[TowerTalk] Are All Low-Pass Filters Alike? -

[W1GOR]

Can anyone provide a reasonable explanation for this issue..?
What would be technically incorrect about filtering before and after the 
amplifier..?

73, Larry - W1GOR
______________________________________________________________
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Shauger" <rgshauger at myyellowstone.net>
To: <n8de at thepoint.net>; "David Thompson" <thompson at mindspring.com>
Cc: <towertalk at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Are All Low-Pass Filters Alike? -


> Absolutely, Don.  Also, resist the temptation of putting a second LP 
> filter
> after the amp.  Someone mentioned that by doing so would tend to make 
> things
> worse.
>
> Bob W7KD
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Don Havlicek" <n8de at thepoint.net>
> To: "David Thompson" <thompson at mindspring.com>
> Cc: <towertalk at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 1:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Are All Low-Pass Filters Alike? -
>
>
>> Why don't hams place the LP filter between the Xcvr and the Amp?  That
>> way, the amount of harmonics reaching the Amp will be minimized,
>> rendering their output levels relatively the same, if not lower, than if
>> the LP filter was AFTER the Amp.
>> BTW:  this is what I have done since the 50's.  Never blew up a LP
>> filter yet!
>> Don
>> N8DE