Welcome to the new FlexRadio Community! Please review the new Community Rules and other important new Community information on the Message Board.
If you are having a problem, please check the Help Center for known solutions.
Need technical support from FlexRadio? It's as simple as Creating a HelpDesk ticket.

New ICOM 7300 SDR

13»

Comments

  • Gopro
    Gopro Member
    edited January 2018
    Hi guys,

    it's really amazing and, at the same time amusing, how do you discredit other rigs.
    If the Flex 6000 series is the best in the world (and accordingly to you in the whole galaxy),
     I'm curious, how  than is possible that Flex 6700 are so badly scored against KX3 and Anan-100D in the test on SDR Zone: Flex Radio Signature Series Model 6700 review Part 2 and 3?
    Poor man, Michael Alexander - N8MSA,  was noticeably affected and disappointed with results
    of his tests!
    Obviously, i am not enlightened enough, or i miss something?

    73,
    Bozidar




  • KY6LA_Howard
    KY6LA_Howard La Jolla, CA. Paris and Sablet FranceMember ✭✭✭
    edited February 2018
    @Bozidar Yes you are definitely missing something These are SOFTWARE DEFINED radio. That review is 17 months old and refers to V1.1 software. We will be at V1.5 software this month. Absolutely different radio
  • W9OY
    W9OY Alpha Team Member ✭✭
    edited September 2015
    Speaking of discrediting other rigs:

    Gee Bozidar I thought it was the 7300 that is the first radio to ever use a DUC?  Of course every cellphone in the universe uses one but details details.

    73  W9OY
  • Gopro
    Gopro Member
    edited September 2015
    Howard,

    still no comment on test: Flex6700 vs KX3 and Anan-100D?
    https://sdrzone.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=106:flex-6700-review-part-3...

    I have expect more from you, but i fully  understand you, i was also shocked-
    it's not easy to realise that your dreams come apart...

    73,
    Bozidar






  • KY6LA_Howard
    KY6LA_Howard La Jolla, CA. Paris and Sablet FranceMember ✭✭✭
    edited January 2017
    @Boldizar That report part 3 is 17 months old and is based on version 1.1 software This month we are at version 1.5 software. The radio software has completely changed and the alleged defects in 1.1 have been corrected. The radio performs entirely differently today. I suspect if you get the same comparison of 1.5 versus any of the radios The current flex would totally outperform them. I would refer you to the Sherwood and QST ratings where the Flex is a top rated radio
  • Bill -VA3WTB
    Bill -VA3WTB Member ✭✭✭
    edited December 2016
    The credibility of this review, if we call it that comes into question. He is going on and on about DSP witch most people understand that the Flex is under development in that area. Why so much testing on something not finished? I think I know why but I will let others figure it out, it's clear...
  • KY6LA_Howard
    KY6LA_Howard La Jolla, CA. Paris and Sablet FranceMember ✭✭✭
    edited September 2015
    Bill is correct. The 17 month old review based on 1.1 software is totally irrelevant today. It's like comparing performance of a 1980 car to a 2015 car. Not the same car.
  • W5XZ - dan
    W5XZ - dan Member ✭✭
    edited December 2016
    great assessment, Lee!  73

  • Peter K1PGV
    Peter K1PGV Member ✭✭
    edited June 2020
    Funny set of reviews.

    In part 1 the receive quality is "superb".... In part 3 it "doesn't retrieve as much audio from received signals" as other radios. Clearly, the guy doesn't get paid to review radios for a living, because he'd starve.

    This thread is wandering far afield, but that review raises an interesting point... has anyone done a similar head-to-head competitive analysis? Is there something about how the AGC in the Flex that makes it perform less well than some of its peers? Or is the reviewer way off base?

    Peter
    K1PGV
  • Bill -VA3WTB
    Bill -VA3WTB Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 2018
    I don't know Peter, but there are several here that own or have owned all of the other radios. I'm sure they could tell us. Dave W2OX would know.
  • Barry N1EU
    Barry N1EU Member ✭✭
    edited December 2016
    I think there have been a few head-to-head comparison comments by two hams who owned both Flex 6K and Apache Labs ANAN-100 rigs but those comments were quite a while ago.  Not sure those guys still own both radios.
  • KY6LA_Howard
    KY6LA_Howard La Jolla, CA. Paris and Sablet FranceMember ✭✭✭
    edited January 2017
    We did a shootout last year between the 6700, K3, KX3 and IC-7800 during the CQ SSB contest

    https://community.flexradio.com/flexr...

    https://community.flexradio.com/flexr... You can read the rather humorous conclusions and that was with old software versions albeit a generation beyond the V1.1 quoted in that Part3 report.
  • Bob - W7KWS -
    Bob - W7KWS - Member ✭✭
    edited December 2016
    I would have to think that Flex has their intellectual property position well in hand.

    There may be later priority dates for improvements by many inventors but here is an application from 1997 that seems to read pretty much directly on direct conversion receivers.  Section 0046 is particularly interesting.

    If it isn't already, it won't be long before what is described here is public domain, at least in the U.S.

    I can't find a corresponding, issued patent but the proposed claims in this application seem very narrow while the description appears quite broad.  This leads me to think that the patent attorney felt that he had to weave his way through a lot of prior art to craft claims that he thought would fly.  There are only two proposed independent claims and both of them are a mile long.

    If no patent issued after this, what it describes should be pretty much open to anyone, at least in the U.S.

    I'll admit right now that I'm not planning on reading much more of this.

    http://www.google.com/patents/US20010040930
  • Walt - KZ1F
    Walt - KZ1F Member ✭✭
    edited November 2016
    I'll make a prediction now: Dayton 2016 will feature multiple SDR solutions, of the knob and rocker variety, for a $2,500 +/- price point. I made the trek to HRO today, there is some incredible stuff available. Unfortunately I can't comment more specifically without violating the Flex religious purity laws governing this echo chamber.
  • Tim - W4TME
    Tim - W4TME Administrator, FlexRadio Employee admin
    edited December 2016
    Unfortunately I can't comment more specifically without violating the Flex religious purity laws governing this echo chamber.

    There are no such restrictions.
  • W9OY
    W9OY Alpha Team Member ✭✭
    edited September 2015
    Why is your not commenting unfortunate?
  • Neal_K3NC
    Neal_K3NC Member ✭✭
    edited September 2015
    This whole thread is like Medusa, snakes everywhere! 
  • Peter K1PGV
    Peter K1PGV Member ✭✭
    edited December 2016

    Just to close the loop on this, the above cited patent application (Pub Number US 2001-0040930 A1, rights were assigned to Rockwell) was rejected by the USPTO and after some back-and-forth with the Examiner (including amendments to the claims) it was ultimately rejected and abandoned.

    The Office Action letters don't appear online (this was back in 2000-2002), so we don't know WHY it was rejected... just that it was.

    Peter
    K1PGV

  • Ken - NM9P
    Ken - NM9P Member ✭✭
    edited December 2016
    Well said, Lee.
    These are indeed exciting times for radio development.
    I was not around for the AM/SSB transition (but followed closely upon it) and I am sure that there was a lot of contention in the ranks as they argued "True voice" vs. "Donald Duck" and BFO vs. Product Detectors.  The Phasing vs. Filtering debates were probably interesting to listen to in the early days of SSB. 

    Now we have the same debates raging in the analog vs. SDR and Hybrid-SDR and Pseudo-SDR arena.  As long as we all remember that all of this is a means to the end of enjoying conversing with one another, it can be an enjoyable process as we watch the world of electronic communications change yet again.
  • Bob - W7KWS -
    Bob - W7KWS - Member ✭✭
    edited December 2016
    Thanks for the follow on research. Good information.
  • k0eoo
    k0eoo Member ✭✭
    edited March 2017
    I was at a TCDXA, local DX club, meeting last night and I Com America gave a Skype presentation on some of their new stuff including the IC7300....

    Looks like the 7300 is still in engineering.  It has not been through FCC testing and the word from IC America is, it should be available mid 2016 if all goes as planned....
  • Chris DL5NAM
    Chris DL5NAM Member ✭✭✭
    edited April 2020
    ... and the result is:

    http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

    List update 25. April
  • Tim - W4TME
    Tim - W4TME Administrator, FlexRadio Employee admin
    edited December 2016
    The IMD DR3 using a narrow spacing is very respectable; especially for a $1500 radio.  However, the Filter Ultimate at 85 dB is much lower than most of the other radios listed with dynamic range narrow spaced values in the low 80s. The radio may be susceptible to saturation when used in a strong signal environment like Field Day.
  • Chris DL5NAM
    Chris DL5NAM Member ✭✭✭
    edited April 2020
    Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ also publish is review:

    http://www.ab4oj.com/icom/ic7300/7300notes.pdf

  • Lewis Cheek
    Lewis Cheek Member
    edited January 2018
    Most folks, I know, like the radio, but the're not dxers or into contesting.

    Lew N4CO
  • Stan VA7NF
    Stan VA7NF President Surrey Amateur Radio Communications Member ✭✭
    edited February 2017

    A friend borrowed my 6700, no name or call without prior permission, in his DX and Multi-multi QRO environment.  After watching me run CW and RTTY decided to try it out for a month.

    At first the no knobs (except flex control) was daunting but the DX hunting, low noise, lack of audio fatigue, and sensitivity convinced him that a change from his older station was necessary.

    Unfortunately, depending on viewpoint, he replaced his station with ICOM (7300 and 7600?), likely based on price and familiarity.  For a short time we had "First in Canada" 6700 and "First in Canada" 7300 running at the same time.

    The 7300 was significantly better than older equipment, especially in phase noise and inter-station interference (Full power 40 CW used to "mess up" 20 SSB even with band pass filters on each) and was more familiar. 

    We will likely run 3 station multi-multi high power in future contests with my 6700 + his two ICOMs and will determine then how well we can run in a 3-up environment.  (STEP-IR on tower 1, tri-band on tower-2, and wire on 80/40)

    Seems ICOM price and slightly poorer performance won out over Flex higher price and better performance.  Time will tell. 

  • Barry N1EU
    Barry N1EU Member ✭✭
    edited December 2016
    The reported tendency of the IC-7300 to go into an OVF condition (14-bit ADC overflow) when strong signals are present makes me think it is not a good choice for a multi-multi.  Good luck.

Leave a Comment

Rich Text Editor. To edit a paragraph's style, hit tab to get to the paragraph menu. From there you will be able to pick one style. Nothing defaults to paragraph. An inline formatting menu will show up when you select text. Hit tab to get into that menu. Some elements, such as rich link embeds, images, loading indicators, and error messages may get inserted into the editor. You may navigate to these using the arrow keys inside of the editor and delete them with the delete or backspace key.