[Premium-Rx] Not even close..

[GandalfG8 at aol.com]

In a message dated 22/05/2003 05:00:28 GMT Daylight Time, w5mc at austin.rr.com 
writes:


> I have a very decent Harris collection of receivers, xmitters and xcivers  
> .. but it has never even come close that any RF-550 would follow me home and 
> endear a operating place at this location.. 
> I don't think they are RARE, the value is well below what we typically see 
> or expect to pay for PREMIUM receivers..
>  
> There is just no way I see this dog making it as a premium receiver.. cost , 
> availability or operating performance ,  it's just not there..  
> I vote NO!  
> 
One thing for sure on this subject of which receivers should be included or 
excluded....
it's always guaranteed to generate sone lively responses:-)

When I first found references to PremRX coming back to me from online 
searches, and decided I wanted to know more, I was somewhat daunted by that list of 
"qualifying" receivers.
At first sight it did seem to be restricted and my immediate reaction was....
"what about my xyz etc".
However, Greg's reasoning made sense then, just as it did in his posting here 
yesterday.

We all have our likes and dislikes and several of what I considered to be my 
"better" receivers didn't make the list and probably never will.
Some of these, just like the RF-550, come from that cross over period where 
the distinctions get a bit blurred....
digital display, good filtering, etc etc, and often similar in many respects 
to later sets from the same manufacturer that do qualify.
Nonetheless, the distinctions are quite clearly stated and, just like some of 
my own favourites, the RF-550 does not qualify.
Does it really matter?

Like me most, if not all, list members will own receivers that wouldn't in 
themselves qualify as well as owning those that do.
There's plenty of otherwise excellent receivers out there so it would be 
surprising if this wasn't so.
Some would argue that the Racal 1772 is a better RF performer than the 1792 
so should that be included too?
Taken on RF performance alone a good case could be made for some of the 
better valve/tube receivers.....
but then we really start to lose the plot:-)

Seeing one's own particular favourite excluded can be a bit of an "emotional" 
knock, I know it was for me:-)
It's a natural reaction to want to kick back at what might seem like a 
judgemental criticism.
Get past that and I still think the qualifying criteria make a lot of sense.
Let's face it, Greg could have decided to leave the list restricted to the 
2050 only, his choice after all:-), but it's expanded into what is, for me 
anyway, the best informed group of radio users online.
There are radios missing from the list but, again, does the list itself 
really matter?
Anyone finding it gets a very good idea of what's required and, if interested 
enough, will email for more info anyway.

One of my favourite modern non qualifiers was the Icom PCR1000.
Lovely little PC controlled receiver.
Lively user group too due to its mass appeal.
I ended up spending more time answering the same dumb questions over and over 
again than I did using the radio!!!
An extreme I know....
but think on it:-)

My vote on the RF-550?
I guess that's pretty obvious:-)
No vote needed.
However good it otherwise might be....
and no judgement implied on that...
it just doesn't qualify in terms of the criteria laid down.

Nigel
G8PZR




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/premium-rx/attachments/20030522/cb6bd06b/attachment.htm