From: "Jim Shorney" 
Subject: Re: [drakelist] T4XC and D104


"Jim Shorney"  made an utterence to
the drakelist gang
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 13:34:12 -0600, Peter Hoon wrote:

>Would like to solicit ideas and opinions on use of speech
>compressors/processors/amps with the D104 and T4XC:


OK, you asked for it.


>Have fellows tried the kind that can be built into the base of the D104?
>Results?


I've used an un-amplified UG8/D104 on a TR7 with excellent audio
reports. The only mic I've used on the T4XC is a Sure 444. Comparison
of the Sure and the D104 on the TR7 with a local resulted in the
opinion that the 444 has a more natural, mellow audio and would be more
suitable for 'armchair' QSOs. The D104 had a more 'punchy' sound, with
a little more on the high end, and would probably be a better mic for
DXing or contesting.

IMHO, well-designed speech processors are OK for DXing or weak signal
conditions, but most folks find the more natural sound of the
unprocessed audio to be easier on the ears when signals are good. I've
found my T4XC/444 combo to be a pretty good 'pile-up buster' without
any added processing at all.

That preamp that comes built in to the TUG8 stand (note: 'D104' refers
to the head/element only) is an abomination designed for CBers to
create splatter with, and should be destroyed at the earliest
opportunity to reduce the population in the wild. In my opinion.


>Have you fellows tried other types of compressors/processors/amps?  Results?

Not on the T4XC, but I have the Drake 7-line processor connected to my
TR7. What little I've used it, it seems to be pretty good. Note that
'audio' processing will not give as much improvement as 'RF'
processing, but the more expensive add-on processors use some nifty
poodle-faking trickery to give you actual RF processing in the audio
line. Kewl...

>In general, do "listeners at the other end" prefer the sound
of a T4XC and
>D104 with a processor/compressor/amp?


Again, when signals are good, unprocessed audio seemes less fatigueing.
When signals are weak to non-existant, the processor can make the
difference between making the contact and not...

It all depends on what you want to do. I rarely use processing at all,
and don't seem to have any trouble getting people to hear me.



-- 
Jim Shorney      -->.<--Put complaints in this box
jshorney (at) inebraska.com
nu0c (at) amsat.org
Ham Radio NU0C
Lincoln, NE, USA
EN10ps
http://incolor.inetnebr.com/jshorney/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Behalf of "Jim Shorney" 
Submissions:        drakelist{at}www.zerobeat.net
Unsubscribe:        majordomo{at}www.zerobeat.net - unsubscribe drakelist in body
Hopelessly Lost:    majordomo{at}www.zerobeat.net - help in body of message
Zerobeat Web Page:  http://www.zerobeat.net
Brought to you courtesy of TLCHost.net  http://www.tlchost.net/
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---