Copper Talk » Ask The Tech » Radio's Mobile » Archived Messages » Galaxy 959, D104-M6B combination « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Red_devil
New member
Username: Red_devil

Post Number: 3
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Monday, October 25, 2004 - 2:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Lately I have looked into replacing my Uniden PC 244 with a more featured (talkback, freq display etc.) I have been running this radio since the mid eighties and have been very pleased with its performance. For this new rig, I still want to stay in the standard 40 plus SSB arena (too lazy to go for the license, but I may want to expand later). I began looking at a radio that was a great performer back when I got my Uniden, The Cobra 148 GTL. Then I began talking to a few people more knowledgeable in recent radio production and learned that their new boards are not as sturdy as the old (Uniden made) components. Also, with the Cobra, I would have to go with an in-line freq display. Other issues and opinions then turned me to Texas Ranger’s new 900 series of radios. I really liked the TR-969WX. But when I looked into the additional cost of the external freq counter and heard of some of the problems with quality I went in the Galaxy direction. My current plan is to go with a Galaxy DX 959 with a D104-M6B. This radio has all of the features that I was looking for in one box. As for the D014, I expect to be able to reduce the mic gain and mic drive when needed in those “rolling with the windows down” times. Most of the time my truck is quiet and I figure the mic will do well. Any suggestions and opinions would be greatly appreciated.

Red Devil - 392
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tumbleweed
New member
Username: Tumbleweed

Post Number: 9
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Monday, October 25, 2004 - 4:06 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have a DX959 and the talk-back is pretty much useless with a power mike. It feeds back. It might work with that Astatic noise cancelling power mike. Don't really know. I have a non-powered Astatic noise-cancelling mike and that works good on it. I run a power mike and just don't use the talk-back. My SSB is off frequency on recieve and it looks like that might cost me to get it fixed. That's been my experience so far...

plate
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bburck
Junior Member
Username: Bburck

Post Number: 10
Registered: 1-2005
Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2005 - 9:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have a 959 that will not function with a power mic. Even with the mike gain all the way down on the mic and barely open on the radio, it squeals badly!! I bought the radio off of ebay and it came without a mic, so i hooked up an old power mic to it and had those results, a friend gave me a stock cobra hand mic and my 959 is busting the doors down loud!! I am very impressed with it. It is peaked out and w/ the variable all the way down it keys about.8 watt and swings about 3, w/ the variable all the way up it keys about 3 watts and swings about 10 w/ the stock mic.. i haven't had the opp to test it out on sideband yet, but, everythign else functions better than expected. JMHO

Brian
Augusta, GA
Home of the Masters
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gumball
Junior Member
Username: Gumball

Post Number: 44
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2005 - 11:20 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I use an Astatic 575 with my 959, and have no problem with the talkback. The mic gain on the radio is set at about 2 o'clock, and the gain control on the mic is set at about 15-20%.

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: