Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+MIKE\s+FOR\s+OMNI\-D\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+MIKE\s+FOR\s+OMNI\-D\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] MIKE FOR OMNI-D (score: 1): Author: ARDUJENSKI@aol.com (ARDUJENSKI@aol.com); Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 15:10:43 EST; I have been using a standard Astatic D-104 mike with good results on my OMNI- D. I was wondering if the TEN TEC desk stand mike (#705A) offers any better/same/lesser audio quality than the D-104. THA; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-03/msg00249.html (7,402 bytes)
2. [TenTec] MIKE FOR OMNI-D (score: 1): Author: rmccabe@dwx.com (Rich McCabe); Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 14:32:42 -0600; Alan, It has been a long time since I have had a D-104 on one of my Ten Tec's. I currently have a 705 on the Paragon and am not really impressed with it. The audio is not as smooth as what I am used; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-03/msg00250.html (8,623 bytes)
3. [TenTec] MIKE FOR OMNI-D (score: 1): Author: pagel@wi-net.com (Mike & Lara Pagel); Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 14:35:40 -0600; I've got both mikes here, Alan, and the answer to your question probably lies in your voice characteristics. I'm mostly a CW op, but wanted a good mike for pleasant audio for ragchewing with buddies; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-03/msg00251.html (9,430 bytes)
4. [TenTec] MIKE FOR OMNI-D (score: 1): Author: patents@dx0man.prestel.co.uk (patents@dx0man.prestel.co.uk); Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 20:39:21 -0000 (GMT); I have a Shure 444 - its wired for my TR-7 and it did a good job. Does it have enough output for the Omni-V ?? I have tried a Heil insert - it got good reports but needs the mike gain set to the top; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-03/msg00252.html (10,418 bytes)
5. Fw: [TenTec] MIKE FOR OMNI-D (score: 1): Author: Michael O. Hyder" <N4NT@wireco.net (Michael O. Hyder); Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 17:23:30 -0500; Among those I tested with was the Shure 444. People who knew me said they sounded OK, but that the D-104 sounded much cleaner and more like I do in person -- more natural. I don't know about the Ten-; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-03/msg00253.html (8,319 bytes)
6. [TenTec] MIKE FOR OMNI-D (score: 1): Author: prvalko@oakland.edu (Paul R. Valko); Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 20:29:06 -0500 (EST); I may be wrong, but I have always been led to believe that the Ten*Tec rigs were superlative on SSB with the Shure 444. 73! =paul= W8KC Collector of Ten*Tecs and other fine plastics <http://www.acs.o; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-03/msg00256.html (8,013 bytes)
7. [TenTec] MIKE FOR OMNI-D (score: 1): Author: AD4YH@aol.com (AD4YH@aol.com); Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 22:40:11 EST; Your search is over. The D-104 is very hard to beat. I have a Paragon II and a OMNI D. I constantly get "rave review" signal reports with comments like "what are you using?" "you have brodcast quali; /archives//html/TenTec/1999-03/msg00259.html (7,681 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]