John, how right you are. I built my first SSB rig in 1954. It was a phasing
rig, and I sure knew how it was supposed to work. When I got my first SSB
book, by Don Stoner, I read every page The ARRL also had a good book on
sideband. I still have both. The two tone test and a scope were as important
as the microphone. When we asked for a report, we wanted an honest report.
When we gave a report indicating problems, we usually were met with a very
positive interested response. Of course there were exceptions, but for the
most part we took pride in the quality of our signals. Boy, how I loved
those technical discussions. We even left a little carrier in so we could
build devices that would lock on to keep us on frequency. We did not have
the stability we have today.
Where did the pride go? When did the technical discussions stop? It is sad,
but then, I am told that I am one of those old timers who still likes CW, so
what right do I have to be influencing others. How many times I have been
told I live in the past, and maybe I do. But I love the present also, with
all it has to offer. But can't we enjoy the present with pride? Oh, well,
another day and another time....
James (Jim) Parsons, K5ROV USAF, Ret. Ham for 58 yrs.
k5rov@arrl.net QCWA, ARCI, Fists, ARRL, ARMS
EX: W1RLA, K5FBB, K4FEO, SV0WN (CRETE), SV0WN (RHODES),
DL4NC, DL4JP, KA2FC (JAPAN), KA2JP (JAPAN).
JOHN 3:16
----- Original Message -----
From: "John G3JAG" <patents@dx0man.prestel.co.uk>
To: "Richard B Drake" <rbdrake@erols.com>; <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 8:56 AM
Subject: RE: [TenTec] Pegasus enhanced audio
>
> They are ... and its hogging already heavily used spectrum.
> Splatter is just another aspect of ignorance. In the good old days when
> SSB rigs were mainly homebrewed, the slightest malfunction was
> instantly spotted and diagnosed. Folk took a pride in helping others to
> fix problems. Nowadays it is rash to give an honest report - it usually
> gets the response "so what ??" If you gave some guys the Sideband
> Handbook section on amplifier linearity to read, they would need a
> translation. It might as well be written in classical Greek.
> So much for the dumbing down of ham radio.
>
> 73 John G3JAG
>
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, Richard B Drake wrote:
> > The whole point of Single Sideband Suppressed Carrier is to
> > improve communications ability by concentrating as much energy as
> > possible into radiating the "essential" parts of the human voice.
> > By definition, you sacrifice some fidelity to do that. I see no
> > problem with using an equalizer to redistribute the spectrum in an
> > effort to improve the sound quality. But to do as you suggest here
> > is ridiculous. I am laughing at the time and money they have
> > wasted on ignorance. Why don't they just use AM?
> >
> > ----
> > 73, Rich - W3ZJ
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> > > [mailto:owner-tentec@contesting.com]On
> > > Behalf Of George, W5YR
> > > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 12:29 AM
> > > To: Michael Gusky
> > > Cc: tentec@contesting.com
> > > Subject: Re: [TenTec] Pegasus enhanced audio
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Just a comment re those "broadcast-sounding" stations
> > > on 75 and 20:
> > >
> > > Almost to a man they are running Kenwood rigs that have been
> > > substantially modified with wide 6 KHz transmit and
> > > receive filters,
> > > low-frequency transmit and received audio response
> > > extended down to 40
> > > to 60 Hz, etc. Most skip over the rig's mic and audio circuitry
> > > completely and put the output of that "rack audio gear"
> > > directly into
> > > the balanced modulator stage. Similarly, the receiver
> > > audio is taken out
> > > in an early stage to appropriate amplifiers and
> > > speakers, eliminating
> > > the usual receiver audio amps and speakers, etc.
> > >
> > > Everything about the transmitter has been modified to
> > > support the
> > > extremely (for amateur SSB) wideband transmit audio and
> > > to provide
> > > ultra-clean operation over that frequency range. The
> > > stations have been
> > > specially designed and assembled to eliminate all hum,
> > > ground loops,
> > > RFI, etc. Not a light undertaking . . .
> > >
> > > Oh, yes, most of them are using studio microphones that
> > > cost more than
> > > the typical transceiver!
> > >
> > > "Hi-fi" in the big leagues on SSB is not a poor boy's
> > > game. Also, don't
> > > overlook the fact that they run high power with large,
> > > high beams to
> > > deliver an S9+++ signal. W2ONV runs the limit (at
> > > least) and has a 70 ft
> > > Sky Needle with beams at 35 and 70 ft. They only have
> > > 60 ft booms . . .
> > >
> > > I use the W2IHY with my Kachina and my IC-756PRO and it
> > > does a great job
> > > of improving the performance of the Heil GoldLine mic
> > > that I use. But,
> > > even though the Kachina has a transmit audio response
> > > of from 100 Hz to
> > > over 4000 Hz, there is no way that I can ever sound
> > > like those lads. My
> > > rigs sound great and I get very good audio reports, but
> > > I will never
> > > sound like W2ONV, even if I had his voice! <:}
> > >
> > > I do highly recommend the W2IHY equalizer. It is very
> > > well designed and
> > > built and does its job well. But, it alone cannot give
> > > you that 14178
> > > sound - sorry.
> > >
> > > 72/73, George W5YR - the Yellow Rose of Texas
> > > NETXQRP 6
> > > Fairview, TX 30 mi NE Dallas in Collin county
> > > QRP-L 1373
> > > Amateur Radio W5YR, in the 55th year and it just keeps
> > > getting better!
> > > Icom IC-756 PRO #02121 (9/00) Kachina #91900556 (12/99)
> > > IC-765 (6/90)
> > >
> > >
> > > Michael Gusky wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Has anyone tried the W2IHY 8 band EQ with the
> > > Pegasus? It would
> > > > appear the Peg is an ideal candidate for putting some
> > > equalization
> > > > between the 705 and mic input. I have listened to
> > > some of the folks
> > > > on 75 and 20 meters running "rack" audio gear with
> > > their rigs and the
> > > > stuff really sounds good.
> > > >
> > > > 73
> > > > Mike
> > > > K5UX
> > >
> > > --
> > > FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/tentec
> > > Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> > > Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> > > Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/tentec
> > Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> > Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> > Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> --
> ----------------------------------
> E-Mail: $m
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Date: $d
> Time: $t
>
> This message was sent by KMAIL under Linux - SuSE 7.0
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/tentec
> Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/tentec
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
|