Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+TopBand\s+Receivers\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+TopBand\s+Receivers\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: jh1kla@mbd.nifty.com (jh1kla@mbd.nifty.com); Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 02:45:20 +0900; Hi all Very interesting articles. In this season here in JA many of us will experience these IMD problems around 1820kHz. So does anybody have a comment how about 75S3 or use on 160M? I suppose that; /archives//html/Topband/2000-09/msg00006.html (6,735 bytes)
2. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: n1eu@hotmail.com (Barry N1EU); Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 08:17:13 EDT; I'm thinking of supplementing my current TopBand receive capability (FT1000MP) by bringing an R4-C or 75A4 into the op position as an additional 160M receiver. I would appreciate hearing from anyone; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00047.html (8,004 bytes)
3. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: phutter@sarnoff.com (PETER HUTTER); Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:08:33 -0400; R4C with Sherwood mods would be a great choice. I've been using one for years along with FT-1000D with great sucess. -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/topband Submissions: topband@contesti; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00048.html (7,754 bytes)
4. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: herbs@vitelcom.net (Herb Schoenbohm); Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:32:21 -0300; Barry, The Collins 75A4 with a 500 hz mechanical filter is hard to beat for weak signal reception on 1.8 Mhz even today with all the technology that has come along in the last 50 years since it was d; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00049.html (9,179 bytes)
5. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: k6se@juno.com (k6se@juno.com); Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:19:55 -0700; Hi, Barry, Surprisingly, the 25-year old Drake R-4C is reportedly the best receiver from a survey I took on the Web a couple of years ago. But not the stock R-4C -- you want one that has the Sherwood; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00050.html (8,501 bytes)
6. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: 4x4nj@iname.com (R. Kline); Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 06:39:45 +0100; I used the R4C with Sherwood mods (+ some others) for 25 years, and just very recently upgraded to a FT-1000D. After doing extensive comparisons, I can say that neither receiver is better than the ot; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00051.html (10,900 bytes)
7. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 12:37:57 -0400; My first R4C post didn't make it to the reflector. I wonder why? On the test bench, that is true Riki. The later R4C with Sherwood first IF filter, Omni 6 plus, and a slightly modified FT1000 all tes; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00053.html (9,587 bytes)
8. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: n4pl@juno.com (N4PL); Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:36:42 -0400 (EDT); Guys, Yes, Sherwood Engineering is doing well and has the 1st IF filters in stock. I recently bought one for my R-4C, installed it and the improvement was phenomenal, as compared to the standard ~18; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00054.html (7,969 bytes)
9. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 14:51:30 -0400; I can't comment on the A4's. The A4's were certainly good receivers in their days, but I don't have one to measure against new gear. 73, Tom W8JI w8ji@contesting.com -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contest; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00057.html (7,892 bytes)
10. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: 4x4nj@iname.com (R. Kline); Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 05:37:19 +0100; My comments about practically identical weak signal characteristics for the 3 receivers (R4C, FT-1000D & Omni 6+) were not laboratory tests - they were actual on the air tests with the possibility of; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00061.html (8,373 bytes)
11. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: w8ji@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:29:37 -0400; Hi Riki, I wouldn't expect you to notice much difference, unless you had one or more very strong signals close to the operating frequency. The R4C is generally a little better than most receivers on; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00062.html (10,405 bytes)
12. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: W2pm@aol.com (W2pm@aol.com); Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 12:22:51 EDT; I'm just wondering if you ops with the A4's and R4C's are using these in conjunction with your new technology rigs by just remote muting the old receiver? If so isn't it kind of difficult to spot the; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00066.html (7,852 bytes)
13. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: phutter@sarnoff.com (PETER HUTTER); Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:06:13 -0400; It's easy to spot the desired operating frequency when the R4C isn't completely muted. A series resistance (adjustable pot) placed in the mute line would do the trick. Peter WW2Y -- FAQ on WWW: http:; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00077.html (8,151 bytes)
14. Topband: Topband Receivers (score: 1): Author: altdx@worldnet.att.net (John Harden, W4NU); Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:35:20 -0400; Dear All, The recent discussion about topband receiving has been very interesting..... Noise is a subject of its own as we well know. Composite noise (we tend to call it phase noise) is a combination; /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00116.html (9,108 bytes)
15. Topband: TopBand Receivers (score: 1): Author: herbs@vitelcom.net (Herb Schoenbohm); Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 11:21:20 -0300; Tom, What about the Collins 75A4? I had Sherwood mods on an early R4C and completely agree with your summary. I believe that a stock A4, for topband, was about the top RX for the money in the 60's an; /archives//html/Topband/1999-08/msg00000.html (6,520 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]