[ICOM] NEW IC-7000

AD5VJ Bob rtnmi at sbcglobal.net
Mon Dec 19 02:04:28 EST 2005


Since we are talking about DSP (Digital Signal Processing)
that reminds me.

I was the first one to come up with it when I shunted the
r/t relay to ground on my HW-101 to get rid of the static
on 80 MTRS, so they all have to pay me royalties now.

Since Diodes are considered as digital devices and I
shunted the receive side to ground with a germanium diode
so the static crashes would go to ground.

At least .3v and above anyway.

Guess that was Pre-IF DSP.

Worked pretty good too bad I didn't patent it Hi Hi



  73 fer nw,
Bob AD5VJ

10X# 37210, FP#-1141, SMIRK#-5177
http://www.n5iet.com/
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 John
Geiger
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 12:05 AM
> To: ICOM Reflector
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] NEW IC-7000
> 
> 
> I have had a couple of TS2000s and ran one in the 2002
CQWPX 
> CW contest with no overloading or IMD problems at all.
Don't 
> know where it gets the repuation of having such a bad 
> receiver, although I think it is a much better CW rig
than 
> SSB rig-which might be a good thing should the FCC
remove the 
> CW requirement, making the SSB portions of the band
pretty worthless.
> 
> Now I ran an Icom 706MKIIG in the ARRL RTTY Roundup this
past 
> year (a smaller contest than the WPX) and the receiver 
> overloaded so bad that it became unusable on 20 meters.
Same 
> thing happened with an Alinco DX70TH in the 1999
November Sweepstakes.
> 
> I think Icom has given up on 222mhz, as they are the
only big 
> manufacturer that makes no 222 gear currently.  Too bad,
as 
> they used to be the leader in 220 gear, with the 375A,
the 
> V21AT 2/222 HT, the 3SAT, etc.
> 
> 73s John NE0P
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Baker" <k7ddmjb at qwest.net>
> To: "'ICOM Reflector'" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 5:11 AM
> Subject: RE: [ICOM] NEW IC-7000
> 
> 
> Here Here!  I have called Alinco Receivers the "Large
Mouth 
> Bass of Receivers" for some time.  They are Wonderfull
wide 
> band receivers:  They here everything within (and
sometimes 
> things outside) their designed range ALL AT ONCE!  ;>)
> 
> Actually, I wanted to start this off with "perhaps you
should 
> get out and listen to more receivers old and new before 
> passing judgment on the poor rig!  ;>)  Please, NO
arrows, 
> just being a smart alek.
> 
> I am a happy TS2K owner for 2 years now and until I
listened 
> to the IC-7000 I haden't found anything ICOM (or anyone
else) 
> made that would match the TS-2000 OVERALL for the money.
I 
> do like the IC-7000 and think it would make a Super
Mobile. 
> Yes, the 756Pro3 is a fine rig no doubt; BUT, it is much
more 
> expensive than the TS2k, only operates HF and 6 meters,
but 
> it has a nice band scan panadapter that I wish Kenwood
had 
> included in their rig.  Even Icom has left out a couple
of 
> very helpful items in its new BIG RIG the
IC-7800$$$$$$$$$.  
> Like making a programmable, alarm that can be use with a

> selected band scan to look for a band opening when it
happens 
> like on 6 meters.  Scan the band, work on other stuff in
the 
> shack, as soon as a signal shows up in the bandpass,
record 
> it digitally, record the Freq, strength info etc, and
produce 
> a warning in the shack or ?? Remotely? OK so for $10k I 
> expect a lot from the rig: no automatic Beer dispenser,
Soft 
> Pretzel oven, rub your feet and put on your slippers!
Well! 
> In truth, most any receiver made within the last 20
years is 
> SO much better than all but a very few that came before
them 
> that we spend a lot of time and $$$ attempting to impose
new 
> sciences to make things that much better.  Anyone own an
old 
> Hallicrafters like the S-40B or S-77A that I used as a 
> novice?  You had to let it warm up for at least a half
hour 
> in advance of its use or it would drift all over the
place.  
> Don't leave the window cracked open in the fall or
winter 
> either or the draft would drive you nuts chasing down 
> signals.  Deaf as a stone above 14Mhz unless you had a
LOT of 
> antenna and even then is was marginal. 5Khz wide to copy
CW 
> signals and no real accurate dial calibration unless you

> added an external xtal calibrator. YUCK!!!  Now we are 
> talking late '50s technology but that hasn't changed
that 
> much except its methods of implementation over the next
20+ 
> years. Dial readouts became better, tubes and
transistors got 
> better and we found new ways to facilitate their use
along 
> with better filtering methods but we were still pretty
much 
> doing the same stuff we had for years. Digital has made 
> things better and more complicated giving us lots of 
> variations on the old methods but even it has had its 
> limitations. Mixing old and new together has produced
some of 
> the finest receivers on the planet.  Find someone who
owns a 
> Robert Sherwood Fully modified R4C and ask to listen to
it; 
> preferably during a Giant Contest like the CQWWDX test
or 
> Sweepstakes. It will spoil you for what can be
accomplished 
> mixing the best of all worlds.  The receivers "breath"
as you 
> listen to SSB, the audio has a fine tonal quality that
must 
> be heard to be appreciated.  Selectivity is nothing
short of 
> a "window" for signals to come (or not) through. Put the

> local BIG GUN up 5Khz from the "barely above the noise
floor" 
> weak one you are listening too and you will never know
he is 
> there unless one of you change freq!!  Readout is still
1KHZ 
> mechanical markings and that is close enough for the FCC
if 
> you use your calibrator. But alas, they don't make the
C-Line 
> anymore and comparing looks, well, Drake never was one
to 
> flirt with cosmetics. Time marches on but the abilities
of 
> our gear to seriously improve still comes in small,
sometimes 
> almost indecernable chunks which is why we seem to spend
a 
> lot of time picking a nit to death over a particular
flaw in 
> a piece of new gear.  The changes are all too minimal to

> suddenly make us go WOW! When I listened to the 7800 I 
> expected "Nirvana" to become a reality.  I didn't get a
lot 
> of WOW factor for the $$$. When I first heard about the 
> pending IC7K, I had great expectations of perhaps ICOM
taking 
> the lead again and incorporating the 220Mhz band, and 
> including a true functional band scope like the big rig
that 
> would allow you to listen and scan at the same time.
Dual 
> DSP engines had HUGE possibilities to remove some of the

> objections others (and myself) had with current audio
DSP: 
> Watery sound, distorted audio, too much agc action that
made 
> the audio sound FLAT with poor dynamics to it.  Etc. I
got 
> some Wow but more "I knew they wouldn't stick out their
neck 
> and actually build the rig we wanted.  Too damn hard to
top 
> it later." The DSP is very good and sounds better than
any I 
> have heard to date.  No 220 band.  The Panadapter
function is 
> time shared and distorts the audio so it might as well
have 
> been left the way it was in the 706. (Half hearted
attempt in 
> my mind. They should have done it right or not at all
for all 
> it is worth to me.)  Noise canceling seems to be
improved but 
> I didn't take it mobile.  Yes I like the rig.  No, I am
not 
> ready to trade in my TS-2000 for it yet.  I think I will
wait 
> for the dust to settle and see how well it does with
time. 
> Thanks for letting me defend my choice of rig and my
rant. 
> Good luck with your choices.  After all, that's why ice
cream 
> comes in flavors, cause we all don't love Vanilla!  ;>)
> 
> Best 73, Mike Baker  K7DD
> Peoria Arizona:  Where its gotten so cold this winter, I
had 
> to put on long pants!  No swimming on Christmas Day this
year!
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of John
Geiger
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 8:28 PM
> To: ICOM Reflector
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] NEW IC-7000
> 
> Then you must not have owned a 706MKIIG or DX70TH.  They

> seemed to be in completition to see who could overload
the 
> worst on HF.  They actually made thge FT847 look decent
on HF.
> 
> 73s John NE0P
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Edward L. Dowdy" <ka9ees1954 at insightbb.com>
> To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 3:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [ICOM] NEW IC-7000
> 
> 
> > Maybe that should be "First to OUTCLASS". The TS-2000
has 
> the worst HF 
> > receiver I have ever heard.
> >
> > 73,
> > Ed KA9EES
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Geiger" <ne0p at lcisp.com>
> > To: "ICOM Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
> > Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 9:12 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ICOM] NEW IC-7000
> >
> >
> > > That is a nice writeup, but I hate to inform Icom
that 
> the IF-DSP on 
> > > the 7000 is not "the first in its class."  The
Kenwood 
> TS2000 is the 
> > > first HF/VHF/UHF radio with IF-DSP.
> > >
> > > Icom tried something similar with the 756PRO, acting
like it was 
> > > such a design breakthrough, even though several rigs

> before it had 
> > > IF-DSP and
> DSP
> > > based filters, like the Kenwood TS870, Kachina 505,
Ten 
> Tec Pegasus, 
> > > and
> I
> > > think the TS2000 came out a little before the 756PRO
also, but I 
> > > could
> be
> > > wrong on that one.
> > >
> > > 73s John NE0P
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "AD5VJ Bob" <rtnmi at sbcglobal.net>
> > > To: "Icom Reflector" <icom at mailman.qth.net>
> > > Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 2:36 AM
> > > Subject: [ICOM] NEW IC-7000
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey just visited the site at 
> > > http://www.aesham.com/display_pages/ic7000.shtml and

> found this on 
> > > the front page in case anyone hasn't seen it yet
they 
> have all the 
> > > specs on it published now.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  73 fer nw,
> > > Bob AD5VJ
> > >
> > > 10X# 37210, FP#-1141, SMIRK#-5177
> > > http://www.n5iet.com/
> > > 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.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----
> > > 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/
> >
> > ----
> > 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/
> 
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 -
Release 
> Date: 12/16/2005
> 
> 
> ----
> 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/
> 




More information about the Icom mailing list