[ICOM] 756 Tested, front-end attenuation etc.

[KE5CTY Bob]

My question is how can the FT 1000 series be so low on the
list and still be the preferred rig for contesters?

I really wish they had done one on my IC-728 (same rig as
the 729 but not 6 mtrs) I am telling you that in the price
range this rig is fantastic.

 The most interesting part and the *best part* for me is
hardly anyone has ever heard of it or knows much about it.

Good for me because I am about to get a second one :0)
 to run as a pair for SO2R this rig is really great.

I would really love to see where it fits in the table.

73 fer nw,
Bob
KE5CTY (old calls WB5ZQU - WY5L)
10X# 37210, FP#-1141, SMIRK#-5177
http://www.qsl.net/ke5cty/
Code may be taking a back seat for now,
but the pioneering spirit that put the code
there in the first place is out front of it all.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Adam
Farson
> Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:38 PM
> To: 'ICOM Reflector'
> Subject: RE: [ICOM] 756 Tested, front-end attenuation
etc.
> 
> 
> Hi Hans,
> 
> I feel very honoured by that nickname! Here is some
further 
> discussion of front-end attenuation and its use in some
AGC 
> systems. Some excellent comments by George W5YR are
included.
> 
> Some years ago, there was a passionate debate about
front-end 
> AGC and attenuation on some of the reflectors. The main
point 
> was completely missed: the attenuation increases the 
> receiver's dynamic range, at the cost of throwing away
NF 
> which is unusable on most HF sites anyway (especially on
the 
> lower bands.) 
> 
> http://www.qsl.net/ab4oj/icom/ic756pro_notes.html#FEAGC
> 
> Cheers for now, 73,
> Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Hans
Remeeus
> Sent: 20 August 2005 11:05
> To: ICOM Reflector
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] 756 Tested
> 
> Hello Adam (Icom-Einstein),
> 
> Excellent article on your site!
> 
> E.g. your conclusions; 'a much quieter receiver and
increased 
> IP-3', after inserting Attenuation, are very important
statements.
> 
> 
> 73,
> Hans Remeeus (PA1HR)
> http://www.remeeus.nl
> Communication is about people, the rest is technology.
> 
> 
> 
> 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/
>