TOM: Just a note to let you know that I agree with you. I have tried the
Omni-V, Omni-VI and VI plus. All of them started clipping at 50wpm QSK. When
working split, it was even worst. What surprised and delighted me was the
new Jupiter I bought. It follows keying perfectly at 65 wpm full break-in.
Irvin W7GX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alderman, Chester" <CAlderma@ora.fda.gov>
To: "'Scanandoah, Alan'" <ascanand@harris.com>
Cc: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:48 AM
Subject: RE: [TenTec] Pegasus vs. Argonaut V - CW Filter Bandwidth
> Hi Al and thanks for the note.
>
> I've been an active QRQ'er for some 25 years and have had QSO's at speeds
up
> to 120 wpm, using both an Omni D and the Corsair II. I have heard Omin V's
> running at 90 wpm, but I've never heard an Omni 6 copyable beyond 70 wpm.
>
> When I purchased my Omni 6, I immediately called TT and it was explained
to
> me the reason the QSK was not any faster was because the phase lock loop
had
> a lock time of 10 milliseconds. To improve the PLL lock time, they would
> have had to given up receiver performance somewhat. The receiver in the
Six
> was so good that I willingly gave up the faster QSK in favor of the better
> receiver. (I'm also an avid 40/80 DX'er where the rcvr DOES count!)
>
> While I do like to 'follow' technology, I think DSP is better for SSB
> operation and not so spectacular for CW operation, i.e., I'm concerned
about
> the 14KC IF frequency in the Orion, NECESSARY because of the wide-spread
use
> of DSP. But I think the Orion rcvr is going to be a 'screemer' primarily
> because of the ability to change the bandwidth of the roofing filter.
>
> 50 wpm is excellent and if your enjoying it, just keep plugging when you
> can. Running high speed CW QSO's with full QSK is really a great fun thing
> to do, more enjoyable than most people realize.
>
> 73, Tom/W4BQF
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scanandoah, Alan [mailto:ascanand@harris.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 9:09 AM
> To: 'Alderman, Chester'
> Subject: RE: [TenTec] Pegasus vs. Argonaut V - CW Filter Bandwidth
>
> Tom
>
> For what it's worth, the Omni VI has improved QSK over that of the Omni V;
> it
> has something to do with processor power and the synthesizer loading
scheme.
> Split mode is even slower.
>
> I guess that's why I keep looking for the older TT rigs. I recently
> obtained an
> Omni A (my first) and have been having a blast; the whiz-bang
> DSP/ethernet-capable/makes coffee rigs are highly overrated. Alas, I
don't
> think I can handle much above 50 wpm these days - not enough time to keep
in
> training :(
>
> 73 - Al, K2ZN
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alderman, Chester [mailto:CAlderma@ora.fda.gov]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 8:56 AM
> To: 'Mark Erbaugh'
> Cc: 'tentec@contesting.com'
> Subject: RE: [TenTec] Pegasus vs. Argonaut V - CW Filter Bandwidth
>
>
> Since YOU are not a high speed CW op, maybe you could get TT to just
> eliminate CW all together???
>
> I am a high speed CW op and I can assure you that TT has already slowed
down
> QSK in their rigs. The Omni A/C/D and the Corsair II rigs had excellent
QSK
> at just about any speed you wanted to run. I watched the RF waveform from
a
> Corsair II and Hercules amp running at 160 wpm (watched on an O'scope, not
> copied!!). My Omni 6 that I received in '92 was a severe disappointment in
> the QSK department (but certainly not in the rcvr department!) because at
> around 68 wpm, the Omni 6 started running dot/dash spacing together
(because
> of the PLL lock time requirements). It is stated that the Orion has 'silky
> smooth QSK as high as 60wpm'!!! Big deal!!
>
> But the trade off for high speed QSK is a better receiver...a better
> receiver, not because DSP can not keep up. For my Omni 6 and hopefully for
> my Orion, I certainly accept the slower QSK trade-off for the better
> receiver design. I just keep my old-faithful Corsair II handy for those
> QSO's in excess of 70 wpm.
>
> Tom/W4BQF
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|