[ICOM] PRO III VS PRO II

[Dave Meitzen]

I have a Pro II and a Pro III for a month -- you will be pleased. The
comparison to a tube radio with a low noise floor is accurate. The only
addition I would make is a roofing filter -- a strong signal that can not be
cut out by the TBP will hammer the AGC killing copy of the weak signal. That
said the PRO III does a better job than the PRO II
FYI
Dave aa9tt

-----Original Message-----
From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of w1gud
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 10:16 AM
To: 'ICOM Reflector'
Subject: RE: [ICOM] PRO III VS PRO II


Adam...I've been told the new processor in the proIII is much advanced over
the proII...it was suggested that an AF processor had been used in previous
versions...and that an RF processor is used in the III.
This isn't very clear to me and as I am picking up my proIII at the tampa
hamfest tomorrow, I was curious what you knew about this.
Many thanks...and meeting you at Dayton sure was fun...

73, Warren W1GUD

-----Original Message-----
From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of Adam Farson
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 4:16 AM
To: 'ICOM Reflector'
Subject: RE: [ICOM] PRO III VS PRO II

Hi Massimo,

Your findings are most impressive. They tie in with the considerable effort
that Icom has put in to improve the receiver front end. There seem to be
some DSP and NB improvements as well.

Would you be willing to post  your comments on "ic756pro2 at yahoo.com"?

Lidio I0GEJ has a weblog (in Italian) in which he describes his Pro3.

http://i0gej.blogspot.com

I have translated it into English:

http://www.qsl.net/ab4oj/icom/i0gej/pro3.html

-----Original Message-----
From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of Massimo 'Max' MUCCI - I8NHJ
Sent: 03 December 2004 01:04
To: ICOM Reflector
Subject: [ICOM] PRO III VS PRO II

Hello group,
Yesterday I got my PROIII and during the night I made a cheek-to-cheek test
with my old PROII.

I'm not an in-deep electronic technician and my test was based just on what
and how I can heard signals through the bands from both the radios.

Well, I have to say that rarely I found a so clear difference between two
radios. The PRO III seems to belong to a different class. Any signals in
both CW and Phone are always much readable, solid and clear. Moreover the
S/N ratio improves using the preamps while the feeling from the PROII, in
the same condition, is just a S-meter reading improvement.

The noise blanker from the III is impressive, very efficient.

I noticed also that, at last, the AGC works much better, just as it should.

The overall impression is the PRO III sounds like an old tubes radio
equipped with all the new digital solutions.

For me, it worths the extra money I spent.

----------------------

73 de Max, I8NHJ/NH7CU
one of EL2PP, 1A0KM, JT1Y, E30GA, T77V, TT8MM, T32R, K5K, XR0X, S05X




----
Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net Icom Users
Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.316 MHz Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/


Scanned by WinProxy
http://www.Ositis.com/
----
Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.316 MHz
Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/

----
Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.316 MHz
Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/