Envelope-to: dave@picks.force9.co.uk Delivery-date: Tue, 31 May 2005 12:28:19 +0100 Received: by pih-mxcore11.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Dd4uw-00012G-Db for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Tue, 31 May 2005 12:28:19 +0100 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by pih-mxcore11.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Dd4uw-000128-7z for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Tue, 31 May 2005 12:28:18 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Dd4uR-0006aS-DM for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 31 May 2005 12:27:47 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Dd4uQ-0006aJ-TN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 31 May 2005 12:27:46 +0100 Received: from olympus.pncl.co.uk ([195.224.180.233] helo=mailhost-av.pncl.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1Dd4vl-0004cf-MS for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 31 May 2005 12:29:14 +0100 Received: from AUG2004 (81-6-226-159.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk [81.6.226.159]) (authenticated bits=0) by mailhost-av.pncl.co.uk (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4VApEtN023248 for ; Tue, 31 May 2005 11:51:15 +0100 Message-ID: <000901c565ce$aa66f670$2101a8c0@AUG2004> From: "Walter Blanchard" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <30128831.1117530262391.JavaMail.www@wwinf3002> Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 11:51:11 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Pinnacle-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Pinnacle-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: blanch@pncl.co.uk Subject: LF: RA1792 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PN-SpamFiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00) Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
 
The performance of a modern rx with a good infinitely-variable DSP filter at very narrow bandwidths is better than older rxs because they don't ring at the edges as xtal-based filters do.  I had an Icom 756 PRO3 that was very good in this respect and now an Icom 7800 that is really excellent - at 10 Hz bandwidth it still works - no xtal filter will do that. A good test if you haven't got a good SG is to tune to Loran then look at the i.f. on a scope and see where the pulse tails go to. 
 
Walter G3JKV.
 
---- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Mayhead G3AQC
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: LF: RE: RA1792

========================================
Message date : May 30 2005, 03:11 PM
From : "Alberto di Bene"
To : rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Copy to :
Subject : LF: RE: RA1792
Marco Bruno wrote:

> I would add: quite easy to maintain, no custom ICs, only a few
> outdated parts
> but still available on the market. The synthesizer is remarkably
> performant, and
> the 3rd order IMD is in the 102-103 dB range.
> [...]

Marco, Jim, Tracey, Laurie, Alan and Dave (am I forgetting somebody?)

thanks for your opinions about that Rx. The latest messages seems to
correct somehow the not so bright impression that initially had formed
in my mind, so I will have to reconsider my decision. Next week I will
have (probably) the chance to examine more carefully that radio. Apart
from checking the LCDs and the keypad for deterioration, what else would
you suggest me to check? Which are the IF filters that I must expect it
to have installed ? Any other weak points to watch ?

And now the one-million-dollar question... given that my intended usage
for that radio would be mainly the reception of digital (or
pseudo-digital) signals across the various bands, from LF to 30 MHz, if
you had to choose between the RA1792 and the Icom R75 (for 2/3 of the
price), which one would be your choice ? I am not interested in
reception of broadcast stations or CW/SSB signals (for this I have a JRC
NRD-525), but, as said, narrow band (from a few Hz to 3 kHz) digital
signals only.

Thanks again guys,

73 Alberto I2PHD

There is no doubt that I would chose the RA1792, I  Have done all my digital work with it and would miss it greatly, and at that price ! go for it.

Laurie.



Whatever you Wanadoo

This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more here