Kenwood TS-2000 Ugly [Archive]

ka5row

12-22-2006, 10:28 AM

Kenwood TS-2000 Ugly

I wonder if this is the year for Kenwood to come up with a new line of HF radios.
I am sorry but with the exception of the TS-570 the current line of Kenwood rigs are as ugly as sin. I just can't get pass the rounded face of the TS-2000. I mention this on the air a lot and get a lot of agreement. It is to the point several #loyal Kenwood users like me are tempted to look elsewhere or, look to past Kenwood radios that are 10+ years old. No doubt the TS-2000 is a fine radio electrically but it is just ugly.

Now my question as to any Manufacture. When you buy a new all in one radio are you buying quantity over quality. #Referencing to #70 CM to 160M or the standard 10-160 M

KI4NGN

12-22-2006, 11:10 AM

I agree. Once in a while when I consider getting a new rig, I've looked at the Kenwood. I'm sure that it is a fine rig, but yep, that rounded front is ugly. Not sure what they were thinking. Maybe the designers were doing acid and that's the way they saw everything? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

N4AUD

12-22-2006, 11:11 AM

I like it.

PE1RDW

12-22-2006, 12:03 PM

Personaly I like the design of the ts-790 and ts-690, no 10 level deep menus and every button where it should be, still not a radio that wins a design award but one that does what it is intended for and does it good.
When you open it you right away notice that it is ment to be repeared by it's owner, very service friendly

K3UD

12-22-2006, 01:07 PM

I never understood some of the Kenwood designs. Several years ago I was looking for a new rig and considered both the Kenwood 480 and the TS-2000 along with the IC-746PRO.

Trying to keep an open mind I finally had to admit that I could never warm up to the TS-2000 because it would always look like a somewhat melted and deformed boom box. I also looked at the TS-480 and when I found out that the faceplate did not attach to the radio I knew right away that it was not for me.

Both radios are undoubtedly well engineered and have very good performance but in the end I purchased the 746PRO.

I have owned Kenwoods in the past and IMHO the elegance of the TS-520/530/820/830 series have never been replicated. The same goes for the Kenwood Twins (R599/T599)

Sometimes it is small things like cosmetic design that turns people off. IMHO the Ten Tec Jupiter falls into the same category of questionable cosmetics.

Merry Christmas
Happy Holidays to everyone on QRZ
73
George
K3UD

W3MIV

12-22-2006, 01:21 PM

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Dec. 22 2006,09:07)]IMHO the Ten Tec Jupiter falls into the same category of questionable cosmetics.
I think it is a reflection of the costs of creating dies and the potential scale of production. All of TenTec's rigs have a kind of "Radio Shack" appearance that is "off-putting" at their price ranges.

I am very interested in seeing some test reports on the new Omni VII that TenTec is now taking orders on. At present, they don't even have a list of specs on their website -- just a few paragraphs of "happy talk."

K3STX

12-22-2006, 02:24 PM

I agree 100%!! I love Kenwood rigs, but the TS-2000 is ugly as sin and I would NEVER buy one. I think for an "average" Ham like me, who dabbles in contesting and DXing, all of the "notch below the top of the line" radios would be just fine. The big boys have other issues to deal with, but I like a big fat radio with big fat knobs and I want it to be HEAVY. And something I enjoy looking at while I sit there for hours on end. How can the designers not understand this? The Orions also look kind of "cheap" to me, but evidently are killer radios. Why not put the guts of an Orion in the case of a TS-950 or an FT-1000?

paul

W3MIV

12-22-2006, 02:26 PM

Quote[/b] (K3STX @ Dec. 22 2006,10:24)]...I like a big fat radio with big fat knobs and I want it to be HEAVY....
You might want to check out the Rosie O'Donnell thread in the Rag Chew forum. Might be right up your alley!

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

K1OU

12-22-2006, 02:30 PM

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Dec. 22 2006,07:26)]Quote[/b] (K3STX @ Dec. 22 2006,10:24)]...I like a big fat radio with big fat knobs and I want it to be HEAVY....
You might want to check out the Rosie O'Donnell thread in the Rag Chew forum. Might be right up your alley!

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Gawd!

Actually, I thought some of the sexiest Kenwoods ever made were the 530, 830, and 850.

AC0H

12-22-2006, 02:51 PM

The TS-2000 has got to be the ugliest radio made.
I said when they brought it out it looked like somebody left it on a hot stove and the plastic melted.

AG3Y

12-22-2006, 03:23 PM

Exactly WHAT do you think a ham rig should look like ? Personally, I think the Kenwood is rather "unique". But I certainly wouldn't go against the majority.

Yes, the 520/820 rigs and the twins have a very classic style, and I think that it would be great if they were resurrected with ALL solid state design, and the latest electronic developments such as roofing filters, and DSP.

I've always loved the looks of the Drake TR-7, and wish I could get hold of one in mint condition ( dream on, Jim ! ) Certainly a different looking radio, in a class by itself.

I have never grown tired of the look and feel of my Icom 720A and if a rig that looked like that with thoroughly modern innards were to come along, I would probably swipe it up in a moment!

How about some additional ideas? You hate the Kenwood. What rigs would you like to see, or what ideas do you have. Something that looks like a home Entertainment system? What ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

73, and Merry Christmas. Jim

KA4DPO

12-22-2006, 03:56 PM

I agree that the TS-2000 is kind of unique. I don't own one but I don't find it's looks objectionable at all in fact, the new FT-2000 has a similar look to it. I do own some older Kenwood rigs and wouldn't trade them.

W3MIV

12-22-2006, 04:08 PM

Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 22 2006,11:56)]...the TS-2000 is kind of unique ... the new FT-2000 has a similar look to it.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

KG4RUL

12-22-2006, 06:34 PM

For myself and my TS2000X, we are both DEEPLY OFFENDED! Where is your sensitivity.

OTOH: Not one operator who has actually sat done and used my radio at Field Day, etc. has EVER said it was "ugly". They just enjoyed all the features that it offers.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

w5klb

12-22-2006, 07:33 PM

Quote[/b] (AC0H @ Dec. 22 2006,07:51)]The TS-2000 has got to be the ugliest radio made.
I said when they brought it out it looked like somebody left it on a hot stove and the plastic melted.
One man's "ugly" is another man's beauty.

Of course, you don't by a rig for looks alone. You buy it because it's has the functions you want (and some you may never use). Yeah, the buttons could be bigger, but that's really a minor complaint. I have fairly skinny fingers, so this not really a big problem for me. This not to say that I'm skinny for I'm showing signs of the "Dunlap Disease." http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I think the TS 2000 is one of the best multi-band all-mode transcievers you can get. You might not think it's purty because it doesn't have the display other radios have, but I think it makes up for this in performance.

And BTW, I'm thinking about getting the TS-480 very soon for use as a moble. Hopefully, this will be very soon as the budget permits.

Yep, I like Kenwood.

k6az

12-22-2006, 08:03 PM

Quote[/b] (AG3Y @ Dec. 22 2006,10:23)]Exactly WHAT do you think a ham rig should look like ?
http://www.k6az.com/forums/icom_761.jpg

G0GQK

12-22-2006, 11:03 PM

The TS 2000 is ugly and so is the 480. its about time Kenwood realised the presentation of the product is halfway to a sale. It doesn't matter how good it is, if people don't like its looks it won't sell in large numbers.

How should a tranceiver look.? Like the thousands that have been made since 1980.

G0GQK

kc4ylv

12-22-2006, 11:16 PM

Quote[/b] ]I think it is a reflection of the costs of creating dies and the potential scale of production. All of TenTec's rigs have a kind of "Radio Shack" appearance that is "off-putting" at their price ranges.

I am very interested in seeing some test reports on the new Omni VII that TenTec is now taking orders on. At present, they don't even have a list of specs on their website -- just a few paragraphs of "happy talk."

It's so sad, Ten-Tec rigs are beautiful pieces of electrical engineering, housed in what looks to me like a box designed by an eight-year old who likes robots.

They're getting better, though. That new one with the LCD looks nice.

And yes, this is huge, it's one of the many reasons why I refuse to buy any Kenwood radios. It's like they fired the pro radio design guy and have the Home Theater guy design chassis' on weekends.

KC0OFZ

12-22-2006, 11:59 PM

Quote[/b] (ka5row @ Dec. 22 2006,03:28)]Kenwood TS-2000 Ugly

I wonder if this is the year for Kenwood to come up with a new line of HF radios.
I am sorry but with the exception of the TS-570 the current line of Kenwood rigs are as ugly as sin. I just can't get pass the rounded face of the TS-2000. I mention this on the air a lot and get a lot of agreement. It is to the point several #loyal Kenwood users like me are tempted to look elsewhere or, look to past Kenwood radios that are 10+ years old. No doubt the TS-2000 is a fine radio electrically but it is just ugly.

Now my question as to any Manufacture. When you buy a new all in one radio are you buying quantity over quality. #Referencing to #70 CM to 160M or the standard 10-160 M
Well to each their own, but if you were to buy one for me, I would gladly take it.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I would even use it on the air to talk with you
73
KC0OFZ
Merry Christmas!!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

w5alt

12-23-2006, 12:09 AM

Quote[/b] (ka5row @ Dec. 22 2006,06:28)]Kenwood TS-2000 Ugly
Is it a one bagger or a two bagger? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

WA2ZDY

12-23-2006, 02:46 AM

Yes, the TS2000 is rather unconventional in appearance and it might be said that the 480 is the junior version of same. #But when I chose the 480 it was mainly for that big readout as compared to that of the FT857/897.

George, I consider the control head a bonus as it is. #For mobile use, what mine was originally bought for, it's ideal. # And since then it's nice not to take up hardly any space on my desktop. #

The only improvement I'd make to the 480 is IF DSP. #I'm glad to have enjoyed this rig. #Now it's time to move on.

Classy rigs? #The 599 twins and 511 - that brushed aluminum front, looking like the stereo gear of that same era, wow, that was hot stuff!

ab9lz

12-23-2006, 04:33 AM

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 22 2006,17:09)]Quote[/b] (ka5row @ Dec. 22 2006,06:28)]Kenwood TS-2000 Ugly
Is it a one bagger or a two bagger? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
'round here it would be known as a "butterface".

WS2L

12-23-2006, 10:37 AM

I own a TS570 and a TS2000 and I will admit that they are a bit ugly but I usually don't buy a rig based on appearance.

ve2nsm

12-24-2006, 12:49 AM

I use to find the TS2000 so ugly it stopped my blood flows everytime I looked at it. I own a TS850 and I would really love a 950SDX on my desk next to it. These are really eye candy.

Unfortunately I am very interested in the TS2000 as a good all purpose 6m and up rig so I did something... i put this picture as a wallpaper so I can get used to it slowly:
http://www.ut2fw.cqham.ru/bur/ts2000/ts2000m.jpg

It works too, I still find it butt ugly but my tolerance level has greatly improved. Another couple of months and I may order one. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif