Dynamic Range Narrow Spaced 2kHz to 105db i to bez żadnych dopisków do legendy to prawdziwa górna połka, a pozostałe parametry przewyższają inne modele które są wyżej w tabeli.
Ale cena za ten model kosmos.. lepiej chyba zainwestować w nowe FLEX-y 6400/6600
New Sherwood data is available for the TS-890S, very good numbers, ranking just below various forms of the K3/K3S, Flex 6700 with a hardware update, and the Icom IC 7851 and IC-8600 receiver.
In regard to the TS-890S vs TS-990S. Quoting Rob Sherwood..."I cannot give you a number in dB as to where in the real world we would notice the difference. What I can say is at 2 kHz the 890S is 30+ dB better in phase noise (RMDR) performance than the 990S on 20 meters. At 20 kHz offset the 990S performs much better. Kenwood really nailed the synthesizer in the 890S.
That reads to me, if you are a CW operator and use your radio under difficult conditions. You're probably going to love the new TS-890S. However, if you are mainly a phone operator. The TS-990S has an advantage on phone, but the TS-890S should also perform well on phone.
Certainly, the work on the TS-890S has bore fruit and advanced receiver performance.
Jestem niemile zaskoczony prędkością odświeżania wodospadu w tym modelu. Na tym polu IC-7300 wypada dużo lepiej, nie wspominając o 7610. Radiowo natomiast bije pierwszego na głowę, ciekawe jak 7610? _________________ 73! Rafał
Rob Sherwood używa obu w cqww. Co napisał: Filtering performance seems comparable, with splattering signals the real problem. When a station is 20 to 30 kHz wide, it is not the receiver's fault. The Kenwood is on 15 and 20m, while the Icom is on 40 meters and below, though so far it has only been used on 40m. _________________ You can't have too many antennas...