Kenwood TS440S: No QRP...

[Singularity35]

Thanks, I'm glad it was a simple fix. This 440 is my main radio now. It does seem to do a better job in rx for weaker signals and noisy conditions.

I had a long QSO with an old ham who's mostly my elmer. He was using an 820 and he sounded really good to my ear. None of that wide band signal in the ragchew frequency but he was using a Detong and had a really nice audio. I kind of like the way a good working tube rig sounds.

 

[wavrider]

I do like the Kenwoods on receive, something about the tone of the audio is pleasing to me.

Not to mention the receivers can dig out the weak signals from the static

 

[Singularity35]

I do like the Kenwoods on receive, something about the tone of the audio is pleasing to me.

Not to mention the receivers can dig out the weak signals from the static

Does triple conversion really make a difference from double conversion?

 

[2RT307]

Does triple conversion really make a difference from double conversion?

Seems like Cpt. K had a triple conversion Icom, IIRC. I know he said he always regretted getting rid of it. I just have to go by what my ears hear, and I really love the receive on both my TS-830S and my TS-520. Both are dual conversion receivers, but the 830 has some nicer features like pass band tuning and a notch filter that really help reduce interference. Honestly, great old analog stuff that knocks out the noise as effectively as my new FTDX-3000's DSP. Wish I could comment on triple conversion... I've never had a receiver with it.

73,
Brett

 

[Singularity35]

Seems like Cpt. K had a triple conversion Icom, IIRC. I know he said he always regretted getting rid of it. I just have to go by what my ears hear, and I really love the receive on both my TS-830S and my TS-520. Both are dual conversion receivers, but the 830 has some nicer features like pass band tuning and a notch filter that really help reduce interference. Honestly, great old analog stuff that knocks out the noise as effectively as my new FTDX-3000's DSP. Wish I could comment on triple conversion... I've never had a receiver with it.

73,
Brett

Hhhmm yes, I guess the newer technology does have the older analog tech beat.

 

[2RT307]

Hhhmm yes, I guess the newer technology does have the older analog tech beat.

I am saying the old analog tech is pretty darned close...maybe just as good. Believe me, the old hybrids are really easy on the ears. I am sure your 440 is too. I had a couple of 430's that received nice, as well.

73,
Brett

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Hhhmm yes, I guess the newer technology does have the older analog tech beat.

Not necessarily once you understand a few things. The old idea of using decent filters gave way to the new digital way of filtering out QRM. That was bragged up to be great. Then manufacturers started coming out with these great new "roofing filters" that made things even better. Guess what those "new" roofing filters did make the newer radios with digital filtering better HOWEVER they are old analog tech. yup, the "new" roofing filters are the same old analog filters that the bullet proof radios had a few decades ago. Also DSP, or digital signal processing, has it's limits. The old idea of actually using a noise blanker circuit in the IF stage worked much better than the the new idea of doing it at the audio level. I mean seriously, if you can eliminate a signal before the detector stage then you do not hear the noise nor does the signal interfere with other stations. If you simply allow the noise to be filtered out in the audio section then if the noise is S7 it will tke a signal stronger than S7 to overcome the noise even if it is filtered out in the audio section. uess what? Manufacturers have started to implement their DSP circuitry at thge IF level again instead of the AF (audio) level. Same thing for speech processors. Old tech like my TS-820S did the speech processing at the I level and is VERY effective. New radios started doing it at the audio level. Guess what again? You got it. Newer radios have gone back to IF level speech processors.

You can certainly do more with new tech however sometimes the old tech is still better and blend of both is the best of both worlds.

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Does triple conversion really make a difference from double conversion?

Seems like Cpt. K had a triple conversion Icom, IIRC. I know he said he always regretted getting rid of it. I just have to go by what my ears hear, and I really love the receive on both my TS-830S and my TS-520. Both are dual conversion receivers, but the 830 has some nicer features like pass band tuning and a notch filter that really help reduce interference. Honestly, great old analog stuff that knocks out the noise as effectively as my new FTDX-3000's DSP. Wish I could comment on triple conversion... I've never had a receiver with it.

73,
Brett

My Icom was triple conversion and it really did perform well.I used to do a LOT of listening to longwave and the AM broadcast band and used 600 foot long wire antenna mounted high and in the clear. I could hear 1Kw AM broadcast stations in Central America squeezed in between the regular North American channel assignments as well as many station in Europe. The filter skirts on that 735 were steep and deep meaning that anything outside the filter was gone.The triple conversion came to shine in that while listening to longwave or in the AM broadcast band the powerful AM stations did not cause a problem nor did the 250 Kw longwave navy transmitter 12 miles line of sight away. With my 600 foot antenna in the clear looking at that navy site I could copy the EXCITER DRIVE THRU at S-9 when the key was UP. That site ran a 10Kw exciter/driver all the time and keyed the 250Kw finals.When the key was UP that 10Kw leaked thru the finals via tube capacitance and I copied it at S-9 or better. When the key was DOWN the signal was much stronger.MUCH stronger. MUCH MUCH STRONGER. LOL. Triple conversion is really not needed however it can indeed make a difference in the presence of really strong signals.

 

[Singularity35]

Thanks for the elaboration guys.

I had a 738 for a few weeks and it really was quiet on rx but pulled in weak signals really well. I let it go because it had a warped shaft on the encoder which froze the tuning knob.

I tried to buy a 735 in excellent condition from a friend but he didn't want to sell it. I guess he liked it.

The only experience I have with a newer DSP rig is with my FT857D which I'm guessing is not the best example for DSP on modern rigs.

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

The only experience I have with a newer DSP rig is with my FT857D which I'm guessing is not the best example for DSP on modern rigs.

I have an FT-857D as well now. The receiver is a piece of shit compared to the IC-735. In fact when push comes to shove on crowded band the old TS-820S will stand up to adjacent station QRM better than the FT-857D and you don't have to mess around in a menu system to try and make it better either.

 

[Singularity35]

I have an FT-857D as well now. The receiver is a piece of shit compared to the IC-735. In fact when push comes to shove on crowded band the old TS-820S will stand up to adjacent station QRM better than the FT-857D and you don't have to mess around in a menu system to try and make it better either.

Agreed. I liked that 738's rx much better. This 440 is much more pleasant sounding in rx too.

I though I was imagining things at first and tried swapping my antenna between both radios initially.

 

[2RT307]

Just in case you have 400 bucks burning a hole in your pocket...
http://hamstation.com/shopping/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=7_9&products_id=4668

Looks like a nice one. I don't know anything about the site, though.

73,
Brett

 

[Singularity35]

Just in case you have 400 bucks burning a hole in your pocket...
http://hamstation.com/shopping/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=7_9&products_id=4668

Looks like a nice one. I don't know anything about the site, though.

73,
Brett

Thanks, that is very nice.

I see a lot of very likely looking used radios in a few sites, including this one. Shipping is the killer. Plus double murder via our customs.

Additionally, converting from 120VAC to 220VAC is probably the least of my problems.

 

[2RT307]

Thanks, that is very nice.

I see a lot of very likely looking used radios in a few sites, including this one. Shipping is the killer. Plus double murder via our customs.

Additionally, converting from 120VAC to 220VAC is probably the least of my problems.

Oh yeah, I forgot your QTH. Stick with the 440, which ain't a bad way to go!

73,
Brett

 

[Singularity35]

Oh yeah, I forgot your QTH. Stick with the 440, which ain't a bad way to go!

73,
Brett

I'll have to until I can convince the wife that I NEED another radio.