TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Further Orion Sub Receiver

To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Further Orion Sub Receiver
From: "Grant Youngman" <nq5t@comcast.net>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:15:54 -0600
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
> I'd prefer it the way it was done for almost a century, and 
> it worked that way in V1, so it's clearly a degradation.


Sinisa, you're almost always right.  And you're right on the theory behind
all of this, too.  But in a practical sense, as a guy with a lot of AM SWL
and ham band experience, it just doesn't matter that much.  And if the only
way you know how to listen to AM is to plunk the carrier in the middle of
the passband, and take what you get, you may not have spent much time on AM.

It's done every day, by virtually everyone I know.  Doesn't matter if it's
an Orion, or just a heavy QRM day with an R-390 at 2 or 4 Khz bw, slid up
copying one sideband to choke off the SSB clutter on the other side.  I do
it as an SWL as well, and I'd probably do the same thing if the mximum
bandwidth was 10 or 12 Khz, too. I have to have my enjoyment degraded by
getting all choked up over the fact than I'm missing part of sideband :-)

Which, just to clarify, so no one jumps, doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see
it changed as much as the next guy.

Grant





_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

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