Any improvement on AOR DV-10?

[N3CI]

I was looking at a DV-10 at the Yaesu booth at Dayton. Wideband handhelds are very useful in my consulting business as well as great for hobby use. The Icom R30 is my current choice.

Well, after reading lots of posts, I am ready to drop interest in the DV10 based on all the negative reviews, mostly dated in 2018. I do wonder if things have improved any in recent months and anyone wants to put in a good word for the radio currently?

 

[marlbrook]

Thr DV10's frequency drift / stability issues will rarely be a significant problem when listening to analogue FM VHF/UHF. It will cause audio issues with narrow bandwidth HF signals though. however VHF / UHF digital signals, particularly weaker ones, are likely to be much more unforgiving. There lies the real issue, as a 'missed' digital signal will not appear at all. Not a question of the squelch opening and strange audio requiring a re-tune, there will be no indication of the signal whatsoever.

The bottom line is the DV10's frequency stability is a design flaw, and AOR's attempts to add 'compensation' via firmware over the receiver's entire range is, is just, adding 'bandages', to what is a self inflicted wound that can never be really 'healed' except at component level.

There are at present, to my knowledge, only two wide band, digital capable, handhelds available.
The DV10, with half the receive range and costing almost twice the price of the Icom IC-30.

The DV10 has the magic word TETRA of course, but in reality, despite it being a significant achievement, I doubt if many will find enough 'in the clear' signals to make that much of an addition.

The IC-30 on the other hand lacks DMR, which is a serious omission on Icom's part, however apart from that it works very well and is frequency stable. I believe if Icom had included DMR the DV10 would be dead in the water, except for those who still apparently think they will be able to hear (and understand) scrambled Tetra.

I am not 'pushing' the IC-30. The point is that Icom managed to produce a frequency stable analogue / digital hand held, that does what it says on the tin.

I have several AOR receivers and I like them. AOR have produced sufficiently innovative and stable receivers in the past, but not in the case of the DV10.

When the main 'drift / stability' problem came to light, AOR decided to bluff it out. Whether that was the right commercial decision, only time will tell, but it was never going to be fair to their customers.

The DV10 is going to receive lots of signals. If anyone has one and is satisfied with its performance, good luck to them, but in its present form it is, and remains too flawed for me, as a receiver that cannot be relied upon to remain sufficiently frequency accurate.

On the other hand, though not a handheld, for my book, AOR got it right with the AR-DV1. It might not be perfect perhaps, but there again what is. Anyone who reads the description of the DV10, and wants a stable receiver that matches the description (except size) should seriously consider the AR-DV1.

 

[N3CI]

Thanks for the most helpful reply. I will stick with what I have. DV10 did look good on paper but the flaw seems fatal.

 

[cherubim]

What's baffling is AOR's "head in the sand" mentality when dealing with this serious design flaw. You'd think they would be scrambling to get a new revised model of the DV10 out as soon as possible. The specs of this receiver look good and there is a pressing need for a handheld wideband receiver which can decode a multitude of digital protocols.

Maybe Yaesu is as much to blame here as AOR ?

 

[cmdrwill]

I have used the Yaesu FT2DR as a RF test receiver even in the VHF Commercial band. It also has a spectrum 'viewer' handy for interference hunting.

 

[marlbrook]

What's baffling is AOR's "head in the sand" mentality when dealing with this serious design flaw. You'd think they would be scrambling to get a new revised model of the DV10 out as soon as possible. The specs of this receiver look good and there is a pressing need for a handheld wideband receiver which can decode a multitude of digital protocols.

As I said, AOR have produced some very good and innovative receivers in the past.

Their 'head in the sand' approach to design flaws is not new, although I find it disappointing.

Their one time AR-ALPHA, flagship receiver had serious signal filtering problems, even compared to their far less expensive SR-2000A.

This was very well documented in

together with other tests against the (then) Icom top of the range. unit.

This was, to my knowledge, AOR's first 'head in the sand' stance, and I was informed, despite all the evidence, their apparent refusal to correct the issue hit their ALPHA sales, to Icom's benefit.

Apparently this has no deterred them from doing the same again. Of course I understand their commercial dilemma. Withdrawing the DV-10 (including units already sold being recalled) would be a serious financial blow in the short term.

Deciding to bluff it out however may eventually prove a worse 'long term' decision financially.

In my case, and I doubt if I was the only one, I rushed to buy a DV-10, relying on my previous opinion of AOR receivers I owned. I never expected the initial firmware to be exactly right. My AR-DV1 is still getting updates to correct minor problems, not just new additions, which is good on AOR's part. I did expect no serious flaws in hardware design.

I will not do so again. I have not given up on buying AOR equipment, far from it, however I will not be buying anything they release for months after it appears, or more, until independent reviews clearly indicate there are no serious hardware design faults.

If, because of the way they are dealing with the DV10, my present 'lack of trust' in AOR is shared by others, that will cost them, and I am sorry about that, but others must decide who is really to blame?

 

[palmerjrusa]

As I said, AOR have produced some very good and innovative receivers in the past.

Their 'head in the sand' approach to design flaws is not new, although I find it disappointing.

Their one time AR-ALPHA, flagship receiver had serious signal filtering problems, even compared to their far less expensive SR-2000A.

This was very well documented in

together with other tests against the (then) Icom top of the range. unit.

This was, to my knowledge, AOR's first 'head in the sand' stance, and I was informed, despite all the evidence, their apparent refusal to correct the issue hit their ALPHA sales, to Icom's benefit.

Apparently this has no deterred them from doing the same again. Of course I understand their commercial dilemma. Withdrawing the DV-10 (including units already sold being recalled) would be a serious financial blow in the short term.

Deciding to bluff it out however may eventually prove a worse 'long term' decision financially.

In my case, and I doubt if I was the only one, I rushed to buy a DV-10, relying on my previous opinion of AOR receivers I owned. I never expected the initial firmware to be exactly right. My AR-DV1 is still getting updates to correct minor problems, not just new additions, which is good on AOR's part. I did expect no serious flaws in hardware design.

I will not do so again. I have not given up on buying AOR equipment, far from it, however I will not be buying anything they release for months after it appears, or more, until independent reviews clearly indicate there are no serious hardware design faults.

If, because of the way they are dealing with the DV10, my present 'lack of trust' in AOR is shared by others, that will cost them, and I am sorry about that, but others must decide who is really to blame?

Agree that AOR have made some great receivers in the past, I wouldn't part with my AR5000+3 for anything, it still compares very favorably with the IC-R8600 with respect to basic performance and the AR7030 from AORUK was one of the best HF receivers ever made. I wonder if the company's in trouble, the AR5700D and AR-ALPHA-II have been listed as "future" on Universal Radio's website for, I guess, around two years now with no sign of them appearing in the near future.

 

[grosminet]

Sorry again for bad english . I have had many AOR receivers and I bought ARDV10 "close eyes" . I have good relationship with french AOR reseller. Since the receiver is out with these problems, they didn't answer any more . I'm using now ARDV10 for TETRA and a new TRX1 for DMR/NXDN. strange behavior

 

[marlbrook]

Sorry again for bad english . I have had many AOR receivers and I bought ARDV10 "close eyes" . I have good relationship with french AOR reseller. Since the receiver is out with these problems, they didn't answer any more . I'm using now ARDV10 for TETRA and a new TRX1 for DMR/NXDN. strange behavior

Sorry to say the lack of replies does not surprise me. The initial response was to attack the people sharing the problems they had found as 'AOR haters' and saying they were fabricating the results regarding frequency instability., and even penalising at least one person.

Quite quickly AOR started to threaten legal action if anything in their emails was disclosed, and when that did not work obviously 'blacklisted' several people and would no longer answer their emails at all.

I am not going to mention names, but two (possibly one using two different names) were allied to the Company I assume you mean. Interestingly I see both have now been banned from the French Scanning Forum, although I do not know why.

None of the above is idle speculation, and have solid evidence to back these things up.

All very sad. Despite never openly admitting the flaw in the hardware that causes the frequency issues, AOR continue to try to apply fixes via firmware. They have has some success, but still 'limited', and it always will be.

The closest analogy I can think of is a Company releasing a new car whose front wheels 'wobble' due to a faulty component in the design, and instead of recalling them and changing the offending component, they keep trying to update the vehicle's on board computer to try to compensate for it.

Just as the car's 'wobble' will vary at different speeds, the DV10's frequency stability will vary with temperature and frequency. Software (firmware) may be used to reduce the problem, some of the time, and in certain circumstances, but the chances the 'wobble' will be totally cured over the entire frequency range at any temperature is a fantasy. The only way to do that permanently is at component level.

There are DV10 owners who find this acceptable, which is fine, but the fact remains AOR have designed and produced many excellent and stable receivers in the past. The DV10 sadly is not amongst them.

 

[mrkelso]

As I said, AOR have produced some very good and innovative receivers in the past.

Their 'head in the sand' approach to design flaws is not new, although I find it disappointing.

Their one time AR-ALPHA, flagship receiver had serious signal filtering problems, even compared to their far less expensive SR-2000A.

This was very well documented in

together with other tests against the (then) Icom top of the range. unit.

This was, to my knowledge, AOR's first 'head in the sand' stance, and I was informed, despite all the evidence, their apparent refusal to correct the issue hit their ALPHA sales, to Icom's benefit.

Apparently this has no deterred them from doing the same again. Of course I understand their commercial dilemma. Withdrawing the DV-10 (including units already sold being recalled) would be a serious financial blow in the short term.

Deciding to bluff it out however may eventually prove a worse 'long term' decision financially.

In my case, and I doubt if I was the only one, I rushed to buy a DV-10, relying on my previous opinion of AOR receivers I owned. I never expected the initial firmware to be exactly right. My AR-DV1 is still getting updates to correct minor problems, not just new additions, which is good on AOR's part. I did expect no serious flaws in hardware design.

I will not do so again. I have not given up on buying AOR equipment, far from it, however I will not be buying anything they release for months after it appears, or more, until independent reviews clearly indicate there are no serious hardware design faults.

If, because of the way they are dealing with the DV10, my present 'lack of trust' in AOR is shared by others, that will cost them, and I am sorry about that, but others must decide who is really to blame?

Thanks for the great report.

 

[marlbrook]

"STABLE OR ACCEPTABLY UNSTABLE FOR MY NEEDS - THAT IS THE QUESTION" (Hamlet - update to 2019 - thanks to Bill Shakespeare - G0BARD)

I understand why some are still buying the AR-DV10. On 'paper' it reads as fantastic. AOR and their Distributors deny that it has any faults, and if pushed some will say it 'may' have had a few, but all are cured now. Shame on them.

Frequency instability of this kind should never be something that even existed, let alone be a matter where people need to discuss whether it is not bad enough for them to be inconvenienced. It does exist on the DV10, and it should not.

Many returned their DV10's, no doubt more will. Hopefully having been 'warned' many will avoid it in its present form.

If (almost) everyone had done this AOR would have withdrawn and fixed the AR-DV10 by now. They decided to 'bluff it out', and to a degree that seems to be working.

The 'REAL QUESTION' is should Customers ever have been put into a position where they feel the need to criticise, defend, or even 'question' such a basic thing as a hardware design created frequency instability of what should have been a 'high end' and expensive Receiver?

 

[prcguy]

I attended the Dayton Hamvention this year, the biggest radio event in the US. I asked several radio vendors if they sold any DV10s and they said they will not sell them at all due to the problems. This must be getting back to AOR and Yaesu.

"STABLE OR ACCEPTABLY UNSTABLE FOR MY NEEDS - THAT IS THE QUESTION" (Hamlet - update to 2019 - thanks to Bill Shakespeare - G0BARD)

I understand why some are still buying the AR-DV10. On 'paper' it reads as fantastic. AOR and their Distributors deny that it has any faults, and if pushed some will say it 'may' have had a few, but all are cured now. Shame on them.

Frequency instability of this kind should never be something that even existed, let alone be a matter where people need to discuss whether it is not bad enough for them to be inconvenienced. It does exist on the DV10, and it should not.

Many returned their DV10's, no doubt more will. Hopefully having been 'warned' many will avoid it in its present form.

If (almost) everyone had done this AOR would have withdrawn and fixed the AR-DV10 by now. They decided to 'bluff it out', and to a degree that seems to be working.

The 'REAL QUESTION' is should Customers ever have been put into a position where they feel the need to criticise, defend, or even 'question' such a basic thing as a hardware design created frequency instability of what should have been a 'high end' and expensive Receiver?

 

[grosminet]

I bought the ARDV10 at the beginning . I'm using it now mainly for TETRA, DSTAR, dPMR and C4FM . I didn't enter any memories into the ARDV10 because it is a mess to manage . (no simple CSV like other RX do) . I bought a TRX-1 for DMR and NXDN . I never understand the AOR commercial actions after users found all these problems . Please AOR read radioreference and answer !!! ARDV10 is ACCEPTABLY UNSTABLE FOR MY NEEDS !!!

 

[wb4sqi]

Well, it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall somewhere in Yaesu or AOR to hear if there is any future for the DV10. It's amazing to see how many Yaesu radios have the same or similar form factor as the DV10.

At least Whistler had the good sense to halt the TRX100/200 development before those units hit the market.

It seems to me now would be a good time for Icom to add DMR to the R30, great time to capture more market share.

Amazing that DV10's are not showing up on the used market.

 

[mrkelso]

I sold one and kept the 2nd one I have here in the box unused just incase they ever fix this piece of what ever you want to call it