-tell that WinRadio is now
configured externally albeit at a less than competitive
price.
My opinion of my own opinion speaks for itself. Every
computer rig-up offers its unique variables and I personally
wouldn't have spent 5-600 bucks to try the thing when a $10
FM or TV board proves to be full of crap in my own
installation. So, I doubt that anybody other than the
clueless have tried it with bad results.
But from what I read, the external versions are at least
shielded from the timidness of those who are accustomed to
having their local AM station blanked out from heterodynes
from the computer monitor on a 'regular' radio.
I'm an old tube-fool and if I was gonna spend $300 for a SW
radio right now, I'd buy the TenTec 320 after comparing all
the results. Or an SX-88 if I could find one at that price!
Adios
--
-Bill Meacham
Vieques, PR
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Labtech1
>From: Bill Meacham NOSPA...@coqui.net
>My opinion of my own opinion speaks for itself. Every
>computer rig-up offers its unique variables and I personally
>wouldn't have spent 5-600 bucks to try the thing when a $10
>FM or TV board proves to be full of crap in my own
>installation. So, I doubt that anybody other than the
>clueless have tried it with bad results.
>But from what I read, the external versions are at least
>shielded from the timidness of those who are accustomed to
>having their local AM station blanked out from heterodynes
>from the computer monitor on a 'regular' radio.
Well... since you haven't tried one or own one then it appears that you are the
one
that is clueless.... since the winradio works, and works VERY well inside my
computer. If you have had problems with a $10 FM card radio in your computer...
gee I wonder why.....
To give you an idea about the superb design of the winradio (WR3150i) it is
only surpassed in my collection of radios
( on shortwave ) by my Yaesu FT767
and the 767 does not cover near the frequency range of the winradio.
Bill Meacham
Sorry, I didn't word that right. What I meant to say was
that you don't hear many bad complaints because an
intelligent buyer is gonna be somewhat familiar with his
computer's noise situation before making that kind of
investment.
Labtech1
>From: Bill Meacham NOSPA...@coqui.net
>Sorry, I didn't word that right. What I meant to say was
>that you don't hear many bad complaints because an
>intelligent buyer is gonna be somewhat familiar with his
>computer's noise situation before making that kind of
>investment.
Actually Bill, and this may surprise you (it did me) I get almost no noise
from the computer on the receiver. Only problem I have is that ( since I HAD to
put the radio in the bottom slot - damn CPU fan hit the card anywhere else )
after extended use the card (radio ) gets too warm and starts to go out of lock
on the PLL. ( thinking about drilling some holes in the bottom of the computer
case to add extra "cool air"
intakes closer to the receiver.
Martin Hayes
earlier, that is the tendency of assuming that all PC radios
are the same, hence can be freely compared in all their
aspects.
With the maximum of respect, you cannot suggest a TenTec
320 as a replacement for WiNRADiO WR-1550 (or vice versa).
Ten Tec is a shortwave-dedicated receiver, going up to 30 MHz,
WR-1550e is a VHF/UHF receiver, up to 1600 MHz. When
making price/performance comparisons, this needs to
be taken into consideration (as well as other factors such
as software support for example, which although sometimes
overlooked when the box itself is the center of attention,
is becoming more and more important).
Just my 2c worth, take it or leave it... ;-)
Martin
Martin Hayes
I have heard criticisms about Winradio (mostly
from people who never used one), but sensitivity or
selectivity was never one of them.
My WR-1550e is specified as 0.4uV on NFM and
I measured it to be around 0.25uV in practice.
On AM, the specified figure is 1uV and I measured
around 0.7 uV. I believe this is just perfect for this class
of receiver.
In terms of selectivity, no complaints either.
Four-pole crystal filters are used and it shows.
In terms of "too much money for receiver delivered", this
is, as you pointed out, a subjective matter depending
on what you want in a receiver. I like the elegance and intelligent
design of Winradio, and the numerous (free) software add-ons such as
XRS plugins and Radio Basic. So for me it was money well spent.
(For someone else it might not.)
Martin
Bill Meacham
>
> Someone on this group commented on this phenomenon
> earlier, that is the tendency of assuming that all PC radios
> are the same, hence can be freely compared in all their
> aspects.
>
> With the maximum of respect, you cannot suggest a TenTec
> 320 as a replacement for WiNRADiO WR-1550 (or vice versa).
>
> Ten Tec is a shortwave-dedicated receiver, going up to 30 MHz,
> WR-1550e is a VHF/UHF receiver, up to 1600 MHz. When
> making price/performance comparisons, this needs to
> be taken into consideration (as well as other factors such
> as software support for example, which although sometimes
> overlooked when the box itself is the center of attention,
> is becoming more and more important).
>
> Just my 2c worth, take it or leave it... ;-)
>
> Martin
I have a question on this generation of radios.
I have seen some of the software sites and see setups with
oodles of options for bandwidth (like 2100, 2250, 2400,
etc.) and passband shifting, etc. Are these options
actually working at IF or is it "simulated" in some other
fashion?
Just curious,
Bill
Brian Denley
It's the 1000 series and to some extent the 1500 series that always come up
short against the Icom offerings.
--
Brian Denley
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/bdenley/index.html
"Labtech1" <labt...@aol.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:20001224032459...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: WINRADIO: Why Does Everyone Hate It?
>
Chris Robinson
Bill:
So far (on the models I've seen) it's been all genuine stuff, no cheap
tricks. Winradio does it in the old-fashioned way (at IF), as well
as in DSP (in DSP models),Ten Tec uses DSP, Icom does it
also at IF the old-fashioned way.
Chris
Brian Denley
offers far more DSP features.
--
Brian Denley
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/bdenley/index.html
"Chris Robinson" <ser...@ibm.net> wrote in message
news:3a4c684...@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net...