[Jim]

I find that the FT-890 is the type of radio that says: ‘amateur radio’. Let me explain. When I first discovered Yaesu in the late sixties, those radios still looked ‘old school’. They included the FR-50B receiver and FL-50B transmitter. I had seen them at a shop near Montreal with my dad. Years passed before I went back to an actual shop. Sometime in the mid-seventies, I went back to that shop and discovered the Yaesu FT-101. I was smitten. I don’t know why, but it just looked so modern. That, I guess, became my benchmark for what a ‘radio’ should look like. In later years I think I bought radios that looked like it, including a massive Sony SWL radio I bought, I don’t remember the model number (it even had a built in cassette) but I bought it, I still believe, because it looked like the FT-101. Fast forward to your radio Anthony, and it’s still in the same vein. Granted, I am talking aesthetics more than performance but let’s all be honest for a moment. We buy radios for their performance ‘as well as’ for how they make us feel. Do I like the latest radios with waterfalls and menus a mile deep? Sure I do, of course I do. But my ‘reference’ will I think, always remain the generation that began with the FT-101 and, in my mind, includes the 890.

[KD3Y]

As you probably know, I like old stuff, Jim. I want knobs and buttons! I couldn’t care less about a touch-screen. I guess I would own one for the functionality and features (I like the waterfall) but I also want it to be “manual”.

[Jim]

I hear you. For instance, I love the quality of transmission and reception on my FT-891, but it’s all about menus menus menus. Obviously, on an HF mobile, that makes sense, but it does hinder one’s ability to interact effectively with the radio. My ideal radio has knobs for most of what I need (I used to have a Kenwood 990s) but enough menus for the more obscure settings.