I absolutely love my TS-2000 but if I didn't have a need for an all-band radio I would definitely have bought the TS-590. Unlike many people out there, I cannot afford *both* so I bought the TS-2000 which is a fantastic transceiver. You work with what you've got :)
Is this the same radio as the 480 test? Have you had the 2000 repaired? They have a known problem in the filters. Kenwood allowed a dc voltage on the filters when they were not supposed to. I've had two and both have gone deaf after a few years of use.
Why do all these videos have the RX passband narrower on the TS2000 than the TS590? If you narrow down the passband on the TS590 you'd see at least a 6dB drop in signal.
WHy were the initial settings on the TS-2000 set to LO 50 / HIGH 2800 and the TS-590 seem to have been LO 0 / HIGH 4000 ? SHouldn't you test them with both initial settings the same? Also, how does the 16bit DSP in the TS-2000 compare to the 32bit DSP in the TS-590?
Hola, el bafle (Speaker) es el mismo, tengo 2 iguales, la diferencia es la intermodulacion, si te fijas no hay interferencias en el 590, los roofing hacen la diferencia
ts-2000 sempre com PRE ligado ... ele precisa estar ligado ... o radio é alinhado com pré .. a condição padrão do TS-2000 é assim ... já o 590 é sem pré pois ele é alinhado sem o pre ...
DJ Caverna Haroldo NETO Concordo plenamente! O padrão de RX do TS-2000 exige que o PRE sempre esteja ligado. Assim sendo, o comparativo entre TS-2000 e TS-590 não está "nivelado".
I had a TS2000 and I thought it was deaf compared to my FTDX3000, I thought maybe something was wrong and had it serviced, But just deaf compared to my FTDX3000. Sold it and bought a Flex3000 but still think the FTDX3000 is better.
i have both and the 590 walks all over the 2000 as you would expect.The 2000 is a great shack in a box but not fantastic at any one thing,the 590 is fantastic at HF.
AGC-timeconstants and AGC-threshold makes the most difference when false "judging the noise" in a receiver. Please adjust them to the same before do a comparison by adjusting the RF-Gain and AGC-speed to have same AGC-delay and same noise floor with no signal. Otherwise this is not a good test. Quite often "noisy receiver" is because the operator don´t know how to adjust these settlings. The default settlings in radios are different but then the operator must adjust this to his taste.
hola que tal soy lu5fcv beto , los dos estan con el mismo bafle , ???? la diferencia puede ser esa , por que lo demas son iguales , por lo menos para mi , saldos
when TS2000 have damaged 455 filter, its reception become be lower. Bacause this we see many videos compairing its reception. Off course it is false, and it is weak knowledge of their peaple that compair falty equipment. When TS2000 is with real specifications, it is alost same each other radio.
I absolutely love my TS-2000 but if I didn't have a need for an all-band radio I would definitely have bought the TS-590. Unlike many people out there, I cannot afford *both* so I bought the TS-2000 which is a fantastic transceiver.
You work with what you've got :)
This is very nice for cooling to cover your radios with towels ! :-) This gives you a better "warm" hot tube sort of sound ! :-) Cheers, 73.
Is this the same radio as the 480 test? Have you had the 2000 repaired? They have a known problem in the filters. Kenwood allowed a dc voltage on the filters when they were not supposed to. I've had two and both have gone deaf after a few years of use.
Why do all these videos have the RX passband narrower on the TS2000 than the TS590? If you narrow down the passband on the TS590 you'd see at least a 6dB drop in signal.
WHy were the initial settings on the TS-2000 set to LO 50 / HIGH 2800 and the TS-590 seem to have been LO 0 / HIGH 4000 ? SHouldn't you test them with both initial settings the same? Also, how does the 16bit DSP in the TS-2000 compare to the 32bit DSP in the TS-590?
Hola, el bafle (Speaker) es el mismo, tengo 2 iguales, la diferencia es la intermodulacion, si te fijas no hay interferencias en el 590, los roofing hacen la diferencia
I wish my TS-480HX >NR< worked that well!
ts-2000 sempre com PRE ligado ... ele precisa estar ligado ... o radio é alinhado com pré .. a condição padrão do TS-2000 é assim ... já o 590 é sem pré pois ele é alinhado sem o pre ...
DJ Caverna Haroldo NETO Concordo plenamente! O padrão de RX do TS-2000 exige que o PRE sempre esteja ligado. Assim sendo, o comparativo entre TS-2000 e TS-590 não está "nivelado".
I had a TS2000 and I thought it was deaf compared to my FTDX3000, I thought maybe something was wrong and had it serviced, But just deaf compared to my FTDX3000.
Sold it and bought a Flex3000 but still think the FTDX3000 is better.
i have both and the 590 walks all over the 2000 as you would expect.The 2000 is a great shack in a box but not fantastic at any one thing,the 590 is fantastic at HF.
AGC-timeconstants and AGC-threshold makes the most difference when false "judging the noise" in a receiver. Please adjust them to the same before do a comparison by adjusting the RF-Gain and AGC-speed to have same AGC-delay and same noise floor with no signal. Otherwise this is not a good test. Quite often "noisy receiver" is because the operator don´t know how to adjust these settlings. The default settlings in radios are different but then the operator must adjust this to his taste.
Quem compara pela barra nao sabe o que ta fazendo. Agora , se escuta e nao escuta , aí é diferente.
hola que tal soy lu5fcv beto , los dos estan con el mismo bafle , ???? la diferencia puede ser esa , por que lo demas son iguales , por lo menos para mi , saldos
when TS2000 have damaged 455 filter, its reception become be lower. Bacause this we see many videos compairing its reception. Off course it is false, and it is weak knowledge of their peaple that compair falty equipment. When TS2000 is with real specifications, it is alost same each other radio.
How say´s 133Gordini, the 590 it´s cearly better than the 2000, it´s quiet! 10 years of design it´s a lot of time!!!
The 590 sounds better.