Date   

Re: ic9700?

Algenon M0JIO
 

Hi 

You’ve got me worried now. I was hoping to get into 23cm as a newcomer by using my existing IC-7100 and a bought transverter from SG Labs to get me on the air. I have been studying the effects of ALC overrun to ensure I keep any spurious emissions to a minimum and I have also done the path loss calcs because I want to learn and do this hobby properly. 

73

Alan. 
M0JIO

On Tue, 13 Apr 2021, at 18:51, Paul G8AQA via groups.io wrote:
Oh! Just like BT with ADSL.

We should be setting an example about pollution. How can we complain to others when we are guilty of the same offence?

People around Japan are complaining about drinking quality water being released into the Pacific.  Idiots are complaining about 5G.  People don't get spectrum pollution.

Paul G8AQA

On 13/04/2021 18:24, ian hope (2E0IJH) wrote:
Yep how dare you critise or point blank refuse to accept they have a problem, even when they wiping out half the amateurs in the area, which is what happened locally when someone used one on a local high point.
 
Ian
M5IJH
 
 
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 6:20 PM
From: "Reg Woolley via groups.io" <g8vhi@...>
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
I pointed them to look at last years convention talks. I think half the problem is they don't understand and don't want to be educated.  If you try and educate them how dare you!
 
Reg g8vhi 
 
 
 
Sent from my Galaxy
 
 
-------- Original message --------
From: "Steve G4HTZ via groups.io" <essexsteve@...>
Date: 13/04/2021 18:09 (GMT+00:00)
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
 
Unfortunately the days of when operators understood or cared 2 hoots about phase noise , over driving linear s etc etc are long gone ....if some one has got a 9700 , IC910, FT991 etc etc they are not going to stop using it or sell it and buy a transverter and decent HF radio ....whatever that might be ...lol just cos Reg or anyone else says there signal is crap 
--
Steve G4HTZ 
JO01JN60
Great Wakering, Essex 
24ghz 1.8w 80cm dish 

also known to be active occasionally on 70cms DATV 



Virus-free. www.avg.com


Regards,

Alan. 


Re: ic9700?

Paul G4KZY
 

Hi Alwyn,

I'd like to keep this positive, so please don't take offence at what I say or think I'm trying to criticise.  I would like to hear people's views for a reasonable alternative to the 9700 in various applications.  Ben asked if the 9700 would make a good replacement for his FT-817 as a microwave transverter driver and lots of people said "No!" for various reasons, but few suggested a good alternative.  Whilst far from perfect, I think a 9700 would be an improvement over an 817 in nearly every aspect.  Maybe I’m wrong, in which case perhaps others can suggest a better option?

Your views (Alwyn) are rightly considered authoritative, which means people will listen much more to what you are saying than what the likes of me are saying.

It is interesting that you think the Rx performance of the 9700 is its greatest weakness, and if I remember rightly, you measured (or perhaps reviewed) the Tx performance of the 9700 a couple of years ago and mentioned that on 2m it (just about) meets the RSGB VHF contest transmit composite noise specs for small stations.  Most complaints on this thread are about the Tx performance – principally on 2m I think?


There are some whose definition of "serious contesting" involves 4 or more antennas and one or more kW amps.  Clearly a 9700 is not appropriate for driving that lot.  However, I think that many folks use a 9700 it for what they consider serious contesting, perhaps in the AR sections or low power sections of RSGB contests.  The 9700 is, IMHO, a good option for this, and they are used by a number of well-regarded contesters.  After all, for a 100W power output, the "serious" alternative might involve an HF rig, a transverter (hopefully not from Ukraine) and a linear amplifier (hopefully not an MML100).  The scope for "inexpert" operators getting a bad signal out of that combination is far greater than the scope for overdriving a 9700.  So, it would be good to hear about others suggestions for a simple mobile / portable setup for an AR contest entry which would be an improvement on the 9700.

Similarly, I'd be interested if you could elaborate on what you meant when you said "its greatest weakness is the poor A/D accuracy on receive which makes it not much use when a band is busy."  Apart from a high quality HF rig and transverter, is there a better alternative?  The main problems I had in last week's UKAC were related to the S9+10dB intermods from the next-door station and AFAIK the best receiver in the world can't do much about that.  Again, is it that you need to put 3 or 4 boxes together to get an improvement, and if you do that how much improvement can you expect?  In other words, how busy do the bands have to be and how useless does the 9700 become under those conditions?  In fairness, I think your talk last year was very illuminating on this particular topic.

Going back to Ben's question, what would anybody suggest to replace his FT-817 as a driver for microwave transverters with IFs of 144MHz and 432MHz, as is an improvement over a 9700?

 

In closing I want to observe that your talk at the Convention last year has been widely praised, and I for one found it both fascinating and educational.  It made me think of a number of different aspects of my station which I hadn’t thought of before and it serves me as a useful reference for performance benchmarks,  Thank you for your work, and let’s hope that the likes of ICOM and Yaesu are listening.

 

Best wishes,

 

Paul G4KZY


Re: UK Microwave Group Technical Talk - Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS - Wednesday 14th April at 20:00

John Quarmby
 

Hi Matthias,

The time is BST, so it is 1900 GMT/UTC.

73

John G3XDY

On 13/04/2021 16:20, DD1US wrote:

Hello John,

 

thanks for the reminder.

 

Is the time GMT/UTC ?

 

Regards

 

Matthias

 

www.dd1us.de

 

 

Von: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> Im Auftrag von John Quarmby via groups.io
Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. April 2021 18:08
An: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Betreff: [UKMicrowaves] UK Microwave Group Technical Talk - Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS - Wednesday 14th April at 20:00

 

A reminder that the next UK Microwave Group Technical talk will take place tomorrow, 14th April, at 20:00.

Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS

The talk can be viewed on the BATC streamer at this URL: http://batc.org.uk/live/ukmicrowave

73

John G3XDY
Secretary UKuG

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com


Re: UK Microwave Group Technical Talk - Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS - Wednesday 14th April at 20:00

DD1US
 

Hi Neil,

 

thanks and regards

 

Matthias

 

www.dd1us.de

 

 

Von: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> Im Auftrag von G4LDR via groups.io
Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. April 2021 20:49
An: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Betreff: Re: [UKMicrowaves] UK Microwave Group Technical Talk - Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS - Wednesday 14th April at 20:00

 

Please note, that the time is 20:00 British Summer Time (BST) i.e.19:00 UTC(GMT).

Neil G4LDR


Re: UK Microwave Group Technical Talk - Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS - Wednesday 14th April at 20:00

G4LDR
 

Please note, that the time is 20:00 British Summer Time (BST) i.e.19:00 UTC(GMT).

Neil G4LDR


Re: ic9700?

alwyn.seeds1
 

Dear All,

Just to say that since my RSGB Convention talk, where I showed the radiated noise (amplitude noise rather than phase noise is the big problem with the 9700) performance of a few different systems, I’ve had quite a few people asking me for advice on the bands and many are keen to improve their signals.

Of course, there will always be some antisocial operators, but I do think they are in the minority.

I use a remote controlled 9700, which I find useful, but would never use it with a PA or for serious contesting.

For me its greatest weakness is the poor A/D accuracy on receive which makes it not much use when a band is busy.

For microwave IF use, I would think the drift would be an issue, unless it is modified to lock the VHF XO.

Regards,

Alwyn G8DOH

_____________________________________________________

Alwyn Seeds, Director
SynOptika Ltd.,
114 Beaufort Street,
London,
SW3 6BU,
England.


SynOptika Ltd., Registered in England and Wales: No. 04606737
Registered Office: 114 Beaufort Street, London, SW3 6BU, United Kingdom.
_____________________________________________________


Re: ic9700?

Paul G8AQA
 

Oh! Just like BT with ADSL.

We should be setting an example about pollution. How can we complain to others when we are guilty of the same offence?

People around Japan are complaining about drinking quality water being released into the Pacific.  Idiots are complaining about 5G.  People don't get spectrum pollution.

Paul G8AQA

On 13/04/2021 18:24, ian hope (2E0IJH) wrote:
Yep how dare you critise or point blank refuse to accept they have a problem, even when they wiping out half the amateurs in the area, which is what happened locally when someone used one on a local high point.
 
Ian
M5IJH
 
 
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 6:20 PM
From: "Reg Woolley via groups.io" <g8vhi@...>
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
I pointed them to look at last years convention talks. I think half the problem is they don't understand and don't want to be educated.  If you try and educate them how dare you!
 
Reg g8vhi 
 
 
 
Sent from my Galaxy
 
 
-------- Original message --------
From: "Steve G4HTZ via groups.io" <essexsteve@...>
Date: 13/04/2021 18:09 (GMT+00:00)
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
 
Unfortunately the days of when operators understood or cared 2 hoots about phase noise , over driving linear s etc etc are long gone ....if some one has got a 9700 , IC910, FT991 etc etc they are not going to stop using it or sell it and buy a transverter and decent HF radio ....whatever that might be ...lol just cos Reg or anyone else says there signal is crap 
--
Steve G4HTZ 
JO01JN60
Great Wakering, Essex 
24ghz 1.8w 80cm dish 

also known to be active occasionally on 70cms DATV 


Virus-free. www.avg.com


Re: ic9700?

ian hope (2E0IJH)
 

Yep how dare you critise or point blank refuse to accept they have a problem, even when they wiping out half the amateurs in the area, which is what happened locally when someone used one on a local high point.
 
Ian
M5IJH

 
 
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 6:20 PM
From: "Reg Woolley via groups.io" <g8vhi@...>
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
I pointed them to look at last years convention talks. I think half the problem is they don't understand and don't want to be educated.  If you try and educate them how dare you!
 
Reg g8vhi 
 
 
 
Sent from my Galaxy
 
 
-------- Original message --------
From: "Steve G4HTZ via groups.io" <essexsteve@...>
Date: 13/04/2021 18:09 (GMT+00:00)
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
 
Unfortunately the days of when operators understood or cared 2 hoots about phase noise , over driving linear s etc etc are long gone ....if some one has got a 9700 , IC910, FT991 etc etc they are not going to stop using it or sell it and buy a transverter and decent HF radio ....whatever that might be ...lol just cos Reg or anyone else says there signal is crap 
--
Steve G4HTZ 
JO01JN60
Great Wakering, Essex 
24ghz 1.8w 80cm dish 

also known to be active occasionally on 70cms DATV 


Re: ic9700?

Reg Woolley
 

I pointed them to look at last years convention talks. I think half the problem is they don't understand and don't want to be educated.  If you try and educate them how dare you!

Reg g8vhi 



Sent from my Galaxy


-------- Original message --------
From: "Steve G4HTZ via groups.io" <essexsteve@...>
Date: 13/04/2021 18:09 (GMT+00:00)
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?

Unfortunately the days of when operators understood or cared 2 hoots about phase noise , over driving linear s etc etc are long gone ....if some one has got a 9700 , IC910, FT991 etc etc they are not going to stop using it or sell it and buy a transverter and decent HF radio ....whatever that might be ...lol just cos Reg or anyone else says there signal is crap 
--
Steve G4HTZ 
JO01JN60
Great Wakering, Essex 
24ghz 1.8w 80cm dish 

also known to be active occasionally on 70cms DATV 


Re: ic9700?

Steve G4HTZ
 

Unfortunately the days of when operators understood or cared 2 hoots about phase noise , over driving linear s etc etc are long gone ....if some one has got a 9700 , IC910, FT991 etc etc they are not going to stop using it or sell it and buy a transverter and decent HF radio ....whatever that might be ...lol just cos Reg or anyone else says there signal is crap 
--
Steve G4HTZ 
JO01JN60
Great Wakering, Essex 
24ghz 1.8w 80cm dish 

also known to be active occasionally on 70cms DATV 


Re: UK Microwave Group Technical Talk - Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS - Wednesday 14th April at 20:00

DD1US
 

Hello John,

 

thanks for the reminder.

 

Is the time GMT/UTC ?

 

Regards

 

Matthias

 

www.dd1us.de

 

 

Von: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> Im Auftrag von John Quarmby via groups.io
Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. April 2021 18:08
An: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Betreff: [UKMicrowaves] UK Microwave Group Technical Talk - Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS - Wednesday 14th April at 20:00

 

A reminder that the next UK Microwave Group Technical talk will take place tomorrow, 14th April, at 20:00.

Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS

The talk can be viewed on the BATC streamer at this URL: http://batc.org.uk/live/ukmicrowave

73

John G3XDY
Secretary UKuG

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com


UK Microwave Group Technical Talk - Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS - Wednesday 14th April at 20:00

John Quarmby
 

A reminder that the next UK Microwave Group Technical talk will take place tomorrow, 14th April, at 20:00.

Backyard Hydrogen Line Astronomy - by Brian Coleman G4NNS

The talk can be viewed on the BATC streamer at this URL: http://batc.org.uk/live/ukmicrowave

73

John G3XDY
Secretary UKuG


Virus-free. www.avast.com


Re: ic9700?

Reg Woolley
 

I agree 100% I tried explaining this to a few on a Facebook forum. It was like trying to plat fog

Reg G8VHI 



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S10e - Powered by Three


-------- Original message --------
From: "ian hope (2E0IJH)" <ian@...>
Date: 13/04/2021 16:14 (GMT+00:00)
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?

A Ic9700 is like a Ft991, You won't stop people using them as the average user doesn't understand the issue's and the suppliers don't make people aware of them.
 
Ian
M5IJH
 
 
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 4:10 PM
From: "SAM JEWELL via groups.io" <jewell@...>
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
As you say, Conrad, a microwave reflector and I think Ben's comments, originally, were mainly directed at something to replace the FT817 as a microwave IF.
I think my views on the IC9700 are pretty much in line with what others have observed, when it is used as contest or well located portable rig, or indeed from home in the heart of a well occupied area (amateur radio) in Europe.
Inevitably there will be Ic9700 users, from less well sited home locations,  and these may well give problems on 2m or 70cm to those within a reasonable tropo range of other band users. But I don't think these users are going to give up using their IC9700 or other rigs that easily.  If they do you may well achieve the desire for a quiet band. Just not in way you would wish!
 
73 de Sam
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
On 13 Apr 2021, at 14:41, Conrad, PA5Y <g0ruz@...> wrote:
 

I have no desire to take you to task Sam, not that you'd care if I did :-)
 
Your comments are correct and in context. 
 
I just report what I measured with the FSWP and as you know I tried an IC9700 on RX during a a big EU contest on 144 and 432 and rapidly realised it's limitations. I don't live on a hill and this was with a single 12 on 2m and a 26 ele on 432MHz. It got completely clobbered sadly. I also have QRO and had misgivings about TX but you have covered that. On 23cms it was a step up but I now have a Kuhne transverter and the K3S which is very fine indeed. I was keen on buying one at the time for the convenience factor.
 
It is better than my TS2000X on receive but on TX the TS2000 is significantly better at wider separations. I agree that on uwave bands the transverters with synth LOs PN will dominate, and of course antenna beamwidths make this less of a problem. 
 
If I was a uwave only operator I would be much less concerned. This is after all a uwave reflector so apologies if my VHF contester head got the better of me.
 
73
 
Conrad PA5Y
 
 

From: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> on behalf of SAM JEWELL via groups.io <jewell@...>
Sent: 13 April 2021 14:38
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
 

As a reviewer of the IC9700 in PW, when it first came out, I did a comprehensive set of measurements in discussion with a number of other, mainly international, equipment reviewers.
I think it qualifies me to have an informed opinion, even if you disagree with it.
I also have, and occasionally use, one of these rigs myself. I am also known for previously producing a range of transverters from 6m to 23cm, but used with an Elecraft K3.
I maintain a keen interest in VHF radio performance.
 
I am concerned at some of the comments I read on here.
 
The IC9700 is not a bad rig. Its transmit composite noise is not the best. It can be bettered by many HF rigs and transverters. It is a lot better than many of the earlier (and some current) shack in a box (multiband) rigs, both on transmit composite noise and on receiver dynamic range. A few (very few) of the earlier single band 144MHz transceivers are good on receive and transmit, but can be pretty good when fitted with a Mutek front end board.  Few of the 432 and 1296MHz single band rigs have an acceptable  performance by modern standards.
 
An IC9700 is not a good choice for those who want to operate contests on one of its 'native' bands, particularly from a high hill, using a high gain antenna and with a 'linear amplifier.  It is worth noting that In common with many of this generation of rig, turning down the power output, for QRP operation, results in (noticeably)much poorer transmit composite noise than when running at full power.  A masthead preamplifier is likely to result in noticeably worse receiver performance in the presence of strong inband and out of band signals.
 
Used as an IF rig with some of the current low(ish) cost transverters, it is likely that performance will be limited by the transverter anyway. Transverter LO phase noise performance has deteriorated in recent years, mainly as a result of incorporating a synthesiser to improve frequency stability for FT8 and some other digital modes.
 
Given the above observations I would say that if you want the convenience of a modern multiband rig, that will be used with a microwave band transverter, then it is a reasonable choice. It is certainly no worse than that popular transverter driver rig, the FT817 and 818, but it does have some very convenient facilities like the frequency spectrum display and ability to record sound to the SD card. So does the new IC705, but I have not had a chance to play with or measure the performance of one.
 
Some of the previous generation rigs are beginning to show their age, both in terms of performance and reliability. Many spare parts are becoming more difficult to find. Do note that when you buy an older rig, you are buying a liability!
 
The almost unforgivable error, perpetrated by ICOM in the IC9700, of having a single SEND output, is neatly overcome with The DX Shop PTT multiplier, when (if) you want to connect a PA or drive a selection of transverters.
 
I'm sure a few subscribers to this reflector will take me to task for not condemning the IC9700, for their own reasons, but it is important to regard the IC9700 in the context of what else you might choose to buy and use.
 
73 de Sam, G4DDK
 
 
 
 
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#62049) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [g8vhi@...]

_._ ,_._,_


Re: ic9700?

ian hope (2E0IJH)
 

A Ic9700 is like a Ft991, You won't stop people using them as the average user doesn't understand the issue's and the suppliers don't make people aware of them.
 
Ian
M5IJH

 
 
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 4:10 PM
From: "SAM JEWELL via groups.io" <jewell@...>
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
As you say, Conrad, a microwave reflector and I think Ben's comments, originally, were mainly directed at something to replace the FT817 as a microwave IF.
I think my views on the IC9700 are pretty much in line with what others have observed, when it is used as contest or well located portable rig, or indeed from home in the heart of a well occupied area (amateur radio) in Europe.
Inevitably there will be Ic9700 users, from less well sited home locations,  and these may well give problems on 2m or 70cm to those within a reasonable tropo range of other band users. But I don't think these users are going to give up using their IC9700 or other rigs that easily.  If they do you may well achieve the desire for a quiet band. Just not in way you would wish!
 
73 de Sam
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
On 13 Apr 2021, at 14:41, Conrad, PA5Y <g0ruz@...> wrote:
 

I have no desire to take you to task Sam, not that you'd care if I did :-)
 
Your comments are correct and in context. 
 
I just report what I measured with the FSWP and as you know I tried an IC9700 on RX during a a big EU contest on 144 and 432 and rapidly realised it's limitations. I don't live on a hill and this was with a single 12 on 2m and a 26 ele on 432MHz. It got completely clobbered sadly. I also have QRO and had misgivings about TX but you have covered that. On 23cms it was a step up but I now have a Kuhne transverter and the K3S which is very fine indeed. I was keen on buying one at the time for the convenience factor.
 
It is better than my TS2000X on receive but on TX the TS2000 is significantly better at wider separations. I agree that on uwave bands the transverters with synth LOs PN will dominate, and of course antenna beamwidths make this less of a problem. 
 
If I was a uwave only operator I would be much less concerned. This is after all a uwave reflector so apologies if my VHF contester head got the better of me.
 
73
 
Conrad PA5Y
 
 

From: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> on behalf of SAM JEWELL via groups.io <jewell@...>
Sent: 13 April 2021 14:38
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
 

As a reviewer of the IC9700 in PW, when it first came out, I did a comprehensive set of measurements in discussion with a number of other, mainly international, equipment reviewers.
I think it qualifies me to have an informed opinion, even if you disagree with it.
I also have, and occasionally use, one of these rigs myself. I am also known for previously producing a range of transverters from 6m to 23cm, but used with an Elecraft K3.
I maintain a keen interest in VHF radio performance.
 
I am concerned at some of the comments I read on here.
 
The IC9700 is not a bad rig. Its transmit composite noise is not the best. It can be bettered by many HF rigs and transverters. It is a lot better than many of the earlier (and some current) shack in a box (multiband) rigs, both on transmit composite noise and on receiver dynamic range. A few (very few) of the earlier single band 144MHz transceivers are good on receive and transmit, but can be pretty good when fitted with a Mutek front end board.  Few of the 432 and 1296MHz single band rigs have an acceptable  performance by modern standards.
 
An IC9700 is not a good choice for those who want to operate contests on one of its 'native' bands, particularly from a high hill, using a high gain antenna and with a 'linear amplifier.  It is worth noting that In common with many of this generation of rig, turning down the power output, for QRP operation, results in (noticeably)much poorer transmit composite noise than when running at full power.  A masthead preamplifier is likely to result in noticeably worse receiver performance in the presence of strong inband and out of band signals.
 
Used as an IF rig with some of the current low(ish) cost transverters, it is likely that performance will be limited by the transverter anyway. Transverter LO phase noise performance has deteriorated in recent years, mainly as a result of incorporating a synthesiser to improve frequency stability for FT8 and some other digital modes.
 
Given the above observations I would say that if you want the convenience of a modern multiband rig, that will be used with a microwave band transverter, then it is a reasonable choice. It is certainly no worse than that popular transverter driver rig, the FT817 and 818, but it does have some very convenient facilities like the frequency spectrum display and ability to record sound to the SD card. So does the new IC705, but I have not had a chance to play with or measure the performance of one.
 
Some of the previous generation rigs are beginning to show their age, both in terms of performance and reliability. Many spare parts are becoming more difficult to find. Do note that when you buy an older rig, you are buying a liability!
 
The almost unforgivable error, perpetrated by ICOM in the IC9700, of having a single SEND output, is neatly overcome with The DX Shop PTT multiplier, when (if) you want to connect a PA or drive a selection of transverters.
 
I'm sure a few subscribers to this reflector will take me to task for not condemning the IC9700, for their own reasons, but it is important to regard the IC9700 in the context of what else you might choose to buy and use.
 
73 de Sam, G4DDK
 
 
 
 


Re: ic9700?

SAM JEWELL
 

As you say, Conrad, a microwave reflector and I think Ben's comments, originally, were mainly directed at something to replace the FT817 as a microwave IF.
I think my views on the IC9700 are pretty much in line with what others have observed, when it is used as contest or well located portable rig, or indeed from home in the heart of a well occupied area (amateur radio) in Europe.
Inevitably there will be Ic9700 users, from less well sited home locations,  and these may well give problems on 2m or 70cm to those within a reasonable tropo range of other band users. But I don't think these users are going to give up using their IC9700 or other rigs that easily.  If they do you may well achieve the desire for a quiet band. Just not in way you would wish!

73 de Sam







On 13 Apr 2021, at 14:41, Conrad, PA5Y <g0ruz@...> wrote:


I have no desire to take you to task Sam, not that you'd care if I did :-)

Your comments are correct and in context. 

I just report what I measured with the FSWP and as you know I tried an IC9700 on RX during a a big EU contest on 144 and 432 and rapidly realised it's limitations. I don't live on a hill and this was with a single 12 on 2m and a 26 ele on 432MHz. It got completely clobbered sadly. I also have QRO and had misgivings about TX but you have covered that. On 23cms it was a step up but I now have a Kuhne transverter and the K3S which is very fine indeed. I was keen on buying one at the time for the convenience factor.

It is better than my TS2000X on receive but on TX the TS2000 is significantly better at wider separations. I agree that on uwave bands the transverters with synth LOs PN will dominate, and of course antenna beamwidths make this less of a problem. 

If I was a uwave only operator I would be much less concerned. This is after all a uwave reflector so apologies if my VHF contester head got the better of me.

73

Conrad PA5Y



From: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> on behalf of SAM JEWELL via groups.io <jewell@...>
Sent: 13 April 2021 14:38
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
 

As a reviewer of the IC9700 in PW, when it first came out, I did a comprehensive set of measurements in discussion with a number of other, mainly international, equipment reviewers.
I think it qualifies me to have an informed opinion, even if you disagree with it.
I also have, and occasionally use, one of these rigs myself. I am also known for previously producing a range of transverters from 6m to 23cm, but used with an Elecraft K3.
I maintain a keen interest in VHF radio performance.

I am concerned at some of the comments I read on here.

The IC9700 is not a bad rig. Its transmit composite noise is not the best. It can be bettered by many HF rigs and transverters. It is a lot better than many of the earlier (and some current) shack in a box (multiband) rigs, both on transmit composite noise and on receiver dynamic range. A few (very few) of the earlier single band 144MHz transceivers are good on receive and transmit, but can be pretty good when fitted with a Mutek front end board.  Few of the 432 and 1296MHz single band rigs have an acceptable  performance by modern standards.

An IC9700 is not a good choice for those who want to operate contests on one of its 'native' bands, particularly from a high hill, using a high gain antenna and with a 'linear amplifier.  It is worth noting that In common with many of this generation of rig, turning down the power output, for QRP operation, results in (noticeably)much poorer transmit composite noise than when running at full power.  A masthead preamplifier is likely to result in noticeably worse receiver performance in the presence of strong inband and out of band signals.

Used as an IF rig with some of the current low(ish) cost transverters, it is likely that performance will be limited by the transverter anyway. Transverter LO phase noise performance has deteriorated in recent years, mainly as a result of incorporating a synthesiser to improve frequency stability for FT8 and some other digital modes.

Given the above observations I would say that if you want the convenience of a modern multiband rig, that will be used with a microwave band transverter, then it is a reasonable choice. It is certainly no worse than that popular transverter driver rig, the FT817 and 818, but it does have some very convenient facilities like the frequency spectrum display and ability to record sound to the SD card. So does the new IC705, but I have not had a chance to play with or measure the performance of one.

Some of the previous generation rigs are beginning to show their age, both in terms of performance and reliability. Many spare parts are becoming more difficult to find. Do note that when you buy an older rig, you are buying a liability!

The almost unforgivable error, perpetrated by ICOM in the IC9700, of having a single SEND output, is neatly overcome with The DX Shop PTT multiplier, when (if) you want to connect a PA or drive a selection of transverters.

I'm sure a few subscribers to this reflector will take me to task for not condemning the IC9700, for their own reasons, but it is important to regard the IC9700 in the context of what else you might choose to buy and use.

73 de Sam, G4DDK



Re: ic9700?

militaryoperator
 

Thanks for the comments Paul. 

Lots to think about, hi. 

Ben. 



Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?

Hi Ben,

I finally gave in to the temptation and bought a 9700 two weeks ago.  I have done a ton of research into the IC-9700 and two years ago, instead of a 9700 I bought an FT-736R due to the bad press the 9700 was getting.  My main motivation for the 9700 was 23cm and my 736 has that band and I've had a lot of fun with it at 1/3 of the cost of the 9700.

The 9700 is a lovely rig to operate.  I've now done 3 contests with it.  Actually I did two contests = 2m UKAC last Tuesday and 23cm UKuG on Sunday, and my son did one = 2m FMAC last week (M7JPH/P).  Sorry I missed you on 23cm on Sunday. On 2m we got excellent results even though the QRM was frightening.  The band scope is a fantastic tool for finding activity on the higher bands too.  

My view is that if you run at full power the 9700 is the cleanest dedicated VHF rig available.  And the Rx performance is about as good as you are going to get from a dedicated VHF rig.  Seriously better than the likes of FT991 or IC910 for example, both of which are in widespread use today.  But not approaching the Rx or Tx performance of a "proper" contest station like a K3 + Kuhne.

At full power the 9700 all but complies with the RSGB VHF emissions guidelines for "small" stations.  The RSGB emissions guidelines, while being a great spec to aspire to, are broken by 90+ percent of contest entrants.  It is said that these guidelines make up the rules for VHF and up contests but if that was true almost everybody would be disqualified.

At reduced power the 9700 suffers from excessive broadband AM noise, caused by the method used internally to control the power.  Conrad PA5Y has done several measurements on this and you can find the data on the IC-9700 groups.io forum.  Personally, I would not run a 9700 into a linear of any kind on 2m or 70cm bearing in mind that you get 100 watts / 75 watts barefoot and after the power is reduced to a level suitable for a linear the composite broadband noise would be really quite poor when running at near the legal limit.

If you are thinking of using the 9700 as a transverter driver for microwaves then you obviously have the broadband noise issue cos you won't be running it at high power.  However, you have to wonder if this is such a big deal at microwaves.  Many are using homebrew kit with very noisy DDS LOs.  Bearing in mind that most microwave stuff is quite low power, and the antennas are very directional, I wouldn't be too concerned.  Also bear in mind that if you are generating a baseband signal at HF, transverting to 2m or 70cm and then transverting again to microwaves the scope for spurii etc. multiplies exponentially.

So, for me, I think the 9700 would be quite good for what you are looking for.  If you are mainly thinking of a transverter driver for 2.3GHz and above, it would probably be a good solution.  You might even find a way to internally reduce power (using a pot, for example) to keep the AM noise down to a low level.

Hope that helps,

73,

Paul G4KZY


Re: ic9700?

 

So has anyone tested Phase Noise on the FT726 or FT736 to put all of this into perspective? 

Dave
VE7HR 


On Apr 13, 2021, at 6:13 AM, David Robinson <g4fre@...> wrote:

The FT726R used in the June 1988 ZB2IQ expedition is still working well. The only repair has been the replacement of the 12v psu pass transistor where someone had shorted the output!

Dave
G4FRE

"The control CPU has a tendency to let go and they have not been available from Yaesu for a number of years now.  They're an OK design for the age but as it will up to 37 years old don't pay silly money for one."


Re: ic9700?

Conrad, PA5Y
 

I have no desire to take you to task Sam, not that you'd care if I did :-)

Your comments are correct and in context. 

I just report what I measured with the FSWP and as you know I tried an IC9700 on RX during a a big EU contest on 144 and 432 and rapidly realised it's limitations. I don't live on a hill and this was with a single 12 on 2m and a 26 ele on 432MHz. It got completely clobbered sadly. I also have QRO and had misgivings about TX but you have covered that. On 23cms it was a step up but I now have a Kuhne transverter and the K3S which is very fine indeed. I was keen on buying one at the time for the convenience factor.

It is better than my TS2000X on receive but on TX the TS2000 is significantly better at wider separations. I agree that on uwave bands the transverters with synth LOs PN will dominate, and of course antenna beamwidths make this less of a problem. 

If I was a uwave only operator I would be much less concerned. This is after all a uwave reflector so apologies if my VHF contester head got the better of me.

73

Conrad PA5Y



From: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io> on behalf of SAM JEWELL via groups.io <jewell@...>
Sent: 13 April 2021 14:38
To: UKMicrowaves@groups.io <UKMicrowaves@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [UKMicrowaves] ic9700?
 

As a reviewer of the IC9700 in PW, when it first came out, I did a comprehensive set of measurements in discussion with a number of other, mainly international, equipment reviewers.
I think it qualifies me to have an informed opinion, even if you disagree with it.
I also have, and occasionally use, one of these rigs myself. I am also known for previously producing a range of transverters from 6m to 23cm, but used with an Elecraft K3.
I maintain a keen interest in VHF radio performance.

I am concerned at some of the comments I read on here.

The IC9700 is not a bad rig. Its transmit composite noise is not the best. It can be bettered by many HF rigs and transverters. It is a lot better than many of the earlier (and some current) shack in a box (multiband) rigs, both on transmit composite noise and on receiver dynamic range. A few (very few) of the earlier single band 144MHz transceivers are good on receive and transmit, but can be pretty good when fitted with a Mutek front end board.  Few of the 432 and 1296MHz single band rigs have an acceptable  performance by modern standards.

An IC9700 is not a good choice for those who want to operate contests on one of its 'native' bands, particularly from a high hill, using a high gain antenna and with a 'linear amplifier.  It is worth noting that In common with many of this generation of rig, turning down the power output, for QRP operation, results in (noticeably)much poorer transmit composite noise than when running at full power.  A masthead preamplifier is likely to result in noticeably worse receiver performance in the presence of strong inband and out of band signals.

Used as an IF rig with some of the current low(ish) cost transverters, it is likely that performance will be limited by the transverter anyway. Transverter LO phase noise performance has deteriorated in recent years, mainly as a result of incorporating a synthesiser to improve frequency stability for FT8 and some other digital modes.

Given the above observations I would say that if you want the convenience of a modern multiband rig, that will be used with a microwave band transverter, then it is a reasonable choice. It is certainly no worse than that popular transverter driver rig, the FT817 and 818, but it does have some very convenient facilities like the frequency spectrum display and ability to record sound to the SD card. So does the new IC705, but I have not had a chance to play with or measure the performance of one.

Some of the previous generation rigs are beginning to show their age, both in terms of performance and reliability. Many spare parts are becoming more difficult to find. Do note that when you buy an older rig, you are buying a liability!

The almost unforgivable error, perpetrated by ICOM in the IC9700, of having a single SEND output, is neatly overcome with The DX Shop PTT multiplier, when (if) you want to connect a PA or drive a selection of transverters.

I'm sure a few subscribers to this reflector will take me to task for not condemning the IC9700, for their own reasons, but it is important to regard the IC9700 in the context of what else you might choose to buy and use.

73 de Sam, G4DDK



Re: ic9700?

David Robinson
 

The FT726R used in the June 1988 ZB2IQ expedition is still working well. The only repair has been the replacement of the 12v psu pass transistor where someone had shorted the output!

Dave
G4FRE

"The control CPU has a tendency to let go and they have not been available from Yaesu for a number of years now.  They're an OK design for the age but as it will up to 37 years old don't pay silly money for one."


Re: ic9700?

SAM JEWELL
 


As a reviewer of the IC9700 in PW, when it first came out, I did a comprehensive set of measurements in discussion with a number of other, mainly international, equipment reviewers.
I think it qualifies me to have an informed opinion, even if you disagree with it.
I also have, and occasionally use, one of these rigs myself. I am also known for previously producing a range of transverters from 6m to 23cm, but used with an Elecraft K3.
I maintain a keen interest in VHF radio performance.

I am concerned at some of the comments I read on here.

The IC9700 is not a bad rig. Its transmit composite noise is not the best. It can be bettered by many HF rigs and transverters. It is a lot better than many of the earlier (and some current) shack in a box (multiband) rigs, both on transmit composite noise and on receiver dynamic range. A few (very few) of the earlier single band 144MHz transceivers are good on receive and transmit, but can be pretty good when fitted with a Mutek front end board.  Few of the 432 and 1296MHz single band rigs have an acceptable  performance by modern standards.

An IC9700 is not a good choice for those who want to operate contests on one of its 'native' bands, particularly from a high hill, using a high gain antenna and with a 'linear amplifier.  It is worth noting that In common with many of this generation of rig, turning down the power output, for QRP operation, results in (noticeably)much poorer transmit composite noise than when running at full power.  A masthead preamplifier is likely to result in noticeably worse receiver performance in the presence of strong inband and out of band signals.

Used as an IF rig with some of the current low(ish) cost transverters, it is likely that performance will be limited by the transverter anyway. Transverter LO phase noise performance has deteriorated in recent years, mainly as a result of incorporating a synthesiser to improve frequency stability for FT8 and some other digital modes.

Given the above observations I would say that if you want the convenience of a modern multiband rig, that will be used with a microwave band transverter, then it is a reasonable choice. It is certainly no worse than that popular transverter driver rig, the FT817 and 818, but it does have some very convenient facilities like the frequency spectrum display and ability to record sound to the SD card. So does the new IC705, but I have not had a chance to play with or measure the performance of one.

Some of the previous generation rigs are beginning to show their age, both in terms of performance and reliability. Many spare parts are becoming more difficult to find. Do note that when you buy an older rig, you are buying a liability!

The almost unforgivable error, perpetrated by ICOM in the IC9700, of having a single SEND output, is neatly overcome with The DX Shop PTT multiplier, when (if) you want to connect a PA or drive a selection of transverters.

I'm sure a few subscribers to this reflector will take me to task for not condemning the IC9700, for their own reasons, but it is important to regard the IC9700 in the context of what else you might choose to buy and use.

73 de Sam, G4DDK


3041 - 3060 of 64940