Hi Paul, Look for it and let me know. I have the CCIR data, and at 35 WPM under severe fading you might start to notice a change once in a while during fades, but that would only be true if receiver
I use the most selectivity possible (but almost never less than 200Hz) unless the signal is buried in rough noise. The reason is S/N ratio is directly proportional to selectivity, and my brain has l
Hi Lee, I see what you are describing now, and it should be clean CW. Waveform is VERY important, more so than rise and fall in most cases. I'll try to do a better job of explaining, because I still
I certainly wouldn't adjust a roller inductor while transmitting near the tuner's rated power, but virtually any roller inductor can be adjusted while transmitting at reasonable power levels without
That's why it is called a raised-sine in this application, since it starts and stops at zero slope. The key to all of this is bandwidth. Assume we start with a square wave from a key and we filter i
Sounds like exactly the same problem ICOM has in some radios. If you do a make-only delay, you also will have to stretch the signal from the key input to restore the weight. That shouldn't be difficu
I haven't been following this closely, so forgive me if I repeat something that has already been said but...... The most effective processor is a split-band audio processor, assuming you can keep the
You miss the whole point of the multi--band clipper then, if you think it has harmonics or IM distortion at the output. 73, Tom W8JI W8JI@contesting.com
I think we have, through poor planning, made life miserable for CW ops on crowded bands. Let's look at this in proper perspective: I listen with a 440 Hz tone mostly. A 1.5 mS rise or fall time woul
That is not true by any observation I have gathered in well over 50 tests when my signal was weak on 160 meters. I now use a waveshape that is similar to a sine rise and fall, and no one so far can
Hi All, 1.) How clean is the transmitter of the Omni? Is it exceptionally clean, or about the same as most "modern" rigs? -x dBc at x kHz will work if anyone can help. 2.) How good is the receiver fo
AGC is a worry, but a minor one. If the blanker follows the AGC system, the receiver will lose gain from AGC being held up by the noise. Overload of preceding stages is another lesser problem, altho
Depends on the noise. With white noise, selectivity helps. With rough noises, it can hurt because the filter ringing will draw out the pulses and increase noise pulse duration. For example, on a qui
Wider filters increase noise power outside the "passband" of your focus. Using a wider filter does not move the noise to a new frequency and improve S/N. While S/N ratio in your "mental area of focu
Hi Scott, If everything is measured the same way, and a USEFUL way, rig X is better. Rig X has less "gain" on 80 meters, that's a good thing since site noise is virtually always higher on lower bands
It works the opposite of that way on moonbounce and 160 meters. Moonbounce ops virtually all use heavy filters, because the background noise is a hiss. Same on 160 meters on quiet nights. Try to use
Jim and others, I'd propose an alternate idea. I'd look into placing a good quality inductor across the antenna terminals. That might cancel the reactance while raising the impedance. The inductor wo
Jim and others, I'd propose an alternate idea. I'd look into placing a good quality inductor across the antenna terminals. That might cancel the reactance while raising the impedance. The inductor wo
I'm a little puzzled by that. Most of the IM we hear is from transmitters, not generated in receivers. The typical SSB transmitter IM3 is in the -25 to-30dB (below one tone of two equal tones). A ty