[Elecraft] Chasing the numbers

[S Sacco]

Very broad topic here.

One thing that you might very well notice about the different
receivers, is how much different they sound, one from another, even in
a situation where you're listening to a single signal on an otherwise
clear band.

Audiophiles would know the correct buzz-words, but tube receivers tend
to sound "warm" because of the characteristics of tubes (somewhere,
I'd read that tubes emit even-numbered harmonics, and transistors,
odd-numbered harmonics...I have NO IDEA if that's true).

I have an ICOM R-71A, which is pretty nice, but the audio sounds
"mushy".  Apparently, there's a mod available for that, but I'm not
going to bother with it; I'll be selling the R-71A and some other
stuff to get a 2nd K3.

I used to have an ICOM IC-756ProII.  I loved the LCD display, and, of
course, the band scope, but I never could actually LIKE the audio.
The CW always sounded somewhat "hollow"; it was hard to describe.
Prior to my ordering the K3, I had several discussions with long-time
friend KR2Q.  Doug had the perfect description for the ProII's audio:
he called it "flutey".

I have a Drake C-Line, with the Sherwood mods in the R4C.   I *seem*
to recall briefly setting up the R4C alongside the ProII, and being
astonished at the difference in how they sounded.  (The R4C was the
clear winner).  I don't know why I didn't compare them for a longer
period; perhaps I didn't want to disappointed in my ProII.  I'm still
trying to figure out what to do with the C-Line.  I might sell that,
too.

Previous to the ProII, I had Yaesu FT-1000MP.  I always liked the
sound of the Collins mechanical filters in it.

Back in my days at contest station K2GL, I spend a lot of time behind
a Collins 75A-4, and loved how that sounded (tubes, and Collins
mechanical filters).  We also had Drake TR-7A's, and as much as I
loved the 75A-4, I disliked the Drake twice as much, especially under
weak-signal conditions.

Anyway, these comparison would not necessarily tell you what's "best",
except for what's most pleasing to listen to under those non-demanding
conditions.  It *DOES* make a difference, especially when you become
used to the differences between what radios CAN sound like, and should
be part of any purchase decision.

I'm sure that you would be able to hear the difference between those radios.

Listening to JA's coming in over the pole on 20 M right now.  They
sound good on the K3.

Hope this helps a little.

73,

Steve NN4X




On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 4:34 PM,  <n2ey at aol.com> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
>  From: Gary D Krause <n7hts at bresnan.net>
>
>  > I've been wondering how the numbers really affect what we hear. If a
>  ham were to sit down in front of all the top rigs, >blind folded and
>  not allowed to touch them, would he or she be able to pick out the one
>  with the best receiver by just >using his or her ears? Lets assume that
>  this ham has good hearing and that every rig is set the same. I realize
>  that people >have different reasons for picking a rig and that it isn't
>  always based on lab tests otherwise we would all own the same rig
>   >assuming money is not a factor :-) But is there really a difference in
>  the lab numbers as close as they are or are we just >chasing numbers?
>
>  IMHO:
>
>  It depends on what you are doing.
>
>  Under good conditions (decent signal strength, not a lot of QRM or QRN,
>  etc.), you won't hear much difference between a K3 and any other
>  half-decent rig.
>
>  It's when things are less-than-good that the differences really begin
>  to show. Like when you're trying to dig out an S1 signal next to an
>  S9+40 signal. Or when the band is full of signals of all kinds and
>  strengths, but you only want to hear one of them. Etc. What tough
>  conditions do is to show up the weaknesses in a rig.
>
>  There's also the inability to set every rig the same. Filter responses
>  and DSP settings vary all over the place, as do gain controls, notches,
>  etc.
>
>  The numbers show what can be measured objectively. But that's not the
>  only measure of a rig. What really shows the quality of a design is a
>  combination of the numbers and other factors, like how tiring is it to
>  operate the rig, how well it makes contacts of the kind you like to
>  make, etc.
>
>  IOW, for me, the real test is this: How much fun do you have with the
>  rig?
>
>  73 de Jim, N2EY
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Elecraft mailing list
>  Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>  You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
>  Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
>   http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>
>  Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
>  Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
>