Well, sigh. You have unfortunately proven my point. Reviews are about being objective, and news is about being objective. But you openly object to me for trying to be objective, by using real measurements, and not just subjective impressions from a few on-air QSOs. Responding to me like that, when I specifically said my suggestion wasn't pointed at you, proves that you aren't interested in an objective review. Subjective impressions are fine, and the ARRL review had plenty of them. But the radio's performance numbers also matter, and that's what I was trying to point out. Like I said earlier, I'm glad you like your radio. I'm glad you like your radio so much that you want other people to like it. It's a shame that the facts offend you so much.
I'm not objecting to your comments. I'm simply stating that the ARRL engineer reviewing the radio did not come to the same conclusions about your "facts" and the radio being detrimental to other hams at a field day. In fact, he said the opposite. I'll post the quote from Bob Allison and the ARRL test, again, because I added it in an edit, and you may have misssed it: "The transmitter does have excellent harmonic and spurious suppression, typically at or greater than 66db on the HF bands. This is always helpful during Field Day, or appreciated by your neighborhood radio amateur."
I have most of the Yaesu radios from the FTDX1200 down..including this one.. This is a great buy and I put mine in a Tac-Com carry case with the Matching [ohh here it comes] MFJ mini tuner that lets you use the radio's tuner button to tune it. It works great in the parks and on field day a new tech class member of the club worked it under the club call sign on the MyAntenna wire and 9:1 balun and said he was upgrading because he would hooked...What more could you ask for???[/QUOTE]
My mistake. You quoted my words in your reply, then complained about people (like me) who don't own the radio quoting numbers (which I did). Silly me, I should have known you weren't criticizing me. Sorry, bro... 73.
Its the 939 model for Yaesu..here is the true deal.. The LDG Z-100Plus has been my best tuner I used on field radios..but the 939Y came out and said how easy it is to use with just push the 891 tune button. The dirty secret is the MFJ software that says it tunes faster than any other tuner is that it doesn't get a good tune 1/2 the time and you have to press the button 1 or 2 more times to get a swr that will work. LDG has better auto tuner firmware and they do have a cable that will plug in the 891 or 991 etc and make it tune if you press the Z100+ tuner button; look at that one... Art K8XG
Some reading about phase noise, and why it should matter to us hams. Bottom line, TX phase noise amounts to RF pollution - it's wideband noise around the desired signal, caused by phase shifts in the oscillator because it's not perfect. Nothing is! http://www.robkalmeijer.nl/techniek...hniek/hambladen/qst/1988/03/page14/index.html http://www.producon.com/sm7ovk/phasenoise.pdf Given that the ARRL reported that it's among the worst they have ever measured in the lab, it's a cause for concern. What if my neighbor buys one? Or multiple neighbors, and they attach them to amps? I do a lot to keep the noise down around here, I don't appreciate Yaesu shipping something this bad - if it indeed is. One lab measurement doesn't necessary mean it's a problem - I'd like to see this test done on other samples. Maybe it was a bad radio, who knows. But it's a major red flag, IMHO. I'd like to see the actual data they measured, and tests of other samples. Usually a noisy oscillator will cause issues for RX as well, I wonder what's going on here - voltage regulation issues for the synth during TX? Steve KV6O
Oh heck in a handbasket the planet is doomed the boards are like the 991 hf section so doom that one also, Hi HI
Since you are content on pushing this theme, and repeating yourself, I will repeat the response, which you have chosen to ignore. If any of your worries concerned the AARL test engineer, I doubt he would have said the following about the rig: "The transmitter does have excellent harmonic and spurious suppression, typically at or greater than 66db on the HF bands. This is always helpful during Field Day, or appreciated by your neighborhood radio amateur." As for receive, let me repeat a few main themes for you.... 1. One of the least expensive new HF rigs on the market, incorporating the same base 32-bit DSP as Yaesu rigs costing 2-3 times as much. What perfection do you expect, at this level? It's $630, shipped. Is it so bad that is out of legal specification for sale? No. Are FCC emissions rules being broken, by the sale of this radio? No. 2. Better receive than the FT450D. Better than the FT-857. I am hearing signals, at times, that even my ICOM 7300 is not hearing, at my QTH. Am I supposed to worry that a statistic is hurting my receive? If it is, then the radio hears so well, I am not concerned about it.
I only wish this were in clearer English. More details here, and some quotes to keep in mind, as you read the negative: "Due to the disappointing measurements, one should expect evil. But that does not happen. The receiver is quite usable, and has a nice CW sound, without DSP artifacts." http://radioaficion.com/news/yaesu-ft-891-review/ He goes on to discuss the IMD. His English is broken, but he mentions that his ICOM IC-735, and the FT-857 are, "also, just like that", with the 857 being pretty close. Again, nothing that creates major problems, and you can read for yourself that the writer enjoys the radio. If you are a signal purist snob, then it is probably a radio to be avoided. Then again, such purists rarely find themselves content with a bargain radio.
There is the concept of diminishing returns for investment to be considered. Just because a given specification is feasibly improved by additionable expenditure....is it really worthwhile? Lots of vintage equipment people may argue this.
Phase noise and harmonics/IMD are separate issues. I have not chosen to ignore, you chose to do so. Read the links I posted. Which discusses receiver performance, not transmitter. The issue is TX phase noise. Whatever, cherry pick what you want, and ignore the rest. Enjoy.
And again, feel free to show me where anyone who has actually used and tested the rig has suggested not buying it, due to said notations? I posted what the German engineer said, after his tests, above. I was editing. You can read it under the Transmitter Intermodulation section of his test results. Broken English, but as he said: "Does that do what? At the most, nothing." This is not a perfect rig. It is an entry-level bargain, selling for $630, which meets all legal FCC specs required for sale, and the worst specs of which are pretty similar to the FT-857, which is one of Yaesu's top-selling rigs, and has been for years. As a bonus, though, you pay far less, don't have to buy filters, don't need to worry about TCXO stability, and enjoy DSP leaps and bounds better than what the FT-857 has to offer. It seems I am not the one who is cherry-picking (and nothing wrong with that).
Actually, there is a forum on QRZ dedicated to user reviews/product reviews. https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?forums/amateur-radio-equipment-reviews.17/ Several days ago I sent a note to QRZ support about the flood of product reviews being published in the News section and asked why they are not redirecting them into the proper forum. I received an acknowledgement and ticket number, was told my request was passed on to the news editor, and my ticket was closed. (Sorry. Way off topic from the original post.)
