Hi Brian,

In terms of receivers, I believe the 746 Pro has it all over the TS-2000.  I 
have not had the luxury of having them sitting side by side but at one time 
went directly from one to the other.  Where the Icom seems to have it over 
both the 2000 and slightly over the 480 is in the amount of noise you hear 
along with the signal.  I'm not sure what measurement this would be but I 
can tell you that on 160, for example, I have heard things on the 746 Pro I 
never heard on the 480 and I believe the 480 receiver is better than the 
2000.  In terms of listening to the audio output, once you settle on a tone 
you like and the filter settings you prefer, it is easy on the ears.  AM 
sound is wonderful as well as FM and SSB and CW are likewise easy to listen 
to for long periods.

In terms of transmit audio, I believe the 2000 with a good wide range mic 
such as the Goldline has great fidelity although I typically had to build a 
high pass filter to cut some lows out of the Goldline in order not to be 
overly heavy on bass.  I get real high quality out of the 746 Pro just with 
the hand mic and the mic EQ and have gotten a lot of compliments on my audio 
although in the monitor it doesn't seem to sound as good to me on AM and FM 
as on SSB.  The hand mic is a little hot on those modes.  Heil is replacing 
my Handy-Mic with another with the wide range element in it and so I will 
know after this week what kind of fidelity I can get out of the Icom.  I do 
not believe the fidelity out of the 480 is as good as either rig primarily 
because it will only open to 2.4 kHz in terms of audio bandwidth.

I hope that helps some.  Take care and very 73.
--------------------
Kevin :)
Amateur Radio:  K7RX

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "K5IN" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 13:04
Subject: Re: ICOM 746 PRO!!!


> question,
>
> I hear the people comparing the ts-2000 and ic-746 but I would like to 
> know
> if anybody has done a side by side comparison of the receivers?  Also
> receive and xmit audio qualities of each.  I know the Kenwoods have what 
> is
> commonly considered good audio.  I have also heard the Icom's typically 
> have
> "compressed and or tight" audio.
>
> Brian, k5in.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Pat Byrne" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 12:52 PM
> Subject: Re: ICOM 746 PRO!!!
>
>
>> Hi Anthony,
>> I had a TS2000 and traded for a 746PRO.  (Involved some $$$s, also).
>> The Icom isn't as accessible as the Kenwood.  But, many of the things
>> that aren't acfcessible are things that you touch once and then
>> pretty much forget.  You can adjust filter width easily and you won't
>> hear the width spoken, but you will hear in the receiver what you
>> have done.  Mode selection is easy and you can direct enter frequencies.
>> My big problem with the TX2000 was, that if I didn't use it daily, I
>> would forget what I needed to do!!  Getting old!!  nd, I tuned a 746
>> and decided that I far preferred the transceivers' receive
>> performance.  And I owned a TS940 for years and still own a TS850 and
>> still really the 850.  I believe, though, that the Icom receiver,
>> being ten years newer than the Kenwood, is a better piece of equipment.
>> Random thoughts.
>> Hope this helps.
>> Pat, K9JAUAt 09:18 AM 1/26/2006, you wrote:
>>>Hi Everyone;
>>>
>>>As long as I have been a ham, I've always liked ICOM equipment.
>>>
>>>I've been hearing a lot about the 746 PRO.
>>>
>>>Does anyone have it and, how accessible is it.
>>>
>>>On my TS2000, all I do is use my power button and mic gain an vox and
>>>memories.
>>>
>>>Please let me know.
>>>
>>>73 De Anthony W2AJV
>>>[log in to unmask]
>>>ECHOLINK NODE NUMBER: 74389