Al,
You are correct for the more usual "casual use". In that arena,
performance does not matter as much. The gut feeling about a radio's
audio or the buttons are the more important to many operators.
But when those operators who are a little more discerning and operate in
DXing and contesting situations, the Sherwood ratings of close-in
blocking dynamic range become the deciding factors in QSO or no-QSO. If
the transceiver is capable of "saddling up" close to a strong station
without that other station taking over the receiver, that factor is
important to those who participate in such operating events.
The ability to avoid receiver overload in crowded band conditions
suddenly becomes the important parameter.
So if you are a casual operator, those Sherwood rankings will not mean
much to you. But if contesting performance is more your 'thing', the
Sherwood rankings will be more important - that is what allows you to
make contacts in the midst of many potentially interfering stations at
close frequencies to your frequency.
73,
Don W3FPR
On 5/1/2016 6:54 PM, Al Lorona wrote:
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 donw...@embarqmail.com
______________________________________________________________
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
