Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Carl\,\s+Pmni\,\s+756\s+etc\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Carl\,\s+Pmni\,\s+756\s+etc\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

21. [TenTec] Carl, Pmni, 756 etc (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 09:39:18 -1000; If I recall correctly, my first real (that is, not hacked up war surplus) rcvr, in 1950-51 was a Hallicrafters S-38! Bought at the local Montogomery Ward store, hi. Still was using the ARC-5 40M CW t; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-03/msg00759.html (8,200 bytes)
22. [TenTec] Carl, Pmni, 756 etc (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 21:08:01 -0500; But Carl, my point is really this.... The only way to compare receivers is to compare them under some sort of standardized tests, even if those tests are less than perfect. I won't debate or disagre; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-03/msg00764.html (8,895 bytes)
23. [TenTec] Carl, Pmni, 756 etc (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 21:08:01 -0500; I have a S38 and a SX99 here, and they are both helped immensely by an audio DSP filter...if you can keep the stations tuned in... those receivers, not because of them. Differences from location-to-; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-03/msg00766.html (8,630 bytes)
24. [TenTec] Carl, Pmni, 756 etc (score: 1): Author: n4ydu@worldnet.att.net (Nathan Moreschi); Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 03:15:19 -0000; DSP currently has some setbacks but that doesn't mean we should slam technology. Sometimes to make things better we have to take a few steps back. DSP is far from perfect but it works well for 99.99; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-03/msg00768.html (11,015 bytes)
25. [TenTec] Carl, Pmni, 756 etc (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 18:38:57 -1000; Tom wrote, in part: My first 40 meter CW DX was Volt, DU7SV, with that "ancient" set up, hi. Was using an Amphenol 300 ohm twin lead folded 40 m dipole(remember those?). 73, Jim KH7M; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-03/msg00769.html (8,089 bytes)
26. [TenTec] Carl, Pmni, 756 etc (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 07:17:47 -0500; I haven't seen anyone slam technology when it is *properly* applied. Factually, almost anyone on 160 or 80 meters would notice close spaced IM DR in the 70dB or less range if they work weak CW signa; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-03/msg00772.html (8,621 bytes)
27. [TenTec] Carl, Pmni, 756 etc (score: 1): Author: ve1adh@accesswave.ca (Dave McClafferty); Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 13:01:46 -0400; Wonder how W8JI's setup compares to Jack's, VE1ZZ. See QST, February 1996, page31. Dave, VE1ADH; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-03/msg00774.html (7,754 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 27
Page: [1] [2]