Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Argonaut\s+V\s+Audio\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Argonaut\s+V\s+Audio\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Toby Pennington" <toby423@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:22:47 -0500; Just saw this post on another list and it describes better than I did about what is happening with the audio on the Argonaut 5. It seems the older Argos did not have this problem according to the fol; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00408.html (7,591 bytes)
2. [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: Don Rasmussen <wb8yqj@yahoo.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:02:07 -0800 (PST); I would say that it's about time for a software revision anyway, 1.09 Let's hope Mr. Burchfield follows up on the idea of removing the rolloff in the DSP and has them put a file out there for us. [Te; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00414.html (7,752 bytes)
3. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: RaySoifer@cs.com; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:54:45 EST; While the Argo V, with its 350 Hz bass roll-off, does sound "thin," remember that bass frequencies do not contribute to intelligibility. The Argo's primary application is as a stand-alone QRP radio,; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00425.html (7,605 bytes)
4. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:30:56 -0600; Speech response for optimum communication extends from 300 to 3kHz. Western Electric and Bell Labs proved this decades ago, and it is still the better way to set up a radio for audio response for ham; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00426.html (7,570 bytes)
5. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: joel hallas <jrhallas@optonline.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:57:01 -0500; Stuart, I certainly agree with you, all except for the words "optimum" and "proved". I have this vision that the Bell Labs folk who defined those limits were male folk with more grey hair than I have; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00428.html (8,553 bytes)
6. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Toby Pennington" <toby423@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:59:52 -0500; Ray, If you had to use the new Argo V with its present audio setup and roll off, you would want it changed also. Now, the Corsair 2, the Omni series all have communications audio and I would settle f; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00429.html (9,479 bytes)
7. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: RaySoifer@cs.com; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:35:24 EST; Right. So my proposed solution of a single-purpose upgrade would enable you to lower the roll-off, and those who want it left alone could do so also without giving up other features. I do use the Arg; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00432.html (7,823 bytes)
8. [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: Don Rasmussen <wb8yqj@yahoo.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:41:27 -0800 (PST); I suspect if the transmit audio is noticably "thin", there more attenuation at other frequencies. At 400hz or 500hz it's pretty obvious. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio from [joel hallas] Stuart, I ce; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00433.html (7,692 bytes)
9. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Toby Pennington" <toby423@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:01:28 -0500; Sounds OK Ray, I would be glad to try the new code out for the audio. Toby W4CAK roll series is would you occasionally, and _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00435.html (8,971 bytes)
10. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: John Sheeley <wb4qda@yahoo.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:07:28 -0800 (PST); Toby I use a w2ihy 8 band EQ or his EQ plus on my Argo 5 either one seems to improve the Argo 5 audio a lot.I have not done the hardware upgrade .I am still runnig 1.07. John/wb4qda _________________; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00436.html (11,166 bytes)
11. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Dave Edwards" <kd2e@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:51:03 -0500; I understood it was the old ones that DID have the problem. Some hardware, and a software upgrade took care of it. ...Dave -- Original Message -- From: "Toby Pennington" <toby423@earthlink.net> To: "; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00439.html (9,550 bytes)
12. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Darwin, Keith" <Keith.Darwin@goodrich.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:11:52 -0500; 300-3000 Yes, we've heard it for many years. But, as I listen to stuff on the air, I find that extending the range beyond that does indeed help intelligibility. I'd submit that 300-3000 is closer to; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00441.html (8,375 bytes)
13. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:40:07 -0600; Joel, actually there were extensive intelligibility tests which are quoted in all the acoustic text books at our lab at the "U". I am in other branches of acoustics but the speech acousticians will r; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00448.html (8,119 bytes)
14. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:47:43 -0600; FM does not have the amplitude response sensitivity that AM suffers. FM is either locked in or not for broadcast clarity, although I hear many marginal FM stations from out of town. AM detection is v; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00449.html (8,380 bytes)
15. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>; Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:49:12 -0600; Increase the capacitance of series coupling capacitors in the audio input speech amplifier stages, if they are too small to pass your desired band. Stuart K5KVH ______________________________________; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00450.html (7,932 bytes)
16. Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio (score: 1): Author: RaySoifer@cs.com; Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:48:33 EST; Hi all, Summarizing many of the comments that have appeared on this topic since my post, they seem to fall into two groups: 1. Those whose SSB operation with the Argo V consists mostly of ragchewing; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-01/msg00458.html (8,995 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 16
Page: [1]