Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] every db lost re Tubes vs. Solid State

To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] every db lost re Tubes vs. Solid State
From: W2XJ <w2xj@nyc.rr.com>
Reply-to: w2xj@w2xj.net
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 23:04:49 -0700
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
A separate RCV antenna solves that issue which is really not germain to 
SS vs VT anyway.

On 4/29/12 11:01 PM, Charles Harpole wrote:
>
> I think we should also count pieces of incoming db lost by insertion of 
> various devices.
>
>
>
> I know ever coax joint, every coax switch, and so on costs rcv db.
>
>
>
> But what does an amp in line take away?  Tubes or SState better or worse?
>
>
>
> Does an antenna tuner take away any parts of rcv db?
>
>
>
> Inquiring minds want to know.  thanks, 73
>
>
> Charles Harpole
> k4vud@hotmail.com
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:22:10 -0700
>> From: w2xj@nyc.rr.com
>> To: amps@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [Amps] Tubes vs. Solid State (was) Expert Amps 2K-FA: Any 
>> Opinions ?
>>
>> That is why a good automatic antenna tuner should be used.
>>
>> On 4/29/12 8:37 PM, Roger (K8RI) wrote:
>>> The SS amp would let me cover the whole band without retuning, but it
>>> would roll back the output power as the SWR went up. The tube amp does
>>> not roll back the output. IIRC the SS amp was down about 200 watts at
>>> 1.2:1. It's been a couple of years. 73 Roger (K8RI)
>>>
>>> _
>> _______________________________________________
>> Amps mailing list
>> Amps@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps                            
>>         
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>