[CQ-Contest] CW filter ideas for the MP Field

[Tom McAlee]

Hi Chuck.  It is best to put them in both IF stages.

I'd recommend a 400Hz filter over the 250Hz.  The 250Hz seems only really 
useful in exceptional cases.  For example, when that loud USA guy is right 
next to the new multiplier and a pileup starts on him, yet the loud nearby 
USA station(s) won't move.  It is nice for those cases, but it is a bit too 
narrow for normal running.

The 500Hz filter is "ok" for running, but for heavy band conditions the 
400Hz filter is better, and it isn't too obnoxiously narrow like the 250Hz 
filter is.  I've found the 250Hz filter to be just too narrow to run with, 
and if conditions are *that* bad that its probably time to find a new run 
frequency or use some other tactics to clear the one you have.

So, I'd say go with two 400Hz filters, one in each IF stage.  For the cases 
where you really need to work that multiplier who is right next to a booming 
station, the IF shift knob can help in place of a 250Hz filter.

73,
Tom, NI1N

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <KI9A at aol.com>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 11:38 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] CW filter ideas for the MP Field


> Gang,
> I have a new MP Field, with the INRAD roofing filter, & the factory  500hz
> filter. I want to add another CW filter from INRAD, & am torn between 
> cascading
> another 500hz (or the 400hz) filter, or just adding a 250 hz  filter.  I'd 
> do
> both, but, am adding a SSB filter already.
>
> Also, whats better, adding them in the 2nd or 3rd IF?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> 73-Chuck KI9A
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>