Ahh, this is right on the mark. How many times have you heard a ham say, "I didn't like Radio X because it didn't have enough close-spaced dynamic range." Me, almost never. Instead, I usually hear that hams have discarded a radio because of a million different reasons like
"bad" or "noisy" audio fit and feel buttons too small kept failing transmitter caused interference to other radios during a contest and many other factors, none of which is measured by gurus like Sherwood. So I totally agree, it's the radio as a whole that matters. It's what comes out of the speaker. it's the sound of the noise. Etc., etc. You've got to get a radio in your hands to get a good idea of it. That's why YouTube videos of receivers being recorded with a camera across the room, and lists of receivers ranked by dynamic range don't mean that much to me. Al W6LX >The performance and usefulness of ANY product, including a radio, >depends upon the totality of its characteristics. > >73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
