to QRZ
Latest Awards
Short Takes #32: Do I Really Need that New Radio?
Every 10 or 12 months I get itchy to buy a new radio. Perhaps you know the feeling, as it is common when you are bitten by the ham radio bug. Soon afterwards you have an irrepressible urge to head to the store and spin the dials. Luckily, I have a Ham Radio Outlet near me to give me the chance to test drive the latest from the big three. Plus, other ham friends locally have no problem showing off their Flex, Elecraft or other cool transceivers. It was in this way that my collection of gear has grown to the point where I have duplicates of almost everything -- three operating positions with some extra gear packed into a Go Bag.
Do I really need this stuff? The immediate, gut-level response to that question is “OF COURSE I NEED IT.” After all, that’s a silly question to ask an amateur radio operator. Each of those units plays a special role in the way that I play radio.
But when my wife recently asked me that same question I started to think seriously about her comment. I was in my room doing some re-wiring of the shack and her off-the-cuff comment kept going around in my mind. You know what? I resolved that she could be right. It’s very possible that I do not need to buy that beautiful new transceiver I’ve been thinking about.
What are the reasons behind our desire to buy another radio?
Perhaps you can remember, if you’re an old timer like me, when portable (now “laptop”) computers first became popular. This was 40-45 years ago, when the original Compaq and IBM portables were competing and before Apple had their hot lineup. If you were into computers at that time, you could follow those incredible changes in processing speeds and capabilities and get caught up in the cycle of investing in a new one every year. I did that for decades with my computers, because the innovations wouldn’t slow down. There was always something new -- always something coming down the pike that was worth paying for and making it worthwhile to update.
Ham radios could be like that, but the key point is that they are not. Sure, there are times when some new feature is critical for the operation of our amateur station. When SSB came out hot and heavy, or when FT-8 or SDRs were introduced. Those were times that required another investment to maximize the joy in your hobby. As discussed in earlier articles here, that innovation has slowed. You can still find it out there, but you’d have to invest in smaller, riskier companies than products offered by the major players. Some friends of mine keep those innovation fires burning; their shacks are always fun to visit, with new QRP or off-shore radios from smaller vendors with new features and capabilities that we just don’t get from the big guys.
Recently, I bounced this comment off of a well-known contact of mine, Mr. Rob Sherwood of Sherwood Engineering in Denver, Colorado (NC0B). Many of you already know Rob for his lab testing recommendations on receiver performance as well as other innovations he believes are essential for the future of amateur radio. He’s been a ham since 1961, and Sherwood Engineering has tested every radio in the market since 1974. [There's a photo below of an unbelieveable equipment stack that Rob has available to test radios -- and a killer antenna farm to boot.]
I was sure surprised when Rob said that he agreed with my wife.
Is the Radio Really All that Important to Your Success?
“Dave, if you’re doing primarily SSB or FT8, you probably don’t need to invest in a new radio,” said Rob, who then gave me that always-needed reminder that my radio isn’t at the front end of the list of things I need to get out. “First, there’s location, and you’re doing fine in one of the higher elevations in the Phoenix valley. Secondly, there’s your antenna, and you’ve already told me that you’re restricted there. Next, your skill level as an operator comes into play. Finally, what model of radio you are using.” So, what's with all that urgency I have been feeling to update my core radio?
As Rob went further to describe reasons behind buying a new radio, I agreed with him that much of what one needs to think about lies in the user interface. We all know how there are ICOM and Yaesu loyalists, people who will only consider the latest offering from whichever company has earned their favor. While this is sometimes due to customer service or a friend’s recommendation, when you examine the core of that loyalty it often comes down to user interface. “There’s something I just like about the feel of the Yaesu radios,” someone might tell me, or “I just love the way that ICOM has simplified the menus,” or “I like my radio as a black box, and all my interface with the radio should be from my computer.”
Regardless of whether it’s a rig full of knobs and meters or a black box, “User interface may be the key determining factor for you. Just remember that software runs all radios on the market now, and I’d go so far as to say that they are all SDRs,” Rob Sherwood told me.
What’s Important to You?
in my discussion with Rob, a couple of key points came out that may impact how much a new radio could impact your station in the event that you decided to put out that investment.
"Operator fatigue is another aspect to consider, especially if you are pushing hard as a contester. Your fatigue will be made much worse by poor receive audio, and also by poor AGC performance. And, if you are located in an urban location, both NB and NR functions will be very important for you. There you might decide to buy a new transceiver mainly because you've found a radio that improves your noise mitigation," said NC0B. "Each vendor has found a niche that works for them. For example, Flex may be best for remote operation, but if looking for the super clean transmit and great NR and NB, than Apache has something for you to consider. The newer ICOM radios with barefoot digital pre-distortion (DPD) output, along with the ICOM amp or a tube-type linear, can have a big IMD improvement. But unfortunately, there's going to have to be a 3rd party amp hack to make this a broader appeal." Personally, I'd wait for a company like KM3KM Electronics to come up with that, as they tend to be ahead of the curve.
As you know, there are a lot of flavors when it comes to how we use our radios. For Rob, and for many hams besides him, receiver performance is the most critical element. For another person, he or she may care far less about a few dB difference in receive performance and may care nothing about a band scope or waterfall. Their entire operation might take place on their computer, so the most important element of their shack is the software program they’ve chosen to run and log their station. The point is, you know what is important; when making your investments in radio equipment, you can focus on those elements to see just what that $3000 or $4000 is going to buy you.
Doing that analysis recently, I sense that I’d get a lot of enjoyment out of an upgrade to a new and exotic radio from my favorite manufacturer, but that enjoyment would be only superficial. I could simply get on the air and hunt POTA or ragchew with my current radio and there would very little actual difference in my success. Is that deflating? Yes, somewhat . . . but I'd also have an extra $4K in my wallet at the end of the day.
73 for now,
Dave, W7DGJ
PS - Please check out the forum discussion attached. I've posted a list there of the top 25 transceivers on the new and used ham radio market from Rob at Sherwood Engineering. It's interesting . . . radio prices run from $1000 to $12000 and of course used equipment is much less.