IC756pro3 vs Kenwood TS570dg
Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 10:32 pm
The 756pro3 is Almost better than the lowly ts570dg.
The only 2 faults I have with the 756pro3 is as follows;
When there is a moderate to high atmospheric noise, the noise reducer does a great job Except there is a rather annoying popping noise and S meter spikes that coincide with the peak apmospheric crashes. The little Kenwood does NOT have this problem.
Now in regards to pulling a very weak CW signal out of the noise.
TS570dg, 270hz filter on, noise reduction on high, dsp at 200;
this lowly little rig does much better than the IC756pro3.
With the two above issues, seems as if the icom 756pro3 is a compromise radio for CW reception. I feel that totally relying on digital filters is a big mistake. Digital plus physical filters should have been the design scheme.
The only 2 faults I have with the 756pro3 is as follows;
When there is a moderate to high atmospheric noise, the noise reducer does a great job Except there is a rather annoying popping noise and S meter spikes that coincide with the peak apmospheric crashes. The little Kenwood does NOT have this problem.
Now in regards to pulling a very weak CW signal out of the noise.
TS570dg, 270hz filter on, noise reduction on high, dsp at 200;
this lowly little rig does much better than the IC756pro3.
With the two above issues, seems as if the icom 756pro3 is a compromise radio for CW reception. I feel that totally relying on digital filters is a big mistake. Digital plus physical filters should have been the design scheme.