And the audiophiles discovered the 813 and how well they worked in their HB
audio amps and woosh... the prices skyrocketed.
Eric
W9WLW
On March 20, 2014 5:12:04 PM EDT, bcarling@cfl.rr.com wrote:
|Rick - I would say that the 813 is also a great valve.
|
|You used to be able to buy them for $20.- 30 each not too long ago,
|but because they are out of production ver few manufacturers still want
|to use them.
|
|805 used to be a rather fine bottle too.
|
|Brian, AF4K (Ex-G3XLQ)
|
|On 20 Mar 2014 at 20:40, Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP wrote:
|
|> Billy,
|>
|> When were you an SWL in DL? And where?
|> I was also an SWL in DL as a kid.
|> That was 1959 to 1962. QTH was Zweibrucken, near the French border.
|> I would have gotten on the air but in Germany we had to be 18 and I
|was just
|> a very early teenager.
|>
|> The relay trick you mentioned was indeed good. It effectively
|doubled the
|> voltage applied to the T/R relay just for an instant, speeding it up
|> considerably. It almost immediately reverted to normal voltage to
|prevent
|> any damage to the relay. In fact, in consideration of the fact that
|TEN-TEC
|> does not delay the first dit long enough for the Ameritron relays,
|it's a
|> great idea to use this circuit with Ameritron amps (if you don't have
|the
|> QSK-5 option).
|>
|> YES, the open frame relays are now a bit faster than they formerly
|were, but
|> the current real life switching time, including settling time and/or
|delay
|> added from reverse diode is "20mS". This was measured within the
|last 10
|> days on a brand new AL-80B by Bob, K4TAX.
|>
|> I agree the point on filtering to solve some of the PIN diode issues.
|> However I guarantee you that you won't get anyone in our club (over
|400
|> members) to go back to PIN-Diode switching. Our club members are
|fanatics
|> (as I used to be) and spend a lot of time and money planning their
|contest
|> expeditions. In the past, PIN diodes caused us a lot of grief.
|Vacuum
|> relays wear out after a long time, but they usually do not die
|prematurely.
|>
|>
|> Quality of tubes is a very serious problem. More than most people
|realize.
|> The only tube I really like besides the 3-500z and the 3CX-1200Z is
|the
|> 572B. Recently, for several months RF Parts could not even deliver
|any
|> decent 572Bs, and now they say "limited stock, please call". Good
|quality
|> tubes are scarce. I still have one brand new (boxed) 3-500z from
|Amperex.
|> I've had it for over 20 years - just in case. Based on my experience
|(sorry,
|> there I go again - hi), that should cover my needs for the rest of my
|life.
|> I have to add that I do not abuse my amps. I run my 3-500z at about
|600w.
|> They last forever that way!
|>
|> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
|> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
|>
|>
|>
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
|Billy Cox
|> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 8:02 PM
|> To: Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP; 'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'
|> Subject: Re: [TenTec] QSK or not?
|>
|> Hi Rick, and I enjoy following your posts!
|>
|> I was a SWL in DL land as a kid and was
|> amazed at some of the signals there, so
|> do understand the challenges a wee bit,
|> glad to know things are improving there.
|>
|> Several years ago I believe Ameritron did change the original (SLOW)
|relay
|> to a newer design. As mine use the QSK board, which means the T/R
|relay is
|> always in "T", I have not considered changing them out.
|>
|> Adding the QSK board was a cleaner/quicker option for me than as Gary
|> mentioned in his post, adding someone's custom idea to an amp.
|>
|> One of the contest clubs, YCCC? came up with a way to speed the old
|stock
|> relay but even that would NOT be fast enough for true QSK.
|>
|> Much of the PIN "QRM" can be addressed with filtering/bypassing, as
|SO2R has
|> some of the same challenges as M/M with lots of close RF.
|>
|> The AL1200 is a good amp, not perfect and it's tube replacement cost
|> continues to rise. So far, there's not been a need to have to do that
|yet.
|>
|> Probably the best tubes today for most of us, are either the 3-500Z
|new or
|> the 8877 sourced as a reliable "pull". Sadly the quality of many
|other RF
|> tubes has become an adventure in risk.
|>
|> That is all part of learning and understanding how things really
|work, ...
|> or should/could work and that makes this hobby so enjoyable at times.
|>
|> (BTW, these posts regarding QSK are encouraging as to one more sign
|that CW
|> is not going away.)
|>
|> Have a great weekend there Rick!
|>
|> 73 de Billy, AA4NU
|>
|> -----Original Message-----
|> >From: Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP
|> >Hi Billy,
|> >
|> >Nice to hear from you again. Indeed the AL-1200 is a wonderful
|amplifier!
|> >
|> >I did say "my experience", and that is based on personal ownership
|as
|> >well as lots of friends, members of my contest club, who had similar
|> experience.
|> >
|> >BTW, it's more than $500 over here. Average? $500 is a fair
|comment.
|> >
|> >In addition we have always had a problem here in Europe with the
|> >shortwave broadcast stations. You guys heard them, but they were 60
|
|> >over 9 here, and the sum of the voltage hitting our rigs sometimes
|> >caused the PIN-Diodes to cause IMD in the receivers. That not only
|> >affected this type of amp, but also things like the Alpha amps. Our
|club
|> members got rid of them.
|> >
|> >Fortunately that Intermod problem has mostly gone away since the
|> >broadcast stations moved outside of the 40m band...except of course
|> >on-site of a multi-multi operation.
|> >
|> >The AL-1200 is indeed a lovely amplifier and would be my first
|choice
|> >(by
|> >far) if we were allowed 1500w here, but I would immediately throw
|out
|> >its open-frame relay and install a decent vacuum relay. I wouldn't
|> >mess around with the PIN-Diodes.
|> >We are limited to just 750w, so I stick with the 3-500z.
|> >
|> >73 - Rick, DJ0IP
|> >(Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
|> >
|> >
|> >-----Original Message-----
|> >From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
|Billy
|> >Cox
|> >Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 5:41 PM
|> >To: Billy Cox; Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment; 'Discussion of
|Ten-Tec
|> >Equipment'
|> >Subject: Re: [TenTec] QSK or not?
|> >
|> >Really Rick, that a rather subjective statement? So let's allow for
|> >other's experiences too as I have run a pair of
|> >AL-1200 amps here with the internal QSK board for over 20 years of
|> >DXing and contesting QSOs, each driven by various brands/models of
|gear
|> >and different guest ops with * NO * design related problems.
|> >
|> >So there's another subjective statement to ponder! B-) B-)
|> >
|> >... and it's NOT $500 here in the US, so let's be accurate to not
|drift
|> >into more anti-Ameritron bashing. QSL OM?
|> >
|> >73 de Billy, AA4NU
|> >
|> >
|> >-----Original Message-----
|> >>From: Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP
|> >>Yes, you are correct, but when you add the terribly expensive
|external
|> >>circuits, the amp no longer attempts to follow CW keying with its
|> >>internal relay. The Ameritron amps can only run clean QSK with a
|$500
|> >>add-on, which my experience has been, are not real reliable. My
|> >>experience is based on personal use for a few years, and knowledge
|of
|> >>experience of several other members of my contesting club.
|> >>
|> >>If you want to run QSK at more than about 10 wpm, it would be
|better
|> >>to purchase an amplifier with a high speed T/R relay. There are
|> >>plenty of them on the market.
|> >>
|> >>I personally switched to a QSK Technologies amplifier. In fact I
|> >>bought two of them. Never had any problems with them.
|> >>
|> >>Today I only have an older Ameritron (clone), the SB-1000, and I
|just
|> >>don't run "full" QSK. For contests I set the timing such that I
|can
|> >>hear between words. IMO, there is no tangible loss of
|functionality
|> >>compared to full QSK.
|> >>For normal non-contest QSOs I run about 1 second hang delay, which
|> >>helps me keep what little bit of sanity I still have left.
|> >>
|> >>73 - Rick, DJ0IP
|> >>(Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
|> >>
|> >>
|> >>-----Original Message-----
|> >>From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
|Brian
|> >>Carling
|> >>Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 5:03 PM
|> >>To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
|> >>Subject: Re: [TenTec] QSK or not?
|> >>
|> >>Yes, but I think a lot of radio amateurs using good QSK Rigs like
|the
|> >>Tentec have managed to convert their amplifiers for QSK operation
|by
|> >>adding a circuitboard like the QSK 1500 or the QSK5.
|> >>
|> >>I realize that is more than just a simple homebrewer undertaking.
|> >>
|> >>Best regards - Bry Carling
|> >>
|> >>
|> >>
|> >>> On Mar 20, 2014, at 11:51 AM, "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP"
|> >>wrote:
|> >>>
|> >>> It's not quite that simple, at least not always.
|> >>>
|> >>> "IF" your amplifier has a very fast T/R relay, such as a vacuum
|> >>> relay, then you are correct; a few simple switching transistors
|and
|> >>> a tiny relay will do the trick. But that only works when the
|main
|> >>> T/R relay is fast enough to follow CW keying.
|> >>>
|> >>> If instead you have an amplifier whose T/R relay needs 20 mS to
|> >>> switch, AND you connect the hand-shaking just as the Ten-Tec
|keying
|> >>> loop normally works, the CW is not going to be very smooth.
|Timing
|> >>> will get screwed up. The open-frame relays are just too slow to
|do
|> >>> that. The only way to make them work is to have hang delay such
|> >>> that they
|> >>don't need to follow the keying.
|> >>> The Ten-Tec hand-shaking does not do this.
|> >>>
|> >>> And then if you have to work with hang delay, you don't need the
|> >>> complexity of the hand-shaking. You just need sufficient pre-dit
|
|> >>> delay and adjustable hang delay - but you sacrifice true QSK.
|> >>> TRUE QSK?
|> >>> You never had it in the first place because you did not buy a QSK
|> >>amplifier!
|> >>>
|> >>> No matter what you feed a mule or how you treat it, it will never
|be
|> >>> a race horse!
|> >>>
|> >>> (On the other hand, not everybody needs or wants a race horse and
|
|> >>> mules are wonderful animals!)
|> >>>
|> >>> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
|> >>> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
|> >>>
|> >>> -------------------------
|> >>> -----Original Message-----
|> >>> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
|> >>> bcarling@cfl.rr.com
|> >>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] QSK or not?
|> >>>
|> >>> I have to wonder why some guys will spend $500 for an external
|> >>> accessory to do QSK with their linear amplifier. The system in
|my
|> >>> TT
|> >>> 422 is so simple. A couple of simple boards and a relay.
|> >_______________________________________________
|> >TenTec mailing list
|> >TenTec@contesting.com
|> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|> >
|> _______________________________________________
|> TenTec mailing list
|> TenTec@contesting.com
|> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|>
|> _______________________________________________
|> TenTec mailing list
|> TenTec@contesting.com
|> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|
|
|_______________________________________________
|TenTec mailing list
|TenTec@contesting.com
|http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|