John C: ..to those saying the DX3000 is set wide open, ..well it's not. The NAR letters in white on the display tell us the narrow filter range is selected and thats 50Hz-500Hz on CW. Then his width mimic (top right) is set to a medium setting, with knees at the W and H letters. Replicating that on my own FTDX3K, it gave a 300Hz DSP BW ..can't fault him there. ..also we dont know whether his APF is actually turned on. We can't tell that without seeing the orange LED on the Cont/APF button. ..just saying :D
alphasxsignal: Much better sound on the 7600
alphasxsignal: CW sound is hollow sounding, not nice to listen to.
Carlos Pereira: Wrong comparision, Serge. IC 7600 has the bw =300hz FTDX3000 has the roofing filter set to 300hz but bw is not narrow. You need to set the bw to 300hz in both rigs. 73 Carlos PY1CAS
26fb384: Don't know why people are pissing and moaning about how superior the icom is compared to the yaesu. Once you have taken yaesu cash back offer into account the icom is a full £1000 more expensive than the yaesu. Of course it's going to be a better radio. I think it just goes to show what good value for money the 3k is
Cone Head: I have both and the IC 7600 wins hands down. Caveat: I am not a CW centric guy. The thing I like the least about the 3000 is the convoluted menu system.
John Adams: You title this a comparison? This is a waste of time.
C.E. Vaughn: Both are excellent rigs, I like sitting on CW myself.
Steve Ellington: CW on these scopes looks like a wide, slow, fuzzy blob....Almost useless. On Flex you can see a distinct, sharp, clear peak moving as the code speed. I suppose I am spoiled.
Phill Robinson: boring
johnnieace45: I wish my qth was that quiet with such a low noise floor!
iz0gus: Icom IC-7600 is set CW-R , why?
Rj Th: I like the ftdx3000 over the icom 7600
neil eyre: why get a radio like that to sit on cw get a life u fk sad o
maciej wrotek: what is the difference between ft 3000 and ft 1200 ?
kd8poi: Nice video. Its always tough to compare great radios, but it seems that the last 30 sec of your tests the 3000 seemed to pick up that very weak cw signal a bit better. Having said that, its not much of a surprise. The 3000 has a much tighter roofing filter, and it seemed to produce a better s/n ratio than the digital narrow filter on the 7600. If I had to buy one today, it'd be the 3000; if I owned a 7600 I'd keep it and save a few thousand bucks.
PR7RC/ZZ7Z: Both radios in the same config:
3000 - IPO Amp1 - Filter 300 Hz (narrow) - AGC fast - G3SJX @ - S6 (peak)
7600 - Pre Amp1 - Filter 300 Hz (N. A.) - AGC mid - G3SJX @ - S 4-5 (peak)
"Yaesu did it again"...
Gary K: I think both are super radios and anyone would be very fortunate to own either. I think in order to really get an idea which is the best one would have to have an operator very proficient in each radio's operation to get the best out of them and do a very critical comparison. For my part I cannot seem to find enough reason to part with my FT-1000 MkV Field for it has awesome performance and the best receiver that I have owned and frankly my budget is limited so I'll stick with what I have.
P Grimmo: You need to have both receivers on top of each other with a clear view of the screens and audio...PLUS a clear view of switching the antenna to each radio so to see the immediate difference. Signals can change in seconds. And the radios must be on the same frequency with the same filter setting. I can make a $300 radio sound better than my 7600 if I don't have the same filters selected. Unless you do this you are comparing apples with oranges. Have a look at the G0KSC and TH6 comparison Vid