RadioBanter - View Single Post

October 1st 04, 09:16 PM

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Avery Fineman)(so desperate to get past spam filters
that he changes screen names)wrote in message
...
In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

In an ideal superheterodyne, all the oscillators would generate pure,
steady
injection signals. In reality, there is always some imperfections in those
oscillator signals. In modern frequency synthesizers, particularly PLL
types,
the imperfection takes the form of noise sidebands on the oscillator
signal.

Technically wrong. DDS is more susceptible to spur generation and
phase noise than Fractional-N and Fractional-N is more susceptible
to that than PLLs.

Tsk. You haven't spent much time with a spectrum analyzer...

Sure have. You can nitpick over the minor points but the main thing is
correct: Frequency synthesizers do not produce perfectly clean LO
signals, and that phase noise in the LO causes performance degradation
in HF ham gear.

Didn't that "phase noise" bother those recycled radios using
vacuum tubes? :-)

Or do you only recycle crystal sets?

Tsk. Simplistic untruth.

No, it's true. You just don't understand the point.

I should have included a clarifying phrase in the above, but I thought
the average technically knoweldgeable reader would understand the
point anyway.

Oh, my, aren't you royals Talking Down to the proletariat!

Difficult to discuss the subject of "US Licensing Restructuring"
in the presence of such nobility. :-)

The clarifying phrase is:

"Even with an ideal receiver front end"

meaning that even if IMD and IP3 aren't causing problems, phase noise
*alone* can cause the apparent noise floor to rise if there are strong
adjacent-channel signals.

Note how, in lab tests, there is sometimes the annotation "noise
limited" when certain tests are made. What do you think that term
means?

Heh heh heh...I'm sure you will eventually get around to showing
that...and that on-off keying telegraphy MUST be tested for in
order to operate in ham HF bands...with or without "recycled
parts" raddios.

So...was all this "phase noise" invisible way back in the
1990 time? It didn't exist? It only came up when a frequency
synthesizer was incorporated? :-)

R70s were made 1982-84 (approximately), so the design is at least 23
years old (1981). You frequenctly denigrate others as "behind the
times", yet the R70 is the newest/most modern piece of HF radio
equipment you mention owning. Just another example of "do as Len says,
not as Len does".

That little Icom R-70 still works fine, as advertised. I've got one.
You don't. :-)

The only thing I "recycled" was some paper to get one in working
order. :-)

"Phase noise" wasn't a big buzzword then. It has a three-loop
PLL in it plus a microcontroller. Sensitivity is still good and
comparable with any contemporary HF receiver.

Have you ever used the receiver he mentions?

R-390? Yes. R-391 (which he didn't mention)? Yes. R-388?
Yes. A Collins 74 or 75 something or other owned by Ed Dodds,
(W6AFU?) long ago. A KWM2? Yes.

I have an Icom R-70. You don't. :-)

No, completely relevant. One important measure of amateur equipment
quality is how it performs in actual on-air operation.

Duhhhhh. :-)

Who decides what is "real sport"? You're not the IOC. Or TAC ;-)

I thought YOU were one of the Ruling Elite on What Is What
in amateur radio? You and all the elite PCTA extras...

The term "road race" is not limited to motor vehicles. It's
understandable that you don't like sports.

Tsk. Your "sport" here is trying to establish a world-record in
sarcastic conclusion-jumping!

I like and used to enjoy (as a participant) certain sports such as
international football (you may know it as "soccer").

I've yet to get close to the concept of sitting around a shack
making as many contacts as possible in a given time as any
"sport." Neither is that activity "pioneering the ariwaves" nor
any sort of "training for emergencies" to reasonable-thinking
human beans.

Like chess or checkers or board games, radio contesting is
a GAME.

It is FAR from an ATHLETIC sport.

Not the same as being there. It seems you enjoy only second-hand
experiences.

Tsk. You've never been in the military, certainly not in military
radio communications, yet you consistently put down what I
experienced in military HF radio communications. You "know"
about it?

The above story is true. The ham involved (actually an ex-ham; he no
longer shows up in the database) behaved exactly as described. He
probably went on to a career in electronics in some capacity or other.
And as I said, most of his ideas were pretty good - he just never
carried them to completion or even to partial implementation. At least
he held a ham license for a while - you haven't even done that.

Heh heh heh...back to the "Sermon on the Antenna Mount" thing.

You still claim over-riding expertise in radio design from what?
Recycling parts in your shack? Building Elecraft kits? A double
degree way back when? RADIO INDUSTRY experience?

Yahhhh...to be "knowledgeable in radio" requires a radio amateur
license?!?!?

You *do* sound just like him, Len. Lots of words and lots of put-downs
and lots of theory. But in terms of actual radios built on your own
time, with your own resources, from your own design....nada. Zip.
Zilch. Zero. Nothing. Not that anyone here knows about in all your
years and petabytes of posting.

If I had extra copies, I could, with a year or so off to do it, digitize
those things and put them on a website that allowed at least 100
MB user space. That includes corporate documents (public)
along with photographs. Not worth it, since the typical PCTA
extra "commentary" (to use a word very loosely) would be
totally derogatory. My little text and photo memorabilia on the
ADA assignment takes 6 MB in PDF.

YOU have REJECTED simple things like a digitized license
repro in the past. You would be expected to reject anything I
present...as "credentials" or whatever real proof there is...and
there is a lot of it.

I even looked through the online database of ham radio magazine
articles. You had 24 "bylines" in ham radio from 1977 to 1982 (even
though ham radio magazine was in operation a lot longer than that).
Most of them were in the 1977-79 time frame (20 bylines). Not one
"build this radio!" article - lots of commentary, some theory, lots of
basic stuff on digital logic theory.

Last mention was over 22 years ago...

Yes. I did it then. Even got paid for it!

I have an Icom R-70. You don't. :-)

You talk about "independent thought". Designing and building a ham
station with only one's available personal resources requires a lot of
independent thought - and action. It also explodes the myth of
amateurs as simple consumers of manufactured products.

Right. All hams do the "recycle" thing. :-)

Tsk. I lost interest in DXing in "radio sports" and the wallpaper
collection of QSLs after working at station ADA long ago.

To each his own. Why do you denigrate what others find as fun? What is
wrong with live and let live?

A federal REGULATION requiring morse code testing in order
to get an AMATEUR license to operate on HF is NOT
"live and let live."

Became a professional in the radio-electronics industry, got regular
money for not only designing, but building and testing, following
through in the field, etc., etc., on many projects.

Completely different game. You sound like someone saying the Tour de
France is no big deal because you did the same route in a car in less
time. Or that a marathon is no big deal because you can do 26.22 miles
in less than half the time on a motorcycle.

Lower your lance, Armstrong. This is NOT about athletic sports
or motorcycling.

Point is, for your own personal use, you just go out and buy a radio.
Yet you put down the salesfolk of 20+ years ago for not knowing some
arcane bit of info about the innards of the set.

"Arcane?" :-)

I put down ANY salesfolk that want to give me a snowjob about a
product they are selling or - in this case - just NOT KNOWING
ENOUGH - about an expensive product.

Does it work any better because you know it has a 3 loop PLL?

No. It works better BECAUSE it has that 3-loop PLL.

I could explain the reasons it does so, but you will dismiss it
as "arcane" and Kellie will think it is all "bafflegab" (because
he is not up to speed on control theory). Davie will snarl and
start babbling about his mini-radio-museum and "you should
SEE this Orion!" :-)

Oh, yeah, the gunnery nurse will probably jump in and talk
about "healthcare credentials" and call everyone "Putz."

Well, now we know where *your* mind is at, Len...

You aren't even close. But, if it pleases you to "recycle" some
imagination and fantasies, you will NOT do "nothing" as you
signed off.