But it really shouldn't be there at all.īT is a technology that has been around since the early 1990's. This background digital noise is about only half as loud on the JVC than on the Plantronics, making JVC the better choice of the two. This constant noise transmission from the FT-3 to the BT headsets shortens both handsets' usable battery life between charges.
The underlying digital noise base is louder on the more expensive Plantronics than it is on the JVC Gumy. Only the desired audio is heard when listening to streaming (NO digital background noises). (During such times that kind of digital noise trash should be totally squelched.) Both headsets are silent when used with an iPhone SE when not in a call. (I have received OTA compliments.) But.there is an underlying level of "digitial noise" constantly present in both headsets' earpieces.even when there is no active QSO in-progress with the FT-3. The audio quality in QSO's on both T & R is very good when using either headset. I have tried an expensive Plantronics Voyager headset and also the $17 JVC Gumy headset from Amazon (two earbuds) with my FT-3DR.
#Yaesu programming software review Bluetooth#
I will subtract one star in my rating of the FT-3DR for the same Bluetooth complaints a lot of other reviewers have identified. Aftermarket drop-in fast chargers along with a spare 2200mAH battery can be had as a Prime bundle from for about 50 bux. (I'm leaving mine alone, but this does work to improve the FT-3's receive audio.)īattery life is excellent. He did this with the trade-off of losing the some of the waterproofing of the radio's case design. By doing this, he achieved a nice tuned port receive audio improvement effect by having some of his FT-3's speaker audio now coming out that part of the case. I have a ham colleague who removed the lower rubber splash grommet and retainer screw for "mic/spkr and ext DC in" from the right side of his FT-3 (as he wears two hearing aids), in an effort to improve its receive audio. But the FT-3DR's receive audio is what Moto used to call "good communications quality" on their handhelds and is perfectly acceptable to my own ears. I also own an FT-70DR (my first Fusion radio) and will admit the receive audio is both louder and mellower (fuller) coming out of the FT-70 than that emanating from the FT-3DR. It truly is like having an FT-400XDR in the palm of one's hand. Plus, I really do like the vivid color touch screen LCD on the FT-3DR much better. I could have bought a used FT-2DR and probably been equally happy with its functionality, but I got a good price on my FT-3DR from HRO during the recent, Covid-19 inspired, weekend virtual Hamfest event. I'm glad I purchased it, and would do it again.albeit with a few reservations. Let it suffice to say, overall, I really like my FT-3DR. Feature rich, but some features need work.