Some good thoughts Colin.  Yes, I wouldn't expect night and day 
improvement, but a lower noise floor would be nice.   The Kenwood blurb on 
the 480 is that it has a rx dynamic range in a class with the TS-950 series, 
but who knows.  Just curious if anyone had done a A/B test.   The higher end 
rigs, with the associated higher price tag isn't in the cards right now. 
What really brought this thing  to the forefront now is the current $300 off 
from Kenwood and another $50 off from Giga Parts for online orders  through 
March 31.   This all brings the price down to $849 for the 100 watt model, 
without filters and voice chip.

And you're right, I'm very happy with the 2000.  Around 25,000 QSO's in the 
log and still chugging away.


73, Steve KW3A
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: RX difference between TS-480 and TS-2000?


> more solid, more features, better all around transceiver yes, but as per 
> the
> question at hand, which radio has the better receiver?
> I haven't had my hands on a 480, and I most definitely haven't had a 
> chance
> to compare side to side on all the HF bands, not even one for that matter,
> but I have an opinion, big surprise huh?
> I would say this: the 480 is a more modern transceiver than the ts2000.  I
> suspect that both radios have a very very similar receiver in them, down 
> to
> having the same circuits and components in the same places and all that.
> Logically, to me, this would mean the two receivers are identical. 
> However,
> because the 480 is the newest HF radio from kenwood, one would assume 
> things
> like DSP filtering and general components are of a higher quality than
> previous radios like the 2000.  Higher speed processing for the dsp, 
> better
> chips, better engineering of stages etc.  That said, if it makes a half DB
> difference over say an icom 718, or a yaesu ft450, is it truly a better
> performer than something else?
> I strongly suspect that in order to achieve better rx performance, you are
> going to have to go up to a higher end, more expensive radio.  something
> like the IC756 pro, IC7200/7600/7800 or yaesu's newer ft2000 or ft9000
> series.
> perhaps the K3 would even be a better performer on SSB as well, but who
> knows how much better at that price point and at that level of 
> engineering.
> I suspect you are very happy with the ts2000, and that you are looking for 
> a
> radio with a lower noise floor and so on.  Receivers are about as 
> sensative
> as they can electronically get in most consumer market HF radios right 
> now.
> the good ones stand out because they have engineered the receiver with a 
> far
> lower noise floor than other radios.
> also, it depends on what sort of roofing filters you can install or that
> come stock with the radio.
> I don't know what the dynamic range is on a ts2000, but the IC7700 has 
> 110DB
> of dynamic range...meaning you can get a far lower noise floor and hear
> weaker signals much more clearly.
> if it's just another HF rig in the shack with an equivalent receiver to 
> the
> ts2000, i think the 480 will do nicely, or an IC7000, or even an old 
> ts570.
> essentially with the 480, your getting the HF side of a ts2000 with a few
> more operator perks, bells and whistles etc...I doubt there is 
> significantly
> higher receiver performance.
>
> But, as I said earlier, I have no hands on experience, so i'm just  making
> my judgement on some facts and logical deductions.
> 73
> Colin, V A6BKX
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Anthony Vece" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 12:21 PM
> Subject: Re: RX difference between TS-480 and TS-2000?
>
>
>> The 2000 is just a more solid radio.
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 30, 2010, at 2:01 PM, Steve Forst <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tnx Anthony.   While it may not have been clear in my post, I have
>>> had a
>>> 2000 for  almost 9 years.  Lots 'o QSO's in the log and  I plan to
>>> keep it
>>> till  it goes to that big ham shack in the sky.   Just considering
>>> adding a
>>> second rig to the shack with a little better RX specs.
>>>
>>> 73, Steve KW3A
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Anthony Vece" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 1:55 PM
>>> Subject: Re: RX difference between TS-480 and TS-2000?
>>>
>>>
>>>> HiSteve;
>>>> I had both of those radios and I preferred the 2000.
>>>> Anthony
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 30, 2010, at 1:21 PM, steve <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just wondering if anyone has done a side by side  comparison of the
>>>>> TS-2000
>>>>> and the TS-480 on receive? I would like to get another HF rig in the
>>>>> shack.
>>>>> I'm willing to sacrifice some performance in favor of accessibility
>>>>> inherent
>>>>> with Kenwood, since I have no sighted  help here.  Rumors still
>>>>> abound of
>>>>> Kenwood debuting a new HF rig at Dayton in May,  but even if true,
>>>>> not sure
>>>>> I would want to be the first in line for a new model.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know the 480 requires optional filters, but is the 480 a
>>>>> noticeable
>>>>> improvement  on  rx?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73, Steve KW3A
>>>>
>