Unsubscribe
Charles Penry
WA5VHU
443-447-6676
-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
tentec-request@contesting.com
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 12:58 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: TenTec Digest, Vol 137, Issue 2
Send TenTec mailing list submissions to
tentec@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tentec-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
tentec-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of TenTec digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Fwd: Re: RX-366 (Barry N1EU)
2. Wide roofing filter for the RX-366? (Carl Gansen)
3. Subreceiver RX-366 (John Henry)
4. Omni VI mystery (Spencer)
5. Re: Subreceiver RX-366 (PA5MW, Mark)
6. Re: Omni VI mystery (Brian Carling)
7. Re: Wide roofing filter for the RX-366? (Kim Elmore)
8. Re: Wide roofing filter for the RX-366? (Bob McGraw - K4TAX)
9. Re: Wide roofing filter for the RX-366? (Kim Elmore)
10. Re: Subreceiver RX-366 (Cecil)
11. Re: Wide roofing filter for the RX-366? (Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP)
12. Re: Wide roofing filter for the RX-366? (Barry N1EU)
13. Re: Wide roofing filter for the RX-366? (Kimberly Elmore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 12:23:06 -0400
From: Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Fwd: Re: RX-366
Message-ID:
<CAFmfzDvShMJOGsxZf+Z8N9jPtMRbHKzc-T5n1axGzOc9JWfLvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Ron, somebody actually made a subsequent post soon after that they had
purchased the last RX366.
73, Barry N1EU
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Ron Notarius W3WN
<wn3vaw@verizon.net>wrote:
> Well, I don't know what else to tell you Andre.
>
> It sounds, though, like the EU distributors are out of stock. That
> said, as of last week, it was posted on this reflector by John Henry
> that the
> RX-366 was (at least as of that time) still in stock at Ten Tec and
> had not been discontinued.
>
> 73
>
>
> On 05/01/14, Andr? Voigt wrote:
>
> e-mail traffic with stan.....
>
> ?73
> Andr? DL2AVC
>
>
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Betreff: Re: RX-366
> Datum: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:31:45 -0400
> Von: Stan Brock <sales@tentec.com>
> An: Andr? Voigt <andre121@t-online.de>
>
>
>
> Sorry, Andre. No dealers for Ten-Tec in the US. We sell everything
> factory direct. If Appello or Waters & Stanton does not have one
> available then there is none available.
>
> Stan
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Andr? Voigt <andre121@t-online.de
> <mailto:andre121@t-online.de>> wrote:
>
> Hello Stan,
>
> thank you for fast replay. Is there no chance to get only one RX-366
> for my lovely ORION II? Are there in the US any other dealer who has
> the subreceiver in stock? I will pay more than the original price only
> to get one. Any Ideas?
>
> greetings from germany
>
> Andr?
> DL2AVC
>
> Am 30.04.2014 14:03, schrieb Stan Brock:
> > Hi Andre,
> >
> > I am sorry, the RX-366 receiver kit has been discontinued due to
> > lack of sales.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Stan Brock
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 4:43 AM, Andr? Voigt <andre121@t-online.de
> > <mailto:andre121@t-online.de>> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Ten-Tec team,
> >
> > i am looking for an RX-366 subreceiver kit for an ORION II but i
> > can?t find it on your homepage. Is the receiver available?
> >
> > kind regards
> >
> > Andr? Voigt
> >
> > DL2AVC
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stan Brock, WD0BGS
> > Amateur Radio Sales
> > TEN-TEC, Inc.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Stan Brock, WD0BGS
> Amateur Radio Sales
> TEN-TEC, Inc.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 21:15:30 -0500
From: Carl Gansen <wb0cff@gmail.com>
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Message-ID:
<CAN2M3k=hw+Ucr-e6jWRzrDxLHzAgROD6uRrCwnZUZYKdATCJEg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I am curious about what members of the list are using for their wide roofing
filter in the RX-366. At this time, with CW as my main interest, I have a
600Hz and a 300Hz in place in mine.
I have little to no interest in AM but I do listen in on digital modes with
FlDigi.
Can anybody offer some thoughts on the filter (brand & bandwidth) that they
chose and the reasoning behind that choice?
--
Carl R. Gansen WB0CFF
9300 W225th Street
Belle Plaine, Mn 56011-4206
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 12:31:35 -0400
From: John Henry <jhenry@tentec.com>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: [TenTec] Subreceiver RX-366
Message-ID:
<CA+kTDv01aPccjrrMHwrjZMAAEPEPOeHQ6GQSs22TYm2bJ2EMHw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
yeah, when I spoke last, it was still on the books, but now, unfortunately,
when the sales record/trend was reviewed, there wasn't strong enough steady
sales to warrant another production run for the RX366. Then the decision
was made.
With current production capacity, one has to decide to run products that
have a higher sales volume and / or profit margin than those that don't.
Then, unfortunately items like the RX366 that have marginal sales are
subject to get discontinued. Demand drives supply.
The RX366 did sell real well when introduced for a while, but it seemed
that only a limited number of Orion 565 and Orion II 566 owners really
wanted one. Then subsequent discontinuance of the Orion II 566 may have
cost it further sales.
Thanks, and 73,
John Henry, KI4JPL
TEN-TEC Engineering
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 12:04:02 -0600
From: Spencer <k5gak@powerc.net>
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: [TenTec] Omni VI mystery
Message-ID: <53628C92.2070403@powerc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Use the fft/waterfall display on digipan or cwget while tuned to WWV.
You can see what the mode switch and filters are doing.
Spencer
W1GAK
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 20:36:46 +0200
From: "PA5MW, Mark" <pa5mw@home.nl>
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Subreceiver RX-366
Message-ID: <5362943E.4010504@home.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
***NOT happy with this.
For more than a year I'm saving for the 1000 dollars needed to buy the
RX366 here in EU.
I'm almost there.....or make that was...
I understand it is not available right now, but still hope it will be
before end of year contest season.
73 Mark, PA5MW
On 1-5-2014 18:31, John Henry wrote:
> yeah, when I spoke last, it was still on the books, but now,
unfortunately,
> when the sales record/trend was reviewed, there wasn't strong enough
steady
> sales to warrant another production run for the RX366. Then the decision
> was made.
> With current production capacity, one has to decide to run products that
> have a higher sales volume and / or profit margin than those that don't.
> Then, unfortunately items like the RX366 that have marginal sales are
> subject to get discontinued. Demand drives supply.
> The RX366 did sell real well when introduced for a while, but it seemed
> that only a limited number of Orion 565 and Orion II 566 owners really
> wanted one. Then subsequent discontinuance of the Orion II 566 may have
> cost it further sales.
>
> Thanks, and 73,
> John Henry, KI4JPL
> TEN-TEC Engineering
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 17:57:58 -0400
From: Brian Carling <bcarling@cfl.rr.com>
To: "k5gak@powerc.net" <k5gak@powerc.net>, Discussion of Ten-Tec
Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni VI mystery
Message-ID: <B675E600-93D1-4458-BF68-FC2D6846355D@cfl.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Great idea,
Best regards - Bry Carling
> On May 1, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Spencer <k5gak@powerc.net> wrote:
>
> Use the fft/waterfall display on digipan or cwget while tuned to WWV.
> You can see what the mode switch and filters are doing.
>
> Spencer
> W1GAK
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 20:16:00 -0500
From: Kim Elmore <cw_de_n5op@sbcglobal.net>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Message-ID: <5362F1D0.3030308@sbcglobal.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
While filters are expensive, they can be swapped out without a lot of
trouble. That said, I chose a wide filter of 6 kHz, then the 2.4 kHz
standard filter and finally a 500 Hz filter for the narrowest. In my
environment, I won't have to deal with any strong (next door) signals in
a 500 Hz passband. Whenever I take the rig to, say, FD, only the main rx
is much used and it has the 300 Hz roofing filter, 600 Hz, 1.0 kHz, 1.8
kHz, 2.4 kHz, 6 kHz and 20 kHz filters.
I can't see the point in having a 2.7 kHz, 2.4 kHz, and 500/600 Hz
filters because there's not enough difference in the 2.7 kHz and 2.4.
Perhaps a the standard 2.4 kHz, 1 kHz and 500/600 Hz filter would be
best if you have no interest in AM.
Kim N5OP
On 4/30/2014 9:15 PM, Carl Gansen wrote:
> I am curious about what members of the list are using for their wide
> roofing filter
> in the RX-366. At this time, with CW as my main interest, I have a 600Hz
> and a
> 300Hz in place in mine.
>
> I have little to no interest in AM but I do listen in on digital modes
with
> FlDigi.
>
> Can anybody offer some thoughts on the filter (brand & bandwidth) that
they
> chose
> and the reasoning behind that choice?
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 20:38:14 -0500
From: "Bob McGraw - K4TAX" <RMcGraw@Blomand.net>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Message-ID: <810D385373E84C6EB820CAC2787A385F@FAMILY>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=response
While roofing filters are indeed nice and serve a really nice function, I
truly believe the lack of understanding as to what they do and how the
perform and when they are needed is in short supply. I found that the
"authority" Rob Sherwood has a very nice presentation on his website where
he discusses the advantage and importance of roofing filters.
My general take is: If one intends to operate with 5 to 10 active stations
in an area the size of a football field on an event such as Field Day, then
they are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, if you live in an area 5 to 10
miles from town and the nearest ham does not operate on the same band the
same time as you, then they aren't necessary but, certainly nice to have
available.
Just remember, the selectivity is developed by the DSP system.
73
Bob, K4TAX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kim Elmore" <cw_de_n5op@sbcglobal.net>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
> While filters are expensive, they can be swapped out without a lot of
> trouble. That said, I chose a wide filter of 6 kHz, then the 2.4 kHz
> standard filter and finally a 500 Hz filter for the narrowest. In my
> environment, I won't have to deal with any strong (next door) signals in a
> 500 Hz passband. Whenever I take the rig to, say, FD, only the main rx is
> much used and it has the 300 Hz roofing filter, 600 Hz, 1.0 kHz, 1.8 kHz,
> 2.4 kHz, 6 kHz and 20 kHz filters.
>
> I can't see the point in having a 2.7 kHz, 2.4 kHz, and 500/600 Hz filters
> because there's not enough difference in the 2.7 kHz and 2.4. Perhaps a
> the standard 2.4 kHz, 1 kHz and 500/600 Hz filter would be best if you
> have no interest in AM.
>
> Kim N5OP
>
>
> On 4/30/2014 9:15 PM, Carl Gansen wrote:
>> I am curious about what members of the list are using for their wide
>> roofing filter
>> in the RX-366. At this time, with CW as my main interest, I have a 600Hz
>> and a
>> 300Hz in place in mine.
>>
>> I have little to no interest in AM but I do listen in on digital modes
>> with
>> FlDigi.
>>
>> Can anybody offer some thoughts on the filter (brand & bandwidth) that
>> they
>> chose
>> and the reasoning behind that choice?
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 21:12:29 -0500
From: Kim Elmore <cw_de_n5op@sbcglobal.net>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Message-ID: <5362FF0D.7000808@sbcglobal.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Yes, it's easy to conflate roofing filters with the more familiar IF
filters. They don;t serve the same purpose but can be complimentary.
Sherwood's presentation is excellent.
In my case, there's a guy about 2 mi away that runs 1.5 kW with a good
beam at 70 ft. He's strong enough to cause problems when he's on the
same band and pointed at me. There are several AM BC stations around and
couple are 50 kW oxyacetylene blowtorches, one at 1000 kHz. Because of
them, roofing filters really do help on 160 m.
When I took my Orion II to FD, all the CW ops fell in love with it
because all the other local FD QRM vanished; it was as if they were all
alone. Even the phone ops were amazed they they could tune to within a
few kHz of one of the phone stations and have zero trouble with IMD.
Kim N5OP
On 5/1/2014 8:38 PM, Bob McGraw - K4TAX wrote:
> While roofing filters are indeed nice and serve a really nice
> function, I truly believe the lack of understanding as to what they
> do and how the perform and when they are needed is in short supply.
> I found that the "authority" Rob Sherwood has a very nice
> presentation on his website where he discusses the advantage and
> importance of roofing filters.
>
> My general take is: If one intends to operate with 5 to 10 active
> stations in an area the size of a football field on an event such as
> Field Day, then they are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, if you
> live in an area 5 to 10 miles from town and the nearest ham does not
> operate on the same band the same time as you, then they aren't
> necessary but, certainly nice to have available.
>
> Just remember, the selectivity is developed by the DSP system.
>
> 73
> Bob, K4TAX
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kim Elmore"
> <cw_de_n5op@sbcglobal.net>
> To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
>
>
>> While filters are expensive, they can be swapped out without a lot of
>> trouble. That said, I chose a wide filter of 6 kHz, then the 2.4 kHz
>> standard filter and finally a 500 Hz filter for the narrowest. In my
>> environment, I won't have to deal with any strong (next door) signals
>> in a 500 Hz passband. Whenever I take the rig to, say, FD, only the
>> main rx is much used and it has the 300 Hz roofing filter, 600 Hz,
>> 1.0 kHz, 1.8 kHz, 2.4 kHz, 6 kHz and 20 kHz filters.
>>
>> I can't see the point in having a 2.7 kHz, 2.4 kHz, and 500/600 Hz
>> filters because there's not enough difference in the 2.7 kHz and 2.4.
>> Perhaps a the standard 2.4 kHz, 1 kHz and 500/600 Hz filter would be
>> best if you have no interest in AM.
>>
>> Kim N5OP
>>
>>
>> On 4/30/2014 9:15 PM, Carl Gansen wrote:
>>> I am curious about what members of the list are using for their wide
>>> roofing filter
>>> in the RX-366. At this time, with CW as my main interest, I have a
>>> 600Hz
>>> and a
>>> 300Hz in place in mine.
>>>
>>> I have little to no interest in AM but I do listen in on digital
>>> modes with
>>> FlDigi.
>>>
>>> Can anybody offer some thoughts on the filter (brand & bandwidth)
>>> that they
>>> chose
>>> and the reasoning behind that choice?
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 21:33:14 -0500
From: Cecil <chacuff@cableone.net>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Subreceiver RX-366
Message-ID: <3B47429C-A669-483B-BCC1-E74DD034F04B@cableone.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Wonderful...
Disappointed for sure...
Cecil
K5DL
Sent from my iPad
> On May 1, 2014, at 11:31 AM, John Henry <jhenry@tentec.com> wrote:
>
> yeah, when I spoke last, it was still on the books, but now,
unfortunately,
> when the sales record/trend was reviewed, there wasn't strong enough
steady
> sales to warrant another production run for the RX366. Then the decision
> was made.
> With current production capacity, one has to decide to run products that
> have a higher sales volume and / or profit margin than those that don't.
> Then, unfortunately items like the RX366 that have marginal sales are
> subject to get discontinued. Demand drives supply.
> The RX366 did sell real well when introduced for a while, but it seemed
> that only a limited number of Orion 565 and Orion II 566 owners really
> wanted one. Then subsequent discontinuance of the Orion II 566 may have
> cost it further sales.
>
> Thanks, and 73,
> John Henry, KI4JPL
> TEN-TEC Engineering
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 07:44:35 +0200
From: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Message-ID: <002401cf65c9$9ab85fc0$d0291f40$@de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Outstanding Kim!
This is exactly what the world of Yaekencom users don't realize they're
missing.
They accept 'intra-transmitter' interference at multi-transmitter events as
a given.
(I think I just made up a word.)
The acid test is when operating 4U1VIC in Vienna.
I've run CQWW DX CW from there several times.
At that site, ALL antennas from all stations have to be located on top of
the roof of the main building. You are not allowed to string wires to other
places, other buildings, etc. Of course that building is about 400 ft. tall
which helps the signal a lot.
(picture:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Office_at_Vienna )
In this case, you can't obtain the kind of separation recommended by K3LR
and W3LPL in their course on antennas for multi-multi contesting, which they
teach at Contest University in Dayton.
I always took along a pair of Omni VI transceivers. Some of the others
brought their flavor of the day Yaekencom. Even without band filters (which
weren't commercially available then), my two Omni's did not disturb each
other when operating on separate bands unless they were on an exact harmonic
frequency. The Yaekencoms were useless. Their owners cried all the way
home. They were in disbelief!
73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Kim Elmore
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 4:12 AM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Yes, it's easy to conflate roofing filters with the more familiar IF
filters. They don;t serve the same purpose but can be complimentary.
Sherwood's presentation is excellent.
In my case, there's a guy about 2 mi away that runs 1.5 kW with a good beam
at 70 ft. He's strong enough to cause problems when he's on the same band
and pointed at me. There are several AM BC stations around and couple are 50
kW oxyacetylene blowtorches, one at 1000 kHz. Because of them, roofing
filters really do help on 160 m.
When I took my Orion II to FD, all the CW ops fell in love with it because
all the other local FD QRM vanished; it was as if they were all alone. Even
the phone ops were amazed they they could tune to within a few kHz of one of
the phone stations and have zero trouble with IMD.
Kim N5OP
On 5/1/2014 8:38 PM, Bob McGraw - K4TAX wrote:
> While roofing filters are indeed nice and serve a really nice
> function, I truly believe the lack of understanding as to what they
> do and how the perform and when they are needed is in short supply.
> I found that the "authority" Rob Sherwood has a very nice
> presentation on his website where he discusses the advantage and
> importance of roofing filters.
>
> My general take is: If one intends to operate with 5 to 10 active
> stations in an area the size of a football field on an event such as
> Field Day, then they are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, if you
> live in an area 5 to 10 miles from town and the nearest ham does not
> operate on the same band the same time as you, then they aren't
> necessary but, certainly nice to have available.
>
> Just remember, the selectivity is developed by the DSP system.
>
> 73
> Bob, K4TAX
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kim Elmore"
> <cw_de_n5op@sbcglobal.net>
> To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
>
>
>> While filters are expensive, they can be swapped out without a lot of
>> trouble. That said, I chose a wide filter of 6 kHz, then the 2.4 kHz
>> standard filter and finally a 500 Hz filter for the narrowest. In my
>> environment, I won't have to deal with any strong (next door) signals
>> in a 500 Hz passband. Whenever I take the rig to, say, FD, only the
>> main rx is much used and it has the 300 Hz roofing filter, 600 Hz,
>> 1.0 kHz, 1.8 kHz, 2.4 kHz, 6 kHz and 20 kHz filters.
>>
>> I can't see the point in having a 2.7 kHz, 2.4 kHz, and 500/600 Hz
>> filters because there's not enough difference in the 2.7 kHz and 2.4.
>> Perhaps a the standard 2.4 kHz, 1 kHz and 500/600 Hz filter would be
>> best if you have no interest in AM.
>>
>> Kim N5OP
>>
>>
>> On 4/30/2014 9:15 PM, Carl Gansen wrote:
>>> I am curious about what members of the list are using for their wide
>>> roofing filter in the RX-366. At this time, with CW as my main
>>> interest, I have a 600Hz and a 300Hz in place in mine.
>>>
>>> I have little to no interest in AM but I do listen in on digital
>>> modes with FlDigi.
>>>
>>> Can anybody offer some thoughts on the filter (brand & bandwidth)
>>> that they chose and the reasoning behind that choice?
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 04:31:42 -0400
From: Barry N1EU <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Message-ID:
<CAFmfzDtR4WzqDrNw2h1BcDkUW7F0ajwUUo5oAAHmfDZeW6Rj3A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Bob McGraw - K4TAX
<RMcGraw@blomand.net>wrote:
> Otherwise, if you live in an area 5 to 10 miles from town and the nearest
> ham does not operate on the same band the same time as you, then they
> aren't necessary but, certainly nice to have available.
>
>
As far as their minimal necessity - you need at least one roofing filter
installed to hear anything. And any signal wider than your widest roofing
filter will be attenuated outside the passband. So at minimum, install a
single roofing filter as wide as the widest signal(s) you want to listen to.
Hardware AGC kicks in by any signal on the band that is over ~ s9 +25dB, to
protect the DAC dynamic range. Roofing filters prevent AGC riding by such
a strong signal outside the passband. Signals of that strength are not
uncommon here on the east coast on the low bands, especially during
contests - also on 20M from European powerhouse contest stations. So
serious contesters and low band dx'ers DO need roofing filters.
73, Barry N1EU
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 06:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kimberly Elmore <cw_de_n5op@sbcglobal.net>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Message-ID:
<1399038486.8799.YahooMailNeo@web184905.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
I should stipulate in my FD story that we most certainly *could* hear
transmitted IMD and transmitted phase noise from the phone stations and a
digital station, which limited useful close-in receive capability. But that
stuff has a very different characteristic than does IMD generated within the
receiver.?
I also have a TS-930S (bought new in 1982) in which I have installed the
Inrad 6 kHz roofing filter (40 MHz 1st IF). Prior to this, the receiver
didn't do well in FD environments (to put it mildly) but with the 6 kHz
roofing filter it, too, became nearly immune to receiver IMD from other
stations on the same band. When I took it to FD, other ops were surprised
that I didn't have the troubles they were having. Thus was the the old dog
taught a new trick!
In many ways my TS-930S is more convenient to take to FD because it has a
built-in power supply. With the PIEXX board installed, it's also subject to
computer control and so suitable for computer logging. With the requisite
power supply mods, it has become a very nice FD/visiting contest radio with
a bit less transmitted IMD than the 12 VDC radios because it runs the driver
and PA at 28 VDC.
Kim N5OP
________________________________
From: Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
To: 'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment' <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, May 2, 2014 12:44 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Wide roofing filter for the RX-366?
Outstanding Kim!
This is exactly what the world of Yaekencom users don't realize they're
missing.
They accept 'intra-transmitter' interference at multi-transmitter events as
a given.
(I think I just made up a word.)
The acid test is when operating 4U1VIC in Vienna.
I've run CQWW DX CW from there several times.
At that site, ALL antennas from all stations have to be located on top of
the roof of the main building.? You are not allowed to string wires to other
places, other buildings, etc.? Of course that building is about 400 ft. tall
which helps the signal a lot.
(picture:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Office_at_Vienna )
In this case, you can't obtain the kind of separation recommended by K3LR
and W3LPL in their course on antennas for multi-multi contesting, which they
teach at Contest University in Dayton.
I always took along a pair of Omni VI transceivers.? Some of the others
brought their flavor of the day Yaekencom.? Even without band filters (which
weren't commercially available then), my two Omni's did not disturb each
other when operating on separate bands unless they were on an exact harmonic
frequency.? The Yaekencoms were useless. Their owners cried all the way
home.? They were in disbelief!?
73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
------------------------------
End of TenTec Digest, Vol 137, Issue 2
**************************************
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4577 / Virus Database: 3931/7431 - Release Date: 05/02/14
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|