In article ,
(Kenneth) wrote:

Telamon wrote in message
.

For example a ten-tec RX-340? This one have some flaws too and
cost $3,950.The sync selectable sideband lose look relatively
easily,Passport recomend an external Sherwood SE-3 [500.00],poor
dynamic range,static crashes sound harsher than on analog
receivers.Spurious signal noted around 6MHZ segment,notch filter
does not work in AM,Sync selectable sideband or ISB modes,Noise
blanker not effective ect, ect, ect,.What about a Drake R8B?
Cost $1,495, This one have a lot of flaws too,for example the
power supply run very hot,[a remedy is to use an external power
supply],bassy sound "virtually requieres a outboard speaker"
[Passport],a cheap mechanical encoder used to have an above
-average failure rate [Why not an optical one like in the AOR
7030+],a lot of birdies and background hiss [from the synthesizer
board and some poor shielding and grounding techniques ect ect
ect..... But what about companies like Ten-tec and drake .Ten tec
owners are
still waiting for the RX-350 sync det fixing and others flaws
fixing[check the complains in the RX-350 yahoo group].What about the
Ten Tec flaws that you can read in passport to world band? Why they
don't fix then? An now we are talking about a $3,999 receiver.What
about Drake R8b encoders,birdies,synthesizer circuit noise ect
ect,?All companies including Icom make excuses and try to compensate
with more advertizings in shortwave radio guides.But the difference
with Icom is that they decrease the R-75 price form $1,100 to $450.00
or $525.00 and are including a free DSP but Drake and others are
increasing the price of their receiver but they are not raising the
quality standards,.

It is reasonable to differ over wants and needs but specifications or
facts are generally not arguable. If you misunderstand what someone has
wrote and continue to argue some point (several actually) as you have
been doing your credibility will be zero.
"If you have a glass roof don't throw stones to others".I did the
tests and I did the research looking for others experiences,expert
reviews,an articles and after dozens of e-mails received from others
honest drake and ten tec owners that want to fix their receivers flaws
and not hide the facts [their receivers flaws] under the rug I react
to others postings.If you check the R-75 yahoo group you will see
honest owners sharing the pro and con of the R-75 and in the process
finding the answers and solutions to their radio few problems.The myth
of the perfect receiver without any flaw was found to be false.For
example check the passport reviews and see for yourself all the ten
tec 340 flaws that they found.If for you, passport credibility is zero
thats ok with me,but if you like to go to a group like this posting
about why you don't like the Icom receiver this is your privilege but
don't begin to groan and talk about "zero credibility" if someone
point out your own receiver faults.

I tried being polite and that didn't work so now I'll be more direct.
You have a reading comprehension problem. One radio (R75) does not meet
its published specifications and all the others in the discussion
(RX340, R8B, AOR7030+) do meet their stated specifications and function.
You read the manual and operate these three radios and you get what you
expect. You read the R75 manual and you don't get what you expect. If
that does not get through to you I give up. You have to modify the radio
to get it to work as described.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

I can't comment on some of these receivers, but I can comment on the
AOR7030. Meets its specs? Maybe, but after 1 year of use, some unadvertised
"bonuses" were thrown in. The mode switches have developed bounce problems
which could have easily been addressed in software. The mechanical tuning
encoder has been noisy since day one, sometimes "scanning" the frequencies
on its own. The sensitivity is definitely not on a par with the R75. I don't
care what the unit is specified as; the MDS on the R75 is better. According
to Dave Zantos, the 7030 Plus isn't much better. On his sample unit, the
optical encoder shaft developed a wobble after about one year. His 7030 Plus
had a low level background noise on signals that wasn't present with the
7030. It is suspected that the removal of the shielding from the synthesizer
might be causing the problem.
I do have both the R75 and the AOR7030, and after two years, the R75 has not
had any problems surface.
If the 7030 wasn't a Christmas gift from my wife, I would have sold this
unit a long time ago.
On the subject of the R75, I know, the sync detector isn't the best in the
world, and the "large front mounted speaker" is a joke, but in terms of RF
handling, selectivity, etc, the R75 is a very good receiver.
Normally, I don't step into this kind of discussion, but sometimes, there is
more than meets the eye in this situation.
If anybody doesn't like the R75, that's fine...................still, it is
a fairly good receiver, especially for the 450 dollar price tag that this
unit is being sold for. Okay, the sync detector doesn't work. I remember the
NRD545 review a few years back. When the author of the article questioned
JRC about the ultimate rejection problem of the DSP section ,he was informed
that JRC didn't have any intention of addressing this problem. In another
thread in this newsgroup, I read that there was a mod to clean up the
"monkey chatter".

Pete

Telamon wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Kenneth) wrote:

Telamon wrote in message

.

For example a ten-tec RX-340? This one have some flaws too and
cost $3,950.The sync selectable sideband lose look relatively
easily,Passport recomend an external Sherwood SE-3 [500.00],poor
dynamic range,static crashes sound harsher than on analog
receivers.Spurious signal noted around 6MHZ segment,notch filter
does not work in AM,Sync selectable sideband or ISB modes,Noise
blanker not effective ect, ect, ect,.What about a Drake R8B?
Cost $1,495, This one have a lot of flaws too,for example the
power supply run very hot,[a remedy is to use an external power
supply],bassy sound "virtually requieres a outboard speaker"
[Passport],a cheap mechanical encoder used to have an above
-average failure rate [Why not an optical one like in the AOR
7030+],a lot of birdies and background hiss [from the
synthesizer
board and some poor shielding and grounding techniques ect ect
ect..... But what about companies like Ten-tec and drake .Ten
tec
owners are
still waiting for the RX-350 sync det fixing and others flaws
fixing[check the complains in the RX-350 yahoo group].What about the
Ten Tec flaws that you can read in passport to world band? Why they
don't fix then? An now we are talking about a $3,999 receiver.What
about Drake R8b encoders,birdies,synthesizer circuit noise ect
ect,?All companies including Icom make excuses and try to compensate
with more advertizings in shortwave radio guides.But the difference
with Icom is that they decrease the R-75 price form $1,100 to
$450.00
or $525.00 and are including a free DSP but Drake and others are
increasing the price of their receiver but they are not raising the
quality standards,.

It is reasonable to differ over wants and needs but specifications or
facts are generally not arguable. If you misunderstand what someone
has
wrote and continue to argue some point (several actually) as you have
been doing your credibility will be zero.
"If you have a glass roof don't throw stones to others".I did the
tests and I did the research looking for others experiences,expert
reviews,an articles and after dozens of e-mails received from others
honest drake and ten tec owners that want to fix their receivers flaws
and not hide the facts [their receivers flaws] under the rug I react
to others postings.If you check the R-75 yahoo group you will see
honest owners sharing the pro and con of the R-75 and in the process
finding the answers and solutions to their radio few problems.The myth
of the perfect receiver without any flaw was found to be false.For
example check the passport reviews and see for yourself all the ten
tec 340 flaws that they found.If for you, passport credibility is zero
thats ok with me,but if you like to go to a group like this posting
about why you don't like the Icom receiver this is your privilege but
don't begin to groan and talk about "zero credibility" if someone
point out your own receiver faults.

I tried being polite and that didn't work so now I'll be more direct.
You have a reading comprehension problem. One radio (R75) does not meet
its published specifications and all the others in the discussion
(RX340, R8B, AOR7030+) do meet their stated specifications and function.
You read the manual and operate these three radios and you get what you
expect. You read the R75 manual and you don't get what you expect. If
that does not get through to you I give up. You have to modify the radio
to get it to work as described.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Pete KE9OA wrote:
snipped

On the subject of the R75, I know, the sync detector isn't the best in the
world

Pete,

Have you thought about incorporating one of your sync' detector designs
to the R75? It might prove to be the ultimate sync' mod for it.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

starman wrote in message ...
Pete KE9OA wrote:
snipped

On the subject of the R75, I know, the sync detector isn't the best in the
world

Pete,

Have you thought about incorporating one of your sync' detector designs
to the R75? It might prove to be the ultimate sync' mod for it.

Yes an maybe better than the R8b sync det [a very good one]
but not perfect Pete is a great designer and he inspired and working
very hard now in his sync det project.My own R-75 sync det [with a 339
comparator mod] is working for me an greatly reduce fading distortion
and diminishing and eliminating adjacent channel interference and is
sideband selectable [manually] using a 2.4 stock filter and selecting
manually [with the twin PBT] the less interfered of the two
sideband.Yes the R8b sync use a different aut sync circuity but if my
R75 sync det is working ok, then what is the motive for keep yearning
for the "ultimate sync"?

In article ,
(Kenneth) wrote:

starman wrote in message
...
Pete KE9OA wrote: snipped

On the subject of the R75, I know, the sync detector isn't the
best in the world

Pete,

Have you thought about incorporating one of your sync' detector
designs to the R75? It might prove to be the ultimate sync' mod for
it.

Yes an maybe better than the R8b sync det [a very good one]
but not perfect Pete is a great designer and he inspired and working
very hard now in his sync det project.My own R-75 sync det [with a
339 comparator mod] is working for me an greatly reduce fading
distortion and diminishing and eliminating adjacent channel
interference and is sideband selectable [manually] using a 2.4 stock
filter and selecting manually [with the twin PBT] the less interfered
of the two sideband.Yes the R8b sync use a different aut sync
circuity but if my R75 sync det is working ok, then what is the
motive for keep yearning for the "ultimate sync"?

Keep dreaming about making the R75 sync as well as the R8B. And be sure
to show some objective tests when you get a chance.

I traded in a R8 for an R8B for the design improvements in the sync
circuits.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

It might be a good thing, if only I could get one of them to work properly.
The quasi-sync detector has been the best sounding one so far, but it is no
better than the TDA1572's balanced detector.
The 4046/SA602 detector still needs some work.................I think that
Phase Detector 2 is unsuitable for this purpose. I need to use Phase
Detector 1, which shifts the VCO by 90 degrees. This could work, if I can
come up with a suitable phase shift network.
I just completed the intial design of the AD607 based sync detector, and
boy, does this one have problems! When I am tuned to center channel, the
system howls, but if I detune to either LSB or USB, everything is ok. This
circuit is based on Mike Murphys application note from Analog Devices. It
just may work out, with some fine tuning. This has been the best iteration
so far. Analog Devices has eliminated the AGC detector in the latest
versions of the AD607, whereas Mr. Murphy's design is based on one of the
older versions that does have this detector. I do have some samples of the
older version, so I will throw that on the board tomorrow, and see how it
works out.
Those sync detectors have been the hardest part of this radio design!
Compared to my current iterations, the Icom R75 sync detector is a gem. This
gives you an idea of just how bad my sync detectors are! I'll get them
running.........they are only a collection of parts!

Pete

starman wrote in message
...
Pete KE9OA wrote:
snipped

On the subject of the R75, I know, the sync detector isn't the best in
the
world

Pete,

Have you thought about incorporating one of your sync' detector designs
to the R75? It might prove to be the ultimate sync' mod for it.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Pete KE9OA wrote:

Those sync detectors have been the hardest part of this radio design!
Compared to my current iterations, the Icom R75 sync detector is a gem. This
gives you an idea of just how bad my sync detectors are! I'll get them
running.........they are only a collection of parts!

You're learning why so few receivers have been made with a good sync'
detector.
Keep up the good work.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Thanks! it has been a learning experience!

Pete

starman wrote in message
...
Pete KE9OA wrote:

Those sync detectors have been the hardest part of this radio design!
Compared to my current iterations, the Icom R75 sync detector is a gem.
This
gives you an idea of just how bad my sync detectors are! I'll get them
running.........they are only a collection of parts!

You're learning why so few receivers have been made with a good sync'
detector.
Keep up the good work.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

I haven't heard from you, so I will assume that you did receive the info.

Pete

starman wrote in message
...
Pete KE9OA wrote:

Those sync detectors have been the hardest part of this radio design!
Compared to my current iterations, the Icom R75 sync detector is a gem.
This
gives you an idea of just how bad my sync detectors are! I'll get them
running.........they are only a collection of parts!

You're learning why so few receivers have been made with a good sync'
detector.
Keep up the good work.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Pete KE9OA wrote:

I haven't heard from you, so I will assume that you did receive the info.

Pete

I got them Pete. Thanks a lot. I haven't studied the schematic too much
but I was wondering what changes (if any) would be needed to use the
sync' detector with a 50-Khz I.F.?


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----