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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Omni\s+V\s+audio\s+mod\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: bstephens1@mindspring.com (robert k stephens); Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 17:20:01 -0500; I forget the details but I know some guys on this list have discussed an audio mod for the Omni VI that involves a 2.8 filter. Would a modified Omni V qualify as a pretty good DX rig *and a nice "low; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00481.html (7,999 bytes)
2. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com (Gary Hoffman); Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:52:04 -0500; I'm almost afraid to answer this one.... :) I don't know the details of the mod itself, so someone else will have to answer you there. But, as for the DX properties vs the Audio properties... it is m; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00502.html (9,576 bytes)
3. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: tlogan7@cox.net (tlogan7@cox.net); Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:00:34 -0500; Having tried both filters I would agree with Gary. The problem is that it is a subjective issue. We all have different audio tastes so there is no "right" answer. However, TenTec did use the 2.4 filt; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00503.html (10,957 bytes)
4. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com (Gary Hoffman); Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:17:42 -0500; Ironically, I can get subjectively "better" audio by making the signal even narrower... what I do is use a narrow IF filter... like typically a 2.1 khz 10 pole INRAD filter... and then I slide my pas; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00505.html (12,205 bytes)
5. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: bstephens1@mindspring.com (ROBERT STEPHENS); Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 21:36:42 -0500; Tnx to all for your replies, I've just spent about 2 hours searching the archives for more info. My eyes are red and I can barely see the screen <g> It looks like the best set up for ssb would be to; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00512.html (12,844 bytes)
6. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: ve7asr@telus.net (Rick Williams); Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:04:23 -0800; Bob I believe the Inrad audio change your speaking of was on the Omni VI not the Omni V?? Certainly the filters can be updated on both. 73, Rick VE7ASR -- From: "ROBERT STEPHENS" <bstephens1@mindspri; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00513.html (9,210 bytes)
7. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: talbot@kmr.ll.mit.edu (Talbot, George A.); Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 11:32:20 +1200; Bob, <snip> a<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" Consider the Ten Tec Paragon. It shares much of the same circuitry as the Omni, the crystal filters are common,; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00538.html (8,948 bytes)
8. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com (Gary Hoffman); Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 18:59:04 -0500; Well, Some people like general coverage radios for SWL... so if that's your = thing, fine. But, if you want a really good receiver, the last thing you want is = general coverage. This throws away a h; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00540.html (9,539 bytes)
9. [TenTec] Omni V audio mod (score: 1): Author: bstephens1@mindspring.com (ROBERT STEPHENS); Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 7:8:43 -0500; Rick I checked the web site and it is true that the Inrad internal mod is for the Omni VI only. Perhaps I've been assuming that the V has more in common with the VI than it actually does. The reputat; /archives//html/TenTec/2002-11/msg00597.html (9,350 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]