Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Re\:\s+FYI\s+\-\s+key\s+click\s+thread\s+on\s+Ten\-Tec\s+reflector\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 00:38:05 -0500
There was a long discussion about this on a newsgroup. If you read Kevin's web page, you'll see he says his detailed analysis supports my practical experience and measurements in my lab. I'm less ma
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-02/msg00000.html (9,009 bytes)

2. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: w5yr@att.net (George, W5YR)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 23:52:33 -0600
Bob, I notice in every case that you used the internal analog audio circuitry in those receivers. If you ran an amplitude and phase frequency response on those radios you might find considerable diff
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-02/msg00001.html (9,487 bytes)

3. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: n4py@earthlink.net (Carl Moreschi)
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 00:30:38 -0000
I would just like to add that last weekend I listened a lot to the 160 meter CW contest. Using the Rx340 filters even down to 100 hertz, I found key clicks were all over the band. It was easy to find
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-01/msg00000.html (12,645 bytes)

4. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: n4lq@iglou.com (Steve Ellington)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 20:47:14 -0500
I'm not sure about the 340 but certainly, DSP filtering has given us the ability to really hear those clicks. This was mentioned in a QST review of one (IF) DSP reveiver. At first listen, they though
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-01/msg00002.html (14,322 bytes)

5. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: paulc@mediaone.net (Paul Christensen)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:16:12 -0500
If you go to the Topband archives on contesting.com, there's been a very good discussion running recently concerning key clicks and as you mention Steve, the ability to hear what's always been there
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-01/msg00004.html (16,473 bytes)

6. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: RMcGraw@Blomand.Net (Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 20:19:39 -0600
I wonder about that too. I've got 3 different receivers. Recently while using the same antenna and switching each receiver on line at a time I can clearly tell there is a difference in the way a sing
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-01/msg00005.html (17,274 bytes)

7. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: geraldj@isunet.net (Dr. Gerald N. Johnson, electrical engineer)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:06:16 -0600
The time response of the receive filter has a great deal to do with how a signal sounds to the ear. The classic mechanical and crystal lattice filters tend to have a square shouldered flat topped fre
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-01/msg00008.html (11,334 bytes)

8. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: n4lq@iglou.com (Steve Ellington)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 22:47:49 -0500
I'm really enjoying this thread. Paul, I was searching for click info just yesterday and came across that W9CF page. I must admit, it's way over my head. I can't even tell what his findings are. Mayb
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-01/msg00010.html (19,250 bytes)

9. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:12:33 -0500
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
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-01/msg00014.html (10,360 bytes)

10. [TenTec] Re: FYI - key click thread on Ten-Tec reflector (score: 1)
Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 09:47:55 -0500
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
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-01/msg00617.html (10,977 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu