[Premium-Rx] Wisdom is at a premium

[Barry Hauser]

John wrote:

> Having unsuscribed to all other receiver lists (notably the C****ns lists,
> largely because I could no longer stand the fluff and nonsense, I beg the
> members of this list to follow the advice of Les - if it ain't
> broke.........

First of all -- go back immediately and re-subscribe to all of them and 10
more.  Somebody has to keep an eye on those lists.  (Dissertion in the face
of mere fluff and nonsense!  I'm sure you're made of sterner stuff -- back
to the front!)

Secondly, I wasn't going to post this, but have to say, I know for a fact
that Les has and does "fix what ain't broken".  Not only that, but he's a
self-proclaimed witch  and  heretic who replaces tubes and ballasts with
diodes, resistors and who knows what else.  I wouldn't put it past him to
find some way to get a tube into a 2050 or RF-590.  (Don't laugh, Asus makes
a PC motherboard with a 12AU7 on it -- no joke. Now, Les, don't get any
ideas!)

Third:  Reading along I had the reaction that, Ahah -- John is going to
clear this all up.  I'm at a disadvantage not being familiar with the
NRD-93, but the professional/semi-professional distinction isn't all that
distinctive by itself.  SX-28's were heavily used professionally, including
the many that were sent to the UK and USSR on lend lease.  Those were not
for hobby use.  Same with the AR88's. (As you have 50 yrs. in HF, I thought
I'd engage the way-back machine. ;-) OK, these were originally intended for
consumer and general use, but WWII cause them to be drafted.

The Ten-Tec SP-325 (think I got it right) was definitely built for
professional use, but generally gets poor reviews and prevailing pricing
reflects that.

Finally:  The reflector list doesn't need fixing, but the list of
appropriate receivers could use some updating - -certainly to reflect the
European and perhaps other non-North American made equipment, and others.

This current go-round started when I posted a query about the RF-550.  No
question that it was not made for the consumer market.  The RF-505 is listed
as is, of course, the RF-590, so, by interpolation, if nothing else?

Searching for some info on the RF-505 turned up, coincidentally, a post to
this list from Larry Gadallah on Feb 19, 1999 which included:

"The summary of attributes of Premium RXs:

- - Digital Frequency Synthesis
- - Computer Controllable
- - Solid State
- - In Active Use By "Real DXers"(TM)
- - Above Average RF Performance
- - Not Built Solely for Consumer/Amateur/SWL Market"

He pointed out that the RF-505 is not computer controllable.  Looks to me
that the RF-550 is just that -- with BCD interface.  I don't know if those
criteria were the ones applied exactly, and I'm not suggesting to remove the
RF-505, but ... where do we stand on the 550?

Bottom line is, John et al -- just want to know if this is "the place" for
that receiver and any others that may pop up along the line.  Perhaps we
should just "play it by ear" as they come as someone suggested, but once
it's clear, the receiver list should be appended.

BTW -- Satchmo had a humongous collection of tape recorders.  So many, in
fact, it's entirely probable he had some capacitors, belts and other parts
replaced that were not yet broken.  So much for Les and Satch -- hmmmm ...
sounds like a duo.

BTW #2 -- That was a "lend-lease" program and I get the feeling you blokes
haven't yet returned all those SX-28's and AR88's.  Too late now -- send
some Marconi's and Racals. (or Thales or whatever they're calling themselves
this week)

(Sorry if offended -- if so, return to beginning, re-read, this time with
jovial tone and tongue planted firmly in cheek.)

Barry


> The contributors to this list don't need to be told what is, and what
isn't
> a premium receiver because they all have a wealth of knowledge, wisdom and
> experience in the field, and as it is reputed that long ago Louis
Armstrong
> said "If you have to ask what rhythm is, man, you ain't got it.".
> My own interpretation, for what it's worth, is that any receiver which was
> designed and used in a primarily professional or semi-professional
> environment, of whatever age, will always be considered a "premium"
> receiver. That's why I personally view the JRC NRD-93 as "premium" whereas
> the JRC NRD-545 is most certainly not. The 51S-1 was, and still is, a
> premium receiver, whereas the Hallicrafters SX-115 or SX-117 are not,
> despite the fact that they are virtual copies of the Collins line of
> receivers.
> OK, that's my head above the parapet; anyone care to take a shot at me?
> John Wilson (50 years in HF Comms)
>
> ---------------------
> John Wilson
> Devon
> EX37 9TR
> United Kingdom
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Premium-Rx Mailing List
> To Post: premium-rx at ml.skirrow.org
> For Info: http://ml.islandnet.com/mailman/listinfo/premium-rx
>