I actually think Tom W8JI deserves much (most?) of the credit, along with
W2VJN, for originally flushing out the key click issue about 15 years ago.
The focus was initially on the FT-1000(D) and FT-1000MP, which were the
most popular cw contesting rigs at that time and the worst offenders.
73, Barry N1EU
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Darrell Bellerive VE7IU <ve7iu@runbox.com>
wrote:
> It took a very long time for Rob Sherwood's judgements to take hold and
> for real change to happen. The fact that some manufacturers are taking
> steps to improve the cleanliness of transmitters is encouraging. It will
> take time, but I believe we will see improvement across the board.
>
> I applaud those who, like Rob Sherwood and Jim Brown K9YC, have taken the
> time to test and document the cleanliness of transmitters. There is great
> information available to those researching the purchase of a clean
> transmitter.
>
> The information is quite technical, and there is more than one cause of a
> dirty transmitter. Not to take away from the great work that has been
> published, but I have wondered if a "dirty transmitter" or "worst polluter"
> list or, with a positive spin, a "cleanest transmitter list" would not help
> promote the idea. A single "score" type of list.
>
> Look at how manufacturers now try to be ranked high on Rob's list of
> receivers. Perhaps the same for transmitters would help to accelerate the
> adoption of change. A simple list with a single overall score and then a
> link to a bit more detailed information. Many hams tend to like the
> technical side of things and take note of 20 dB less signal 2 kHz from the
> carrier, but having a single "score" might be a better means to an end.
>
> Developing the score and the criteria for such a list would be more
> difficult to determine, and certainly in constant dispute, but some form of
> weighted formula combining issues such as IMD, phase noise, key clicks,
> etc., to determine the score would be required.
>
> And big numbers tend to be perceived as more valued than small numbers, so
> make the theoretically cleanest transmitter possible have a score of 1000,
> and the theoretically dirtiest possible transmitter a score of 0.
>
> It would take a very thick skinned individual to pick criteria, develop a
> formula for a single score, and publish the list. But I do think such a
> list would help motivate manufacturers and purchasers to make better
> choices.
>
> 73, Darrell VE7IU
>
> On 15-12-10 02:11 AM, rick@dj0ip.de wrote:
>
>> snip...
>>
>> But I have been listening to what Rob Sherwood says since 1976 and so far
>> he
>> has been spot on with his judgment.
>> Elecraft, FLEX, TEN-TEC and many other companies listen to his
>> suggestions.
>> Those who don't work with him so closely are coincidently the ones whose
>> transmitters are polluting our bands!
>>
>> Clearly Elecraft has shown us the path.
>> I hope others will follow and even use this technology in the lower cost
>> radios.
>>
>> In any case I applaud everyone participating in this discussion.
>> It is high time we discuss this topic as a technical topic, rather than
>> blaming it on some LID ham.
>>
>> snip...
>>
>> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>> (Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|