Envelope-to: dave@picks.force9.co.uk Delivery-date: Mon, 30 May 2005 15:11:39 +0100 Received: by pih-mxcore12.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1DckzS-00042i-Tq for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 30 May 2005 15:11:39 +0100 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by pih-mxcore12.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1DckzS-00042Y-Q0 for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 30 May 2005 15:11:38 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Dckyb-0004xv-N3 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 May 2005 15:10:45 +0100 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Dckya-0004xm-JN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 May 2005 15:10:44 +0100 Received: from cmsout02.mbox.net ([165.212.64.32]) by relay2.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1Dckzw-00046a-9w for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 May 2005 15:12:12 +0100 Received: from cmsout02.mbox.net (cmsout02.mbox.net [165.212.64.32]) by cmsout02.mbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0CA4C8EC for ; Mon, 30 May 2005 14:10:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from uadvg131.cms.usa.net [165.212.11.131] by cmsout02.mbox.net via smtad (C8.MAIN.3.21U); Mon, 30 May 2005 14:10:33 GMT X-USANET-Source: 165.212.11.131 IN dibene@usa.net uadvg131.cms.usa.net X-USANET-MsgId: XID468Jedokh3538X02 Received: from [192.168.0.2] [151.46.38.177] by uadvg131.cms.usa.net (ASMTP/dibene@usa.net) via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.21E) with ESMTP id 591Jedokf0327M31; Mon, 30 May 2005 14:10:31 GMT X-USANET-Auth: 151.46.38.177 AUTH dibene@usa.net [192.168.0.2] Message-ID: <429B1EE1.1070605@usa.net> Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 16:10:41 +0200 From: Alberto di Bene User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <4298D673.7020308@usa.net> <002301c56449$31f11300$ecac8351@w4o8m9> <6.1.0.6.2.20050529205736.02814360@mbox.spin-it.com> In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.2.20050529205736.02814360@mbox.spin-it.com> Z-USANET-MsgId: XID591JedokG0327X31 Subject: LF: RE: RA1792 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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) 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