Tables like this one mean almost nothing to me. Dynamic range is so good across the board that it's now overrated. When you're talking about differences of a few dB other details start to matter much more. For instance, the chief factor that pushed me off the fence toward a K3 was it's diversity reception scheme; you don't see that listed anywhere in the table.
What about how the radio *sounds*? Where in the table is that? How about it's macro and programming capability? Is that in the table? Or its effect on your psyche after 24 hours of a contest? These things are much harder to measure. (Another pet peeve is the dozens of videos on YouTube with two radios set up side by side as the camera operator switches the antenna between them, while the built-in mic on the camera picks up all of the room noise. What in the world are these videos supposed to prove?) To paraphrase what Wynton Marsalis said about technique-- that all it does is get you "in the door"-- about all these numbers prove is that a particular rig is worthy of closer scrutiny. By no means is it a stamp of approval. This goes for the K3 as well as any other rig. Al W6LX ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
