Well, I didn't mean to make it sound like a complaint against Ten-Tec. I
contacted them via an email address given on their website for technical
questions, and I assumed that they had assigned that task to someone who had
time to do it. Apparently not. My only other experience with Ten-Tec was
back in the mid-80s when I was doing satellite work and bought one of their
144/432 satellite rigs. It didn't work out of the box. I called them about
it, and they immediately shipped out a new one before even asking about me
shipping the broken one back. I was most impressed with their attention to
that, and have always thought highly of their service.
K8AC
Floyd Sense - Angier, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eddy Avila" <k6sdw@hotmail.com>
To: <sentek@SprintMail.com>; <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni VI Plus questions
>
> Floyd, sorry to hear you had a bad experience with Ten Tec....owning two
> older-model rigs, the Corsair II and the Scout, I've had occasion to call
> Ten Tec service several times and found them genuinely concerned and
always
> ready to help with phone support and on two occasions sent replacement
parts
> without asking for a deposit to see if substitution would fix a problem!!!
>
> I can't speak to your Omni 6+ questions, the rig is way too much denero
for
> me........73
>
> k6sdw
>
> >
> >I'm new to the reflector, so please excuse if this info has been covered
> >before. I'm researching various transceivers in preparation for
purchasing
> >a backup to my existing rig, and have some unresolved questions about the
> >Omni VI Plus.
> >
> >Two items popped up in the QST reviews of the Omni VI and the Plus:
> >
> >1. In the MDR evaluation, the review shows that the test was noise
limited.
> >A bit confusing, as Ten-Tec claims that the receiver has very low phase
> >noise, compared to other rigs. Does the Omni VI Plus use crystal
> >oscillators, or a synthesizer? (hard to tell from the published info).
If
> >crystal oscillators, why was the MDR test noise limited?
> >
> >2. The receiver audio bandwidth was somewhere in the area of 1600 Hz at
the
> >6 dB points. The audio bandwidth of my TS-850 receiver measured at 2296
> >Hz.
> >Quite a difference, and I wonder how this narrower bandwidth is perceived
> >by
> >the Omni user on SSB? I note that the low end 6 dB point is 475 Hz -
seems
> >to me that this would make for "tinny" sound on received signals, but
maybe
> >not, depending upon the slope of the passband. If I reduce the audio
> >bandwidth of my 850 using my Timewave DSP-599 filter, I don't like the
> >resulting sound. I realize that the 599 filter slope is just about
> >vertical, and that exaggerates the effects of the narrower bandwidth
> >
> >When I bought my 850 last year, I was hot on the trail of the Omni VI
Plus,
> >but was turned off when a Ten-Tec employee who addressed my email on #1
> >above brushed me off saying he didn't have the time to discuss it. Seems
> >not to be a time-burner to me - if the ARRL test results are incorrect,
he
> >should have said so. Otherwise, give me a reasonable explanation.
> >Thanks for any info you can provide.
> >
> >K8AC
> >Floyd Sense - Angier, NC
> >
> >
> >--
> >FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/tentec
> >Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> >Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> >Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/tentec
> Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
>
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/tentec
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
|