ICOM 7300 and HM-219 Stock Mic: Over-the-air DX test

Yes. Directly fed to 7300. None of that pro-audio nonsense. No EQ. No pre-amp, Just the rig. Pattern is figure 8. No issue with room noise on the MXL-144 but I close-talk the mic within 6 inches and it's on a desk stand not boom so it is vertically placed in front of me. the radio mic gain is 55-60 and I even have an amp with a fan next to the rig with zero fan noise on the MXL.

 

The difference is far more noticeable when running near-eSSB on the wider bandwidth.

Yes no doubt the 7300 and hand mic sound wonderful out of the box - like you I also turned the gain down to 34 with the hand mic and cut compression level to 1. That was just right for the way I use hand mic..

Switching to the dynamic mics you do need more gain. I am finding 50-60 on mic gain and 4 on compression gets nice ALC action and smooth audio. I also run 200-2900 bandwidth (2.7k medium) and that's worked well for the 3 dynamic mics that I've used so far.

Ham radio is all about experimenting. Get out there and try some new mics !!! The cheaper the better !!!

 

Agree cheaper the better, not to the point that the mic is a piece of junk or unreliable. You can use an inexpensive electret with this radio that is flat in the voice range, or a 3000$ U87 for bragging rights, that is also flat in the SSB voice range. The stock mic is good enough that I just don't have a pressing need to build an adapter or purchase the $$$ Icom desk mic yet.

 

Nice to read these reports about the IC-7300 and yes, I also get excellent reports from the its stock mic. As always, a few people can't resist the need to snipe ICOM for 'leaving something out' of this great rig. It has everything I need and more in a rig in its price range.

 

Sniping Icom?

It's common business practice to provide a product line with added features, as price increases. Icom put a lot into this rig, for the money. I don't see anyone denying that.

You may have just returned from a thread where people were in some sort of heated exchange about said topic? It's not happening here.

 

Yes, the hand mic is just fine provided you don't have a need for a desktop mic (eg..you want to run VOX and keep hands free for typing etc).
I am super impressed with the 7300. Everyone will have their wish list of convenience features/changes as they use the rig. That's called user experience and it's important.

For me, it's improving the output power adjustment - I don't care for the click-click encoder knob quick adjust knob, or, just offer the ability to store power settings by band/mode (eg.... for CW I run 100W, no amplifier; for SSB I can run max 40W into my amp so dont want to drive it with 100W if I forget to turn power down; for digital we tend to run USB mode at much lower, say, 10W PEP) Each mode change requires readjusting the power output via the click click knob. It would be nice to have it software controlled/stored in a future firmware upgrade

The antenna ports are a hardware change, but the other items might be easily done in a firmware revision.

As for the microphones, I'm certain that there are some inexpensive desk mics in the $5-$10 range that will sound super with this radio. Thats some of the fun....see what works, try something new, adjust, try again, etc. etc.

Joe

 

I think that if you perform more scientific investigation, you will find that boosting the bass will almost always create a less readable signal. When there are weak signals over an ionospheric propagation channel, putting your limited signal in the low frequency spectrum is counterproductive. Most DXers know that having the midrange and lower high spectrum from 400 or 500 Hz to low kHz is the most important range for readability. I can not count the times that I can hear a weak ESSB station and just hear the mumble mumble and only can pick out a few words here and there. But there will be even weaker QRP stations with crisp audio who are perfectly copiable while just a whispering ghost of a signal.

 

I know, and I agree, but what I am hearing over SDR, and what dx stations are telling me, is in conflict with this long-standing premise. The difference can be heard, and others agree -- at the 5,000 mile shortpath and 10,000+ longpath range.

My thoughts are that this is because the stock mic lacks deep bass, and pumps this extra into the upper lows, and mids.

 

Now that I think about it, I am going to record a 2nd video highlighting what I am talking about, using the websdr site out of California. I will be transmitting from Korea. I just need some better conditions. I will post that video, and we can discuss it. I don't care which setting turns out to be the best -- I plan to use the best, either way.

 

I have turned many hams on to this condenser microphone which works very well on Icom rigs and on my IC7300 in particular. It is RF resistant too due to it's construction. Problem is that most hams turn their nose up at something like this and will spend big-bux on something that sounds no better.

Linked microphone with windscreen....


It worked so good I took an old one of the microphones above that had broken the XLR plug, removed the condenser element, and built the microphone below. I had an old small ribbon mike that the ribbon let loose, so I gutted it and put in the condenser element. I use it on my FTdx3000.

 

K1WVU, I think whatever you posted there didn't make it... only your quote of my post did.

 

I have been a ham for 59 years and have owned a lot of rigs. I bought the IC-7300 about six months ago and I'm still like a kid with a new toy. It has, by far, the most sensitive receiver I have ever used or seen. I think ICOM made a mistake and let this baby out the door as a "lower priced" receiver when it is competition for many or most top of the line models. I run mostly digital modes. W0YF

 

I think it's more of a sign of what's to come. They have actually lowered prices a few hundred, since introduction. I think their upcoming new models will be even better, and offer the 2nd receivers for contesting, and connectivity that is missing in the 7300, due to price point. I think they are trying to grab as much of the market as they can.

I am not particular to one company or another, and just love radios in general, but the other larger names in the industry have got to be concerned.

 

...with smaller incremental improvements. When you compare the latest to some older technology (with improvements), there's not a lot of difference. I recall when the Drake 4-line was the bee's knees. Today, with improvements in filters etc, they rival the performance of new rigs. Many rigs produced in the 1980s-2000s (with updates) also perform quite well. After what's connected to the ANT jack, the biggest single difference in performance can be attributed to "the nut in front of the rig".