Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] THE SKINNY ON MY AL-82

To: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] THE SKINNY ON MY AL-82
From: Vic Rosenthal <k2vco.vic@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 07:53:46 +0200
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Nobody ever said that the object of a parasitic suppressor wasn't to lower the 
Q of the parasitic 'tank circuit'! But there's no advantage to reducing the Q 
of the coil in the suppressor, which was what Rich argued.

Vic K2VCO/4X6GP 

> On Dec 20, 2014, at 3:44 AM, Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com> wrote:
> 
> ------------ ORIGINAL MESSAGE ------------(may be snipped)
> 
>> On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 16:56:11 -0500, KM1H wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> You get better suppression with the lower resistance since it further lowers 
>> the Q and broadens the frequency response.
> 
> REPLY:
> 
> So Mr Measures with his low Q nichrome wire was right? 
> 
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
> 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>