73 de Tom K3IO (ex W3IWI)
I bought a Anan 10 to see what the hubbub was about. It has a full featured ethernet based version of PowerSDR as its software. It has a fair amount of horsepower and is ADC based. It has the ability for considerable experimentation but relies on everything pretty much being coded up from the ground up for every new iteration/architecture of control software. PSDR_mrx works well everything else is pretty much sorta works or not. This radio was designed to be a test bed for ideas and to that end it completely fulfills its design goals.
I look at this 7300 and the only digital I/O I see is a USB 2 B plug. So this radio to me looks like a ADC > FPGA > android tablet. If the price point actually is $1200 then it's likely a cheap ADC > cheap FPGA > cheap android tablet. I doubt there is much I/O connectivity or flexibility in programming, probably pretty much just the ability to upgrade firmware. Be that as it may it will probably be able to go toe to toe with a K3 and stand up pretty well if not very well. It likely will not have the playgrounds we have like the Flex API, Waveforms DAX SCAT multiple well integrated third party programs, or routine deep updates in its operating system. Once you get it going making changes only cuts into the bottom line, so I don't see much in the way of changes except on the fringe. I doubt there is much room in the architecture for much change either.
So if I were Elecraft I would be scared. The analogue radio is going the way of the dodo. If I were Flex I would be glad. It means the ARRL's grip on analogue roofing filter prejudiced testing necessarily has to change. Icom spends a lot of dough and will not stand for a stacked deck when it comes to testing. Once the iron grip on testing falls Kenwood and Yaesu will HAVE to come out with competition or be left in the dust. Anti-SDR attitudes will start to melt away as the pure capability of SDR will blow the new user away. They will wonder why they have $800 tied up in stupid roofing filters and then realize they have been ripped off. Next will come the idea: "if this is so good I wonder what a Flex can do?" HMMM freeDV HMMM DSTAR HMMM remote base. HMMM world class contesting (very near on the horizon). HMMM advanced station control HMMM all those weird digital modes etc etc.
It's an exciting time in ham radio Thanks Gerald, Steve, W5GI (rip) and the rest of the folks at Flex including the sales people who keep the lights on. Thanks Phil Harmon, Phil Covington and Bill Tracey and the rest at HPSDR and even Anan for their part in commercializing the knowledge! This is what creative destruction looks like. This is what advancement in the state of the art looks like. It's a good thing. Flex has nothing to fear. Edison built GE, but I have AC coming out of my wall socket.
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?
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
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?
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.
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....
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.