On 12/19/2010 5:08 PM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

...
You STILL don't get it. It is NOT an issue of "too good an antenna"; it
IS about too poor of a receiver front end.

Note: the OP's receiver in question is a fine receiver, BUT THE FRONT
END IS *NOT* DESIGNED FOR A VERY LONG ANTENNA.

On 12/19/2010 8:15 PM, John Smith wrote:

All I get is that you missed the importance of attenuators (heck, a
couple of variable resistors will do.)

Again, you miss the point. Why should the OP build a longer antenna for
his receiver and then attenuate the signal before it gets to the receiver?

Indeed, most decent radios already have an RF Gain control on them ...
this will be quite helpful.

The OP wasn't asking about *most* receivers. The answer given by me and
others for HIS receiver and HIS specific question is correct.

Why you are making a non-problem into a problem and arguing for small
antennas is simply perplexing! To say the least!

Please don't be too perplexed. I am not arguing in general for small
antennas. I AM saying a large antenna is not the correct antenna for the
OP's specific receiver in question. Period. What don't *you* understand
about that?

And, for MW, a 300+ ft antenna is really needed for good DX ...

Again you are addressing the -general- case. For the -specific- receiver
the OP actually asked about, a 300 foot antenna would be a disaster.