Tommy WD4K writes:
>>With all due respect Yuri and others have sadly missed the whole point.
K6SE's endeavours were NOT tests...only the opinion of one guy sitting in a
shack somewhere, using his memory to evaluate multiple receivers. This was
NOT testing guys---DUH!
This is opinion...hello...anybody see the difference?<<
With even more due respect you are missing the point!
Earl is doing A/B test between one of his "proven" rigs K2 and FT1000MP
(modified). It is a test where he switches between two rigs at the same time
and
has on the occasion witness, person who would bring their other rig (recently
Omni VI) and can "see" with their own ears the difference. It is a Test against
the "standard" at any particular time. He is using ground wave signal and band
noise, simulating or actually doing real life TEST. Duuuh!
As anybody can see it is not an opinion but real test.
>>Some of you are WAY off base in commenting on the operation of receivers you
have never even owned, you have never touched an Orion, K2, or MP and are
probably not privileged to any quality comparative, lab controlled
testing....yet you ramble on and on about how much you know, based on an
entirely false hypothesis taken from someone else's opinion. If you take a
look at the top ten list, knowing the deficiencies of many of those rigs,
you have to see the ridiculous rankings which in itself destroys any
credibility of the whole issue.<<
As long as you can ramble on what you know what I have or what I know it's OK?
He is not ranking rigs by their overall performance or value. He is ranking
them by how they perform on his A/B test against know "winners" for that S/N
test. Can you comprehend that?
>>So, to not get personal, let's evaluate the "tests"
Controlled environment---NO
Receivers tested at the same time--NO
On air conditions the same at all times--NO
Standard of input signals/type/intensity levels---NO
....<<
Rest is immaterial and silly
It is controlled environment for the purpose of the test, he sets the
thresholds and YES two receivers are compared in A/B test at the same time. For
the
purpose of the test the conditions are the same, he uses ground signal and
selects the antennas in order to signal disappear in one rig, switches to the
"standard" rig and signal is there. Recent test with worshiped Omni VI fared
about
the same as Orion.
>>Earls Ears are NOT a standard on which anyone can rely on for sure. That IS
a known.
How can anyone possibly take this test scenario and the resultant top ten
list seriously? I have been watching the comments and I still see the same
junk science "tests" being run again. And again, the same list, recommended
to those who do not know any better. If this kind of unsubstantiated, factless
and harmful information is allowed to overshadow the valuable information
many many others, then eventually the value of this group will be lost. It
seems that the support here is for the personalities and their right to an
opinion, rather than the substance of their information or comments. That is
a very sad occurance and harms everyone.<<
It is not junk science but REAL LIFE and ultimate test. You and anyone else
can set up conditions similar to what Earl has and verify his findings. If you
don't care about this "feature" of the radio, than be happy and wonder how
your competition can outhear you in those borderline situations.
>>This may be the most dangerous part because it places the credibility of
this group in a very bad light...that of personalities and friendships
overshadowing good solid reporting, logic and common sense. That some of
these subscribers, many of whom we know are knowledgable and believable,
would jeopardize their own reputations by endorsing such a questionable
approach is at least surprising, and certainly disappointing. If this
reflector allows such to continue without challenge, then where is the
future of dependable, credible information?<<
"Emperor has nice clothes?" Is that how you want the group be known as?
Your "challenge" is silly, you can't comprehend what is the matter of
discussion and you are dumping and making assumptions based on wrong
understanding of
the "problem."
>>The unfortunate reality is that I read a couple of posts thanking Earl for
his "findings" and noting that they would alter their buying pattern because
of it...It is this influence of the unknowing that is the problem...no
problems with Earl or his opinions, I have great respect for Earl from past
information and respect his right to his opinion...however, they should be
treated as "his" opinions and respected as such...rather than facts which
they are not. Buyer beware of what is fact and what is opinion. Tommy<<
"Unfortunate reality"? Maybe those guys understand and appreciate Earl's
findings and they wish that TenTec looked into that and made design changes or
improvements so it would put the Orion on the top of the Earl's heap? Isn't
that
what we would prefer? Fine radio in every respect? If "cheap" K2 can hack it,
why shouldn't Orion for kilo bucks not be able to beat it?
Anyone can see that Earl's opinion is based on fact, repeatable tests with
particular radios and shared his findings with others, some appreciate it, some
go ballistic because of "sanctity" of whatever is endangered? Get real!
Maybe it is more like:
Buyer be aware what are you getting and if it is what you need, for the money.
Yuri, K3BU
|