I don't see how you can have a legitimate A/B test unless you have both the A
and the B you are testing in operation at the same time, on the same antenna
in the case of radios. There are simply too many variables to even begin to
compare from notes. But when you can copy weak signals between strong signals
on B that you cannot copy or even hear on A - that's a pretty good indication
that B is a better reciever.
And, as Mrs Rudd explained more'n fifty years ago, "if B is greater than A,
and C is greater than B, C is also greater than A." Having owned or at least
tried most of the "performance" rigs on the market, and having kept the rigs
with the best performance out of the bunch, I 'spect I can make a fairly valid
comparison.
But my main concern in any purchase is pretty simple. Does this new whatzis
allow me to do things I could not do with my old whatzis? Or do something
easier or better than the old whatzis? In the case of the Orion the answer is
generally yes.
The Orion cannot give me armchair copy of SSB signals at or below my noise
level, but I can copy signals that I can only tell are there on the other rigs
around my shacks. That's good. It has excellent audio, and excellent CW. That's
good. I can go hunting the DX's recieve frequency without keeping one hand
on a the REV button. That's good. The factory is constantly updating the
firmware. That's good.
Is it absolutely perfect? No, it's just the best rig of many that I have had
the pleasure of operating. And there are a couple of things I wish were a
little different - but I'm getting used to those "features" and I may like them
after a while.
It won't pour wine, make coffee, or wash the dishes. But I didn't expect it
to. And I didn't buy it for that. I bought it because I believed the Orion is
an incremental advancement in reciever technology giving me superior
performance in my shack. It does exactly what I expected it to do. And that's
good.
You cannot have mine!
73 Pete Allen AC5E
|