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 Forst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:01:28 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
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
> 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2