1:47 damm what is this, a sirens in the background ? I think the signals are both bad, can't understand nothing and they are talking in mine language - polish. Maybe the problem is with the recording device - cellphone ?
Using the ft2k in cw is a pleasure, in low bands (40, 80 160m), you almost remove all background noise and can be hours listening without fatigue problems. Variable bandwidth is a Cw's op Dream. Noise reduction is useless in cw mode. Using the Contour and the proper use of manual notch (narrow mode) noise level drops dramátically (I use a notch setting close to 1620 when weak cw signals and some band noise remains after width).
This kind of radio is not for ragchew, you can buy other simple radios from the market, as also is not an easy Radio, you have to read the manual and understand basics of dsp, filtering, etc. This can be annoying for some people.
In the end, The FT2000 has one of the best ergonomics design I HAVE seen in a radio of this level, you dont need to use the menu most of the time.
Ft2000 is not a plug and play radio, is highly customizable. At first sight, is clear that test was made with an out-of-the-box Rig. Bandwidth set in ft2000 is 2700-2900hz, and more important, VFR filter is switched off, without this filter, nearby broadcasting Stations at certains hours, increase noise level a lot (sometimes 2-5 s units) and may appear ghost signals.
Well, I wonder how you guys can trust such a non laboratory A/B comparison test made by an operator who can't make any difference between the frequency (3709khz =80m) and the band ! (Actually not a QSO on 40m local).
The FT-2000 series radio beats the MP's hands down in most cases when you take your time to LEARN ! ;-)
Don't take ANY conclusion with a rig that's only a few hours on top of your shelves -> see the plastic sheet still on the screen !
Un test che non ha senso. Le condizioni in cui sono posti i due rigs non sono le medesime. Il 1000 è messo in largo, l'altro stretto. Buona facciata solo per far vedere che non sono stati buttati i soldi per il 2000. Ma la realtà è un'altra.
i done this exact test when i took my MP to a friends house, the receive quality of the MP was far superior, he just sat there and had to accept it. I picked up on the quality issues after foolishly purchasing a FT-950 which i had about a week then promptly sent back.
If this comparison was made with FT2000 subreceiver, it is true comparison and FT2000 will sound as good as MP. DSP side also disappointing on FT2000 CW (500hz) until the COLLINS filter is used on the Analog subreceiver side, then, the results will exceed MP.
FT-2000 DSP side sounds MUCH better than FT1000MP in some conditions, like low noise and wide filter width 4.0khz. However in high noise condx, and in narrow filter (CW), operator must depend on the ANALOG side subreceiver.
L'FT-1000MP e' 100 volte meglio del "giocattolo" FT-2000D. Il 2000 ha solo un migliore amplificatore audio, ma il 1000MP e' e rimmarra' per sempre una "macchina da guerra" senza meno ! Chi obietta a proposito dell'IPO non ha capito nulla di come si usa una radio......
I recently bought a 1000MP and love it. I owned a 2000 until March this year and think the 1000MP is a far superior radio. About to add the Power SDR IF to the 1000 to give me the bandscope and a few other things. I thought the 2000 was hard to beat....I'm not sure now!
Dal video sembrerebbe che il 1000MP vada meglio del 2000... quindi o il 2000 è settato male (in effetti la ricezione sembra più larga), o il 1000 monta qualche filro Inrad o Collins che gli fa fare il salto di qualità....
Perchè il widht sul 2000 è aperto sino a 2800-2900 hertz? E' ovvio che riceva peggio!!
radiopoli 1 year ago 2
1:47 damm what is this, a sirens in the background ? I think the signals are both bad, can't understand nothing and they are talking in mine language - polish. Maybe the problem is with the recording device - cellphone ?
maciejwrotek 1 year ago
FT 1000 IS BETTER!!!!!!!!
7960661 1 year ago
@7960661 i have to agree, far better build quality
slartybardfarst52 1 year ago
@7960661 It's only setted better...
radiopoli 6 months ago
Using the ft2k in cw is a pleasure, in low bands (40, 80 160m), you almost remove all background noise and can be hours listening without fatigue problems. Variable bandwidth is a Cw's op Dream. Noise reduction is useless in cw mode. Using the Contour and the proper use of manual notch (narrow mode) noise level drops dramátically (I use a notch setting close to 1620 when weak cw signals and some band noise remains after width).
nmunyoz 1 year ago
This kind of radio is not for ragchew, you can buy other simple radios from the market, as also is not an easy Radio, you have to read the manual and understand basics of dsp, filtering, etc. This can be annoying for some people.
In the end, The FT2000 has one of the best ergonomics design I HAVE seen in a radio of this level, you dont need to use the menu most of the time.
nmunyoz 1 year ago
Ft2000 is not a plug and play radio, is highly customizable. At first sight, is clear that test was made with an out-of-the-box Rig. Bandwidth set in ft2000 is 2700-2900hz, and more important, VFR filter is switched off, without this filter, nearby broadcasting Stations at certains hours, increase noise level a lot (sometimes 2-5 s units) and may appear ghost signals.
...
nmunyoz 1 year ago
Width on FT2000 is too open! Factous test!
radiopoli 1 year ago
Well, I wonder how you guys can trust such a non laboratory A/B comparison test made by an operator who can't make any difference between the frequency (3709khz =80m) and the band ! (Actually not a QSO on 40m local).
The FT-2000 series radio beats the MP's hands down in most cases when you take your time to LEARN ! ;-)
Don't take ANY conclusion with a rig that's only a few hours on top of your shelves -> see the plastic sheet still on the screen !
73, Eric, ON6CV.
MrToonfish 1 year ago
Un test che non ha senso. Le condizioni in cui sono posti i due rigs non sono le medesime. Il 1000 è messo in largo, l'altro stretto. Buona facciata solo per far vedere che non sono stati buttati i soldi per il 2000. Ma la realtà è un'altra.
5bwaz 1 year ago
i done this exact test when i took my MP to a friends house, the receive quality of the MP was far superior, he just sat there and had to accept it. I picked up on the quality issues after foolishly purchasing a FT-950 which i had about a week then promptly sent back.
slartybardfarst52 1 year ago
@slartybardfarst52 Nice, is ur friend an experienced radio operator ? I mean did he configure radio before comparing, properly ?
maciejwrotek 1 year ago
FT-1K wins hands down. FT-2K is Yaesu's biggest mistake.
slceline 1 year ago
is there a problem with the ft1000 200w model???
brybish 1 year ago
don't know what to make of this thinking of getting a 2000 but like the retro 1000 look and sound.
brybish 1 year ago
Remove blank spaces from (h ttp) and (w ww) in link below to hear comparison.
wb8yqj 1 year ago
h ttp://w ww.zerobeat.net/wb8yqj/nosig.wav
h ttp://w ww.zerobeat.net/wb8yqj/abtest.wav
Subreceiver with COLLINS 500hz vs. DSP
wb8yqj 1 year ago
If this comparison was made with FT2000 subreceiver, it is true comparison and FT2000 will sound as good as MP. DSP side also disappointing on FT2000 CW (500hz) until the COLLINS filter is used on the Analog subreceiver side, then, the results will exceed MP.
wb8yqj 1 year ago
FT-2000 DSP side sounds MUCH better than FT1000MP in some conditions, like low noise and wide filter width 4.0khz. However in high noise condx, and in narrow filter (CW), operator must depend on the ANALOG side subreceiver.
wb8yqj 1 year ago
L'FT-1000MP e' 100 volte meglio del "giocattolo" FT-2000D. Il 2000 ha solo un migliore amplificatore audio, ma il 1000MP e' e rimmarra' per sempre una "macchina da guerra" senza meno ! Chi obietta a proposito dell'IPO non ha capito nulla di come si usa una radio......
ciucciofrullo 1 year ago
Very poor non-scientific comparison.
The 2.4Khz filters are inline on the the 1000, while the filter on the 2000 is set very wide.
Therefore the bass response on the 2000 is more prominent and this shows in the recording.
If the operator had actually learnt to use the 2000 properly you would probably reach a different conclusion.
Issues remain with the implementation of the roofing filters on the 2000, but it at least it doesn't require major surgery to make it a good receiver.
Not like the 1000
26cab40 2 years ago
the pre amp i refer to on the mp is the ipo if it is not lit the preamps are in line!! read the manual!!!
simon2e0gmw 2 years ago
great radio the ft1000 mp wins it for me however yet to find on mine the pre amp switch 2e0gmw is on about ;)
grint702 2 years ago
FT-1000MP sounds much better...
IronManXXX 2 years ago
ho avuto tutti e due gli apparecchi e concordo con il video, 73.
iz8gdm 2 years ago
your 2000 ft is not properly configured for SSB operation. Because so many differences in quality VS ft1000.
YU7BH
stefanhacko 2 years ago
FT2000 has DNR off and coutour off!!!
Dnr does a big improvement on QRN conditions.
iz7fmm 2 years ago
I recently bought a 1000MP and love it. I owned a 2000 until March this year and think the 1000MP is a far superior radio. About to add the Power SDR IF to the 1000 to give me the bandscope and a few other things. I thought the 2000 was hard to beat....I'm not sure now!
vk6hz 2 years ago
that's just one beautiful radio,
scaleop4 2 years ago
note the pre amp is OFF on the ft2k and it is on on the 1000mp!! of corse the mp will sound stronger!! but the 2k would beat if the pre amp was on!!
simon2e0gmw 2 years ago
ft1000 is superior than ft2000 always
4LD001 3 years ago
FT1000MP win!!!!!!!!!
willkarling 3 years ago
no competition , tried it myself with a friends radio , FT1000MP everytime
slartybardfarst52 3 years ago
Dal video sembrerebbe che il 1000MP vada meglio del 2000... quindi o il 2000 è settato male (in effetti la ricezione sembra più larga), o il 1000 monta qualche filro Inrad o Collins che gli fa fare il salto di qualità....
iz7fmm 3 years ago
Ma perchè il Width è quasi tutto aperto? Per ricevere più disturbi adiacenti?
radiopoli 3 years ago
Ma non si capisce !! sinceramente quale va meglio???
Pinocamxcam 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ciao bella prova.
La stessa cosa ho fatto io con l'IC 756 PROIII e il MARK V.
Ho dato via lo Yaesu, e anche di corsa.
Ciao
aleric1312 3 years ago
Che cosa è vecchio è meglio
YO3DLK 3 years ago
super radio...
VictoreCelia 3 years ago 15