Elecraft

March/April NCJ

Classic

List

Threaded

12 messages Options

Bill W4ZV

March/April NCJ

The latest NCJ issue has HF Transceiver Price vs Performance, Part 2.
Elecraft does very well overall in this comprehensive article! If you're an
ARRL member, you can view online at this link (login required):

http://www.arrl.org/arrl-magazines

Sorry if this has been posted before but I searched and could not find it.

73, Bill W4ZV

--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

David Gilbert-2

Re: March/April NCJ

It's an interesting article, but in my opinion the flaw in it is that it
relies so heavily on eHam satisfaction ratings. There is a very wide
range of user criteria for what makes a "good rig", and eHam ratings are
notoriously flawed anyway. Many ratings are from folks who aren't very
discerning in the first place (skewing the ratings upward) and I once
did a profile of over 2,000 eHam ratings that found they were heavily
spread downward by things other than performance, such as shipping
issues or vendor support. The author's use of statistical analysis is
impressive, but as they say, "garbage in, garbage out."

Just my opinion ...

73,
Dave AB7E

On 3/12/2021 5:36 AM, Bill W4ZV wrote:

> The latest NCJ issue has HF Transceiver Price vs Performance, Part 2.
> Elecraft does very well overall in this comprehensive article! If you're an
> ARRL member, you can view online at this link (login required):
>
> http://www.arrl.org/arrl-magazines
>
> Sorry if this has been posted before but I searched and could not find it.
>
> 73, Bill W4ZV
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

Nate Bargmann

Re: March/April NCJ

My assessment of eham reviews over the years is that there are some hams
who can break an anvil with a rubber mallet!

73, Nate, N0NB

--

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."

Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Jim Rhodes-2

Re: March/April NCJ

When looking at eham reviews I really only read the ones that give a rating
of 4 or less. The total number of reviews only tell you how many units are
out there. The 5 ratings seem to mostly be people patting themselves on the
back about what a great product they bought and give no useful information.
I look at the ones by people who are not so satisfied, there is usually
more useful information there. Sure there are the folks that give a 4
rating because "it only comes in black", but if you look for trends you can
often find trends.

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 5:40 PM Nate Bargmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> My assessment of eham reviews over the years is that there are some hams
> who can break an anvil with a rubber mallet!
>
> 73, Nate, N0NB
>
> --
>
> "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
> possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."
>
> Web: https://www.n0nb.us
> Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
> GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

--
Jim K0XU
[hidden email]
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

David Gilbert-2

Re: March/April NCJ

I agree that a preponderance of 5 ratings are from people congratulating
themselves on their choice, and the text often goes like
"this is a fine rig" or "met all my expectations."

And out of roughly 2,200 eHam ratings I once profiled just for grins,
almost all of the ratings of 1 star or 2 stars were for service or
support issues ... which tells you nothing about the rig itself.

I also agree about the need to look for trends in the comments to find
any worthwhile insight ... which is why the NCJ article that used only
the summary average ratings is borderline useless to me.

73,
Dave AB7E

On 3/13/2021 8:56 AM, Jim Rhodes wrote:

> When looking at eham reviews I really only read the ones that give a rating
> of 4 or less. The total number of reviews only tell you how many units are
> out there. The 5 ratings seem to mostly be people patting themselves on the
> back about what a great product they bought and give no useful information.
> I look at the ones by people who are not so satisfied, there is usually
> more useful information there. Sure there are the folks that give a 4
> rating because "it only comes in black", but if you look for trends you can
> often find trends.
>
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 5:40 PM Nate Bargmann <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> My assessment of eham reviews over the years is that there are some hams
>> who can break an anvil with a rubber mallet!
>>
>> 73, Nate, N0NB
>>
>> --
>>
>> "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
>> possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."
>>
>> Web: https://www.n0nb.us
>> Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
>> GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>>
>

Charlie T, K3ICH

Re: March/April NCJ

Same here.....what a waste of electrons (-), or holes (+) whichever your preference.
I was hoping for something useful, but it's obvious, Rob's list is the only one that has anything of consequence.

73, Charlie k3ICH

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of David Gilbert
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2021 12:38 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] March/April NCJ

I agree that a preponderance of 5 ratings are from people congratulating themselves on their choice, and the text often goes like "this is a fine rig" or "met all my expectations."

And out of roughly 2,200 eHam ratings I once profiled just for grins, almost all of the ratings of 1 star or 2 stars were for service or support issues ... which tells you nothing about the rig itself.

I also agree about the need to look for trends in the comments to find any worthwhile insight ... which is why the NCJ article that used only the summary average ratings is borderline useless to me.

73,
Dave AB7E

On 3/13/2021 8:56 AM, Jim Rhodes wrote:

> When looking at eham reviews I really only read the ones that give a
> rating of 4 or less. The total number of reviews only tell you how
> many units are out there. The 5 ratings seem to mostly be people
> patting themselves on the back about what a great product they bought and give no useful information.
> I look at the ones by people who are not so satisfied, there is
> usually more useful information there. Sure there are the folks that
> give a 4 rating because "it only comes in black", but if you look for
> trends you can often find trends.
>
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 5:40 PM Nate Bargmann <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> My assessment of eham reviews over the years is that there are some
>> hams who can break an anvil with a rubber mallet!
>>
>> 73, Nate, N0NB
>>
>> --
>>
>> "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible
>> worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."
>>
>> Web: https://www.n0nb.us
>> Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
>> GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this
>> email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to
>> [hidden email]
>>
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Wes Stewart-2

Re: March/April NCJ

In reply to this post by David Gilbert-2

I bought a European made tri-band Yagi antenna from a friend who had never
installed it. (I won't mention the manufacturer) It was still in the unopened
box after sitting in my friend's garage for some time. The pieces of tubing
were shipped inside each other (graduated metric sizes have a lot of clearance
between sizes) and when I extracted them all I found two pieces for the same
element were very corroded. I used my household lye/vinegar method to clean
them up and assembled the antenna. It worked fine and I decided to write an eHam
review.

Based on the QC issue I rated it a four stars. I almost immediately got an email
from the company in which I was accused of improperly storing the antenna and
all sorts of other things. It was also claimed that anything less that five
stars would ruin their business, etc. I sent photos of the tubing and heard
back that this was impossible, it's never happened before and so on and so
forth. I got so much grief about this that I wrote the reviews people at eHam
and asked them to pull my review, which they did.

Wes N7WS

On 3/13/2021 10:37 AM, David Gilbert wrote:

>
> I agree that a preponderance of 5 ratings are from people congratulating
> themselves on their choice, and the text often goes like
> "this is a fine rig" or "met all my expectations."
>
> And out of roughly 2,200 eHam ratings I once profiled just for grins, almost
> all of the ratings of 1 star or 2 stars were for service or support issues ...
> which tells you nothing about the rig itself.
>
> I also agree about the need to look for trends in the comments to find any
> worthwhile insight ... which is why the NCJ article that used only the summary
> average ratings is borderline useless to me.
>
> 73,
> Dave AB7E

Grant Youngman-2

Re: March/April NCJ

At least they just grumbled about your review.

I once posted to a reflector about (what was well known) buggy control firmware in a (non-Elecraft) radio. (The “radio" part of the radio was fine, but sometimes you never knew what pressing a front panel button would break next). I almost immediately received a cease and desist letter via emai from the developer of said firmware, threatening a lawsuit based on potential loss of livelihood and reputation if I didn’t make a retraction. I made a snark-laden public retraction on the reflector, which I’d guess was lawsuit worthy in itself. But I guess that was enough. I never heard from this person again.

I eventually just got rid of the radios and moved on …. life is too short.

Grant NQ5T

> On Mar 13, 2021, at 1:52 PM, Wes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I bought a European made tri-band Yagi antenna from a friend who had never installed it. (I won't mention the manufacturer) It was still in the unopened box after sitting in my friend's garage for some time. The pieces of tubing were shipped inside each other (graduated metric sizes have a lot of clearance between sizes) and when I extracted them all I found two pieces for the same element were very corroded. I used my household lye/vinegar method to clean them up and assembled the antenna. It worked fine and I decided to write an eHam review.
>
> Based on the QC issue I rated it a four stars. I almost immediately got an email from the company in which I was accused of improperly storing the antenna and all sorts of other things. It was also claimed that anything less that five stars would ruin their business, etc. I sent photos of the tubing and heard back that this was impossible, it's never happened before and so on and so forth. I got so much grief about this that I wrote the reviews people at eHam and asked them to pull my review, which they did.
>
> Wes N7WS
>
> On 3/13/2021 10:37 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
>>
>> I agree that a preponderance of 5 ratings are from people congratulating themselves on their choice, and the text often goes like
>> "this is a fine rig" or "met all my expectations."
>>
>> And out of roughly 2,200 eHam ratings I once profiled just for grins, almost all of the ratings of 1 star or 2 stars were for service or support issues ... which tells you nothing about the rig itself.
>>
>> I also agree about the need to look for trends in the comments to find any worthwhile insight ... which is why the NCJ article that used only the summary average ratings is borderline useless to me.
>>
>> 73,
>> Dave AB7E
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

k6dgw

Re: March/April NCJ

I was warned that Yelp has that same problem. 1) I've been told eHam is
the same, I've never posted a review as a result. 2) About all the
Yelp reviews seem to be good for is identifying that a business is closed.

73,

Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 3/13/2021 11:58 AM, Grant Youngman wrote:

> At least they just grumbled about your review.
>
> I once posted to a reflector about (what was well known) buggy control firmware in a (non-Elecraft) radio. (The “radio" part of the radio was fine, but sometimes you never knew what pressing a front panel button would break next). I almost immediately received a cease and desist letter via emai from the developer of said firmware, threatening a lawsuit based on potential loss of livelihood and reputation if I didn’t make a retraction. I made a snark-laden public retraction on the reflector, which I’d guess was lawsuit worthy in itself. But I guess that was enough. I never heard from this person again.
>
> I eventually just got rid of the radios and moved on …. life is too short.
>
> Grant NQ5T
>
>
>> On Mar 13, 2021, at 1:52 PM, Wes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I bought a European made tri-band Yagi antenna from a friend who had never installed it. (I won't mention the manufacturer) It was still in the unopened box after sitting in my friend's garage for some time. The pieces of tubing were shipped inside each other (graduated metric sizes have a lot of clearance between sizes) and when I extracted them all I found two pieces for the same element were very corroded. I used my household lye/vinegar method to clean them up and assembled the antenna. It worked fine and I decided to write an eHam review.
>>
>> Based on the QC issue I rated it a four stars. I almost immediately got an email from the company in which I was accused of improperly storing the antenna and all sorts of other things. It was also claimed that anything less that five stars would ruin their business, etc. I sent photos of the tubing and heard back that this was impossible, it's never happened before and so on and so forth. I got so much grief about this that I wrote the reviews people at eHam and asked them to pull my review, which they did.
>>
>> Wes N7WS
>>
>> On 3/13/2021 10:37 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
>>> I agree that a preponderance of 5 ratings are from people congratulating themselves on their choice, and the text often goes like
>>> "this is a fine rig" or "met all my expectations."
>>>
>>> And out of roughly 2,200 eHam ratings I once profiled just for grins, almost all of the ratings of 1 star or 2 stars were for service or support issues ... which tells you nothing about the rig itself.
>>>
>>> I also agree about the need to look for trends in the comments to find any worthwhile insight ... which is why the NCJ article that used only the summary average ratings is borderline useless to me.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>> Dave AB7E
>>

Dr. William J. Schmidt, II

Re: March/April NCJ

In reply to this post by Wes Stewart-2

I had a similar thing happen after purchasing an antenna switch of well-known brand. I didn't try the switch before it went to the top of the tower but I quickly found that one position had a bad relay. I was able to use another position to get the thing working. I posted on eHam and rated it below average in quality because I expected a switch... something so simple... to work out of the box. I quickly received an email from the manufacturer berating me, suggesting it was my fault for the switch failing for being just another dumb ham (yes, for a simple 12V switch), and that my review would "ruin his business". This went on for some time, but I did not bend to such rude tactics in favor of the truth. I also commented that the kick-back diodes were, in my opinion, at tower end where they are not easily serviceable after static discharge (this was not the problem causing the box to fail).

Evidently this has become common-place.

Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ

email: [hidden email]

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Wes
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2021 12:53 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] March/April NCJ

I bought a European made tri-band Yagi antenna from a friend who had never installed it. (I won't mention the manufacturer) It was still in the unopened box after sitting in my friend's garage for some time. The pieces of tubing were shipped inside each other (graduated metric sizes have a lot of clearance between sizes) and when I extracted them all I found two pieces for the same element were very corroded. I used my household lye/vinegar method to clean them up and assembled the antenna. It worked fine and I decided to write an eHam review.

Based on the QC issue I rated it a four stars. I almost immediately got an email from the company in which I was accused of improperly storing the antenna and all sorts of other things. It was also claimed that anything less that five stars would ruin their business, etc. I sent photos of the tubing and heard back that this was impossible, it's never happened before and so on and so forth. I got so much grief about this that I wrote the reviews people at eHam and asked them to pull my review, which they did.

Wes N7WS

On 3/13/2021 10:37 AM, David Gilbert wrote:

>
> I agree that a preponderance of 5 ratings are from people
> congratulating themselves on their choice, and the text often goes
> like "this is a fine rig" or "met all my expectations."
>
> And out of roughly 2,200 eHam ratings I once profiled just for grins,
> almost all of the ratings of 1 star or 2 stars were for service or support issues ...
> which tells you nothing about the rig itself.
>
> I also agree about the need to look for trends in the comments to find
> any worthwhile insight ... which is why the NCJ article that used only
> the summary average ratings is borderline useless to me.
>
> 73,
> Dave AB7E

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email]

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Bill Coleman-2

Re: March/April NCJ

In reply to this post by Wes Stewart-2

> On Mar 13, 2021, at 1:52 PM, Wes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Based on the QC issue I rated it a four stars. I almost immediately got an email from the company in which I was accused of improperly storing the antenna and all sorts of other things. It was also claimed that anything less that five stars would ruin their business, etc. I sent photos of the tubing and heard back that this was impossible, it's never happened before and so on and so forth.

Based this type of response, I would have revised my rating to three stars and stood firm.

Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email]
Web: http://boringhamradiopart.blogspot.com
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Bill Coleman-2

Re: March/April NCJ

In reply to this post by Dr. William J. Schmidt, II

> On Mar 13, 2021, at 3:48 PM, Dr. William J. Schmidt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I had a similar thing happen after purchasing an antenna switch of well-known brand. I didn't try the switch before it went to the top of the tower but I quickly found that one position had a bad relay. I was able to use another position to get the thing working. I posted on eHam and rated it below average in quality because I expected a switch... something so simple... to work out of the box. I quickly received an email from the manufacturer berating me, suggesting it was my fault for the switch failing for being just another dumb ham (yes, for a simple 12V switch), and that my review would "ruin his business". This went on for some time, but I did not bend to such rude tactics in favor of the truth

With this kind of attitude, this person will never have any customers.

A real serious businessman would have redoubled their efforts to find out how a faulty switch made it out of QA, contacted the customer and apologized for the difficulty, and offered to replace the faulty switch with a working model.

I don’t see how threatening customers is a good business model. <shakes head>

Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email]
Web: http://boringhamradiopart.blogspot.com
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]