Icom IC-R8600 v AOR 8600 Mk2 - Civil Airband Reception comparison
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 січ 2025
- Both Receivers programmed with identical memory channels (all memory channels are Civil Airband frequencies between 118 - 138 MHz).
Icom IC-R8600 Antenna is EuroStick gen. coverage 25 MHz - 2GHz.
AOR 8600 Mk2 Antenna is custom: Scanmaster TFA-10 Wideband portable telescopic via 2m Messi Paoloni UltraFlex 7 Coaxial cable.
Thank you for this interesting demonstration, and, with apology for making my query late, may I seek your advice on why I could not received a local (UK BBC radio 4) 200KHz AM broadcast, while it is received loud and clear on vintage Selena, Sony ICF-7601L and on NRD-535. All these radios are placed in the same location, using the same antennae (long wire and other). In fact, the portable radios pick up this broadcast with hardly any antenna extension, while the IC-R8600 renders nothing but (50Hz) noise, and this is despite trying all the permutations on turning on 'noise reduction', attenuation, reducing RF gain. Am I doing anything wrong? Thank you.
BBC Radio 4 transmits using WFM mode. I think you're right about the 200kHz bandwidth - can't remember of the top of the head. I'm also pretty sure the R8600 WFM bandwidth is fixed - that cannot be changed. I'm also sure that there are no more short/long wave BBC radio stations. The BBC have ceased using them. You'll have to check on that.
@@Maersky-747 Thank you.
Well, if two different antennas are used, it's hardly a comparison.
Two identical Antennas were used -- in my opinion the AOR is far more sensitive to receiving weaker signals than the IC-R8600.
You are 100% correct. There is no such thing as identical aerials when conducting this sort of comparison. The slightest difference in aerial location negates any experimental accuracy, as does different cables.
Without a stable Signal generator the only way of removing most if not all unwanted variables would be to run both Receivers at exactly the same time, each monitoring the identical specific Frequency with the Squelch 'OFF' in VFO Mode, and using just ONE aerial connected to each Receiver via a Splitter. Then swapping the leads to each Radio over and repeating the tests, to remove any possible disparity in the Cables / BNC plugs from the Splitter.
IFBW should also be the same. Using a 'moving' Aircraft signal the comparison MUST be observed / monitored at exactly the same time naturally.
Minor differences in 'S' readings between any two Receivers (even the same Model) can always be expected.
The video is interesting, and well presented, but in reality the comparisons have no credibility whatsoever, given the chaotic nature of radio signal propagation / reception. Without strict measures to remove all possible variables differences nobody should draw any conclusions from it.
does the icom pick up military band.thanks steve
Sure does Stephen 👍
Have you compared both receivers on SW to? I'm shure the R8600 will be better, but by what margin?
The AOR is factory standard, that is, it has not had the optional Collins Filters fitted. A comparision wouldn't be worthwhile given the audio quality from the Icom speaker as well as the ability to modify the audio with audio settings as well as Filter settings available on the IC-R8600.
Hi Ron, independent testing shows that the Icom R8600 is the best available general coverage receiver available to date, even better than the R9500 and way better than the AOR R5000, especially for SW (www.sherweng.com/table.html) - there are better receivers incorporated into transceivers but those require an amateur radio license. On SW, the performance of the AOR 8600 is worse compared to the AOR5000.
Maersky d
@@on4amg How could it be better than the IC-R9500?
Im being honest the Sensitivity of the earlier AOR 5000 which i still use today, will out Perform these too on airband VHF UHF airbands but the icom R8500 and R8600 have very good SSB sensitivity.
I agree. Although I never had the AOR AR5000, it is highly rated for its sensitivity. Although the Icom IC-R8600 is exceptional tuned to HF, the audio quality is nowhere near as good as the AOR AR3030.
I would have liked to know how the antenna/s were fed to each radio. As for the pre-amp; if they are off on both radios, who cares?
That is an important detail not provided here.
could you tell me whats the best antenna for vhf and uhf,i have just bought a standard ax 700 radio,thanks steve.
There is in my opinion no such thing as a 'best' antenna. I would suggest you look into how an antenna is made and in particular how an antenna is made for a particular frequency range. There is no 'one size fits all' antenna - however, there are wideband antenna that give general coverage between 25MHz and 2GHz. If you want to narrow the area of interest; for example if you are interested in listening to civil aircraft which transmit between 118 - 137MHz, the approximate length of a Dipole antenna would be around 1.870 feet for each dipole.
Use this website to calculate the length of a Dipole:
www.everythingrf.com/rf-calculators/dipole-antenna-length-calculator
It is simple to make your own antenna. The parts you need quite simply are rods of a particular material, coaxial cable and tubing pipes - all of which you probably can get at your local DIY/Hardware store.
There are many commercially available antennas you can buy which would suit your requirements for what you want to listen to. You're probably better off looking online. I would recommend you look at this antenna ...
www.moonraker.eu/moonraker-dbab-antenna
Is there no pre amp on airband on the 8600
Which 8600?
@@Maersky-747 just one question is the icr 8600 any good on uhf and vhf I really want one but that test is turning me off I would be grateful for an answer 3000 euros is a lot of money i love hf but i also like marine and airband vhf thank you
@@martinryan5069 If you subscribe to my Channel I will upload a video demonstrating the use of the RS-R8600 Remote Control software running alongside Flightradar. I will have the receiver perform a memory scan of VHF civil aircraft where you'll see the receiver stop on an active civil aircraft transmission. The furthest civil aircraft transmission I have received is approximately 120 miles away. This will demonstrate the sensitivity of the receiver receiving a signal at considerable distance.
@@Maersky-747 I'm a waiting 👍
@@martinryan5069 I've turned the table on my previous comment for the reason that after considering what you might learn or see from a video, I cannot see how demonstrating the receiver sensitivity receiving VHF/UHF transmissions would benefit you. For starters, I do not have a dedicated VHF antenna that is specifically tuned to the civil airband (118 - 136 MHz). There are so many other factors that will increase/decrease a signal. I know for sure that I have civil aircraft frequencies stored in memory and when the receiver performs a memory scan, it does stop of frequencies that are being received from aircraft that I know are at least 120 miles away. You might want to consider joining the Icom IC-R8600 Group on Facebook. There are many members in there that may be able to better help you make your decision whether the R8600 sensitivity is good for you.
Here's the link to the Group ...
facebook.com/groups/680970545433371
Very interesting! You show the difference in reception between Icom and AOR. But I will go for ICOM IC-R8600.
What antenna are you using,thanks steve.
Scanmaster TFA-10 telescopic antenna connected to a magmount base placed outside on a window sill.
The AOR is very good on VHF and UHF. It's passable on HF too, but a preselector helps clean things up. MW is average as it struggles to winkle out a weak signal next to a big one. My AOR AR5000 could do it with ease, but then it was more expensive.
just using a long wire at the moment
seems to me the aor has the better audio...bit of a shocker ....
The AOR is using an external speaker (previously used as a hands-free cellphone speaker - Nokia HFS-12). The audio from the R8600 is slightly muffled as the AOR was placed on top of the R8600 speaker giving the audio a slight muffled bass sound.
Actually, the Icom R8600 has a tone control for the audio. Pushing Dial "B" gives you complete separate Bass and Treble control just like a stereo receiver. What you were hearing was simply the settings that the tester had it set for. You may have found your own setting would have been much more pleasing.
Unless you do an A/B comparison on the same antenna, not the same type of antenna, it's a useless comparison. Also, S meter calibration isn't a measure of sensitivity. Looks like the AOR reads full scale all the time. Meaningless. Better to find a signal and check the level of quieting.
This is a comparison not!
Ok ... fair comment 👍
I had the AOR many years ago and i found it a pain to use, and its not even nice to look at with its tiny screen (i am trying a Fairhaven RD500 at the moment which if i remember seems a bit easier than the AOR plus it has a remote control)....anyway back to this, so yes, it can pick up the same as the Icom in this case but the Icom overall will be easier to use and is certainly nicer to look at and reading the screen is definitely easier, plus is it as easy to record with the AOR? All those things need to be taken into account here.
When I got my brand new 8600 out of the box, it didn't even sit flat on the desk.
It all went downhill from there on in.
Boy thats a lot of money for,,,,,
aor
Ah it's hilarious to see the icom 8600 boy's getting all upset by this video.
hehe
Where exactly are these "upset" people? I've read every comment in this video and don't see any remarks that are even remotely upset... lol
The 8600 aor is better shame on icom
Between 118 - 136 MHz (Civil Airband) I find the AOR to be more sensitive at receiving weaker transmissions.
The 8600 is packaged really badly. You have to buy overpriced add on cards to do the most basic things which were available as standard back in the 80s by the most basic of manufacturers. On top of that, you can't use all functions at once.
@@TonyLing AOR 8600 had the accessory card options.
@@redsky1433 Yes, but the cards were expensive, and there weren't enough slots for them all.
@@TonyLing what about the overpriced iconm