BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Steve Dresser <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 6 Mar 2006 09:13:47 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
Gary,

You can't beat the 480 for accessibility.  Almost all functions are 
spoken, and those that aren't either beep high/low, or are voiced 
with CW.  Also, functions such as power, Mic and Vox gain are easily 
accessed from the keyboard.  However, if you want a hot receiver with 
good dynamic range and low noise, you can't beat an Icom.  Icoms are 
less accessible, and they tend to be more intensive, so you have to 
decide what's most important to you.  I find myself wishing I could 
find a rig that had the accessibility of the 480 and the receiver 
characteristics of the Icoms, but I'm not holding my breath.

Steve

On Sunday 3/5/06 22:42 Gary Lee wrote:
>I am thinking of changing rigs from my ts2000.
>
>Candidates are
>icom 746 pro
>icom 756 pro
>kenwood ts480
>
>I would like to hear from anyone who has actually operated these rigs to
>get a feel for their performance and useability.
>
>I don't need anything over 100 wattts, in fact, any other rig suggestions
>are welcome.
>I'm mostly looking for better selectivity and sensitivity than I seem to
>get with the 2000.
>
>Thanks for any light you can shed on this.
>73

ATOM RSS1 RSS2