Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Is\s+My\s+Wide\s+Filter\s+\*Too\*\s+Wide\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Is\s+My\s+Wide\s+Filter\s+\*Too\*\s+Wide\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Is My Wide Filter *Too* Wide? (score: 1): Author: al_lorona@agilent.com (LORONA,AL (A-USA,ex3)); Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:10:29 -0600; Hi, Everybody, I have wide, 2.8 kHz Inrad filters in both IFs of my Omni VI now. My transmitted SSB signal showed all the signs of an incorrect BFO insertion frequency: poor carrier rejection and poo; /archives//html/TenTec/2001-07/msg00054.html (9,428 bytes)
2. [TenTec] Is My Wide Filter *Too* Wide? (score: 1): Author: csturner@falcon.csc.calpoly.edu (Clark Savage Turner); Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:56:20 -0700 (PDT); Yes, I've checked and needed no carrier adjustments to come within specs, in fact, better than before. I've also stuck one of these filters into my Corsair II with no carrier oscillator adjustment ne; /archives//html/TenTec/2001-07/msg00055.html (8,481 bytes)
3. [TenTec] Is My Wide Filter *Too* Wide? (score: 1): Author: k8do" <k8do@email.msn.com (k8do); Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:53:38 -0400; Hey Al, The TT engineers are pretty sharp fellas... When they designed the Omni VI with the narrow 2.3 SSB filters, don't you suspect that they looked at a design with the wider 2.8 filters and decid; /archives//html/TenTec/2001-07/msg00059.html (7,745 bytes)
4. [TenTec] Is My Wide Filter *Too* Wide? (score: 1): Author: csturner@falcon.csc.calpoly.edu (Clark Savage Turner); Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:42:02 -0700 (PDT); That's 2.4 filters. And the INRAD fellow is sharp, too. Check George's background. They know each other :-) . The 2.8's have much better skirts a very short distance away in the passband. Check the s; /archives//html/TenTec/2001-07/msg00064.html (9,343 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]