RME 6900 opinons?

[K1ZJH]

Pretty looking, but I'd like to hear from owners about the bad side of this RX, if it has any. Say, compared to a NC-300, RX-1, SX-101 or similar.

Pete

[WQ9E]

It is pretty stable (it still uses a tunable instead of crystal controlled HFO )  and the sensitivity is fine.  The dial mechanism is smooth and isn't prone to failure like the two speed drive used on the RME 4300/4350 receivers.  It doesn't cover 160 but does have a WWV position.

Some owners don't like the receiver on AM.  But read the manual carefully and follow the tuning instructions to avoid this issue.  The RME-6900 is meant to be offset tuned on AM so that the carrier is near the cutoff on either side of the IF pass band so that only one sideband is received.  You should tune so that the sideband with the least QRM is selected.  If you center the carrier in the IF then the audio response is very restricted.  A few have been modified by owners to provide wider response on AM using some additional small value capacitors.  I find it easier to follow the instructions and tune properly rather than modify   It is a good all mode receiver.

I have a couple of them here and neither required more than an alignment to get them working as specified.  They are nice looking receivers although you will find the S meter is difficult to read unless the panel is at eye level.

Disclaimer:  I live about 30 miles from the original RME factory site and I have and like a lot of RME gear.  My oldest is a RME-9D and my favorites in the RME line are the 9D (an early classic), along with the 69, seldom seen 99, and the 6900. 

[KM1H]

My only experience has been on the repair bench and they are unremarkable in performance or stability, their main point is external appearance.

Im still looking for a clean no rust RME 45 to complement the DB-22 and VHF-152A on the shelf.

Carl

[W9GT]

RME really knew how to make nice looking dials and probably their best over-all effort was the RME 69.  RME-69s were staples in many shacks in the 30's - 40's and were considered to be one of the best receivers in their day.  A friend of mine had an RME 70 which was somewhat rare and was sort of like an RME 69 with a wierd-looking S-meter that was at the top edge of the front of the cabinet.  The RME 45s looked a lot better than they worked.  I believe they had loctal tubes...nice looking big half-moon dial, but performance ...not so hot.  I had an RME 45B which had a two-speed dial mechanism.  It worked fairly well on AM and I also had the matching preselector and VHF 152 converter boxes.  Really was a neat looking combo.

I don't know too much about the later RME receivers, but common complaints that I have heard were that the dial mechanisms weren't so hot and they didn't sound all that great on AM.  All-in-all, it would seem that the early RME receivers might be a better choice for AM, however, I guess you really need to check it for yourself.  You might also check with Dan, W8NWF.  I believe he has a 6900.

73,  Jack, W9GT

[nq5t]

i had one for a while.  Bought it to try one after some discussion around here as I recall that put it in a "similar to" basket with the NC-303 (which I had) and others.  Not a bad receiver.  But the NC-303 is still here and the 6900 is gone.

[W9RAN]

I like my 6900 Pete, but to my ear, with the product detector and decent AGC  it's a better receiver for vintage sideband than for AM.   I've wondered why RME picked 57 kc for the low IF (unless maybe just to be different) but it provides good selectivity and nice audio, for slop-bucket.   Unlike the 4500s series with their perpetually-slipping vernier drives, the 6900 tuning is smooth and I think the slide-rule dial looks cool ;-)

73, Bob W9RAN

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

The best part of the 6900 to me was the main tuning knob. 

I had one some years ago with the matching 6901 speaker, wasn't a bad looking set. But looking inside was a huge let down. A vast emptiness, reminded me of a Super Pro converted to miniature tubes or transistors. Why bother? Mine went down the road within a matter of months.

It was a somewhat sad experience, because I've had a number of RME rigs over the years and always enjoyed them. Always interesting and fun to use. As Carl and others have mentioned, the 6900 is incredibly unremarkable for the hype and expectations of the time, as well as to those familiar with their older gear. It was RME's last gasp, only too clear when you have one in your hands.

They are a bit scarce though, and certainly of good construction. Maybe on par with the SX-101 for performance, or some of the baby Hammarlunds of the same period. Rodger is right - what were they thinking using an edge view S meter? It's as if the electrical guys got the 'go smaller/more modern' memo and the mechanical crew was still using the 1950s big-box design mentality.

[k7yoo]

I recently acquired a nice RME 6900 after passing on quite a few ugly ones. It was a Rx I used as a novice in our Jr Hi radio club. It is about on par with my SX101A. It is a decent Rx and not nearly as bad as the ER article from a few years back suggests--although I note that the author said he was keeping his. I like it because it is different and quite acceptable to operate on both AM & SSB. I find the calibration to be quite good on mine (except for the goofy logging dial) and the sensitivity decent. There are a few birdies, but none that really bother me. It is NOT in the radio turd category like some of the other late tube era stuff I could mention.

Skip

[ke7trp]

Carl. I have a clean rust Free RME 45 here.  We got it a couple years ago. Capped it and went through it. Its working fine. Used it for a week and set it back on the shelf. If its something you want. Let me know. I am sure my Brother can ship it. Its in the original case also.

We had an ultra clean RME 6900.  I used it for a few hours. It was very good on SSB.  Stable, Clear ect.. Not the best on AM for HiFi.  It was sold off to a collector that hopefully is enjoying it. It was spotless!

C