Which is the better unit.............
 

There are 2 noise reducing units on the market I am considering for
purchase either one, MFJ-1025 1.5 - 30 MHz Noise Canceling Antenna and the
Timewave ANC-4.

A number of yrs ago I made my one and only purchase of "Mighty Fine Junk"
and have'nt been back since.

So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Which is the better unit.............
 

Sun Tzu wrote:
So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.

Don't forget the ClearSpeech system. I have two of
them and they really work.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Which is the better unit.............
 

On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:44:21 +0000, Cecil Moore wrote:

Sun Tzu wrote:
So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.

Don't forget the ClearSpeech system. I have two of them and they really
work.

tell mew about this system and where do I find more info on it


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Which is the better unit.............
 

Sun Tzu wrote:
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:44:21 +0000, Cecil Moore wrote:

Sun Tzu wrote:
So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.
Don't forget the ClearSpeech system. I have two of them and they really
work.

tell mew about this system and where do I find more info on it

A Google search turned up almost 10K pages for "ClearSpeech"
including this one:
http://www.universal-radio.com/CATAL...kers/2980.html
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Which is the better unit.............
 

On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:16:26 +0000, Cecil Moore wrote:

Sun Tzu wrote:
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:44:21 +0000, Cecil Moore wrote:

Sun Tzu wrote:
So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.
Don't forget the ClearSpeech system. I have two of them and they really
work.

tell mew about this system and where do I find more info on it

A Google search turned up almost 10K pages for "ClearSpeech" including
this one:
http://www.universal-radio.com/CATAL...kers/2980.html

thanks for the info but Heil Sound does'nt even show this unit on their
website.

I would think if it really works would'nt HS still have it on the website?


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Which is the better unit.............
 

Sun Tzu wrote:
thanks for the info but Heil Sound does'nt even show this unit on their
website.
I would think if it really works would'nt HS still have it on the website?

I bought my two before Heil took them over. I suspect Heil
priced the devices too high to be economically viable.
I would recommend as an alternate - buying a used device.
They really do work well.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Which is the better unit.............
 

Clearspeech units do NOT keep noise OUT of the first RF stage. They operate as
audio DSP. It is a totally different approach from either the ANC-4 and the MFJ
1025.

I own both the ANC-4 and the MFJ-1025.

These units use a separate noise sensing antenna mounted close to ground. Mine
are about 20 feet long and about 3 inches above the ground.

Both units use analog operational amplifiers to cancel manmade noise BEFORE the
noise enters the receiver [before the first rf amplifier stage].

Operation is easier to describe in terms of two op-amps. Op-amp#1 adjusts the
gain of the input#1 noise to match the noise level and inverts the noise signal.
[-mmnoise#1 @ input#1]

Op-amp#2 has one input from the station antenna that contains signal plus
manmade noise [signal + mmnoise] and the second input from the noise amplifier
[-mmnoise#1] that has inverted noise only. This amplifier algebraically adds the
two signals [eg: signal + mmnoise - mmnoise]. The output of this amplifier has
just signal. The manmade noise has been canceled!!

In my station the ANC-4 is used primarily because it is simpler to use. There
are only two adjustments, noise gain and noise phase.

The MFJ-1025 has three adjustments, noise gain, noise phase and T/R delay [for
QSK type usage]. I don't use QSK so I can't comment on this feature.

Each unit has several push buttons for basic frequency range.

Both units will easily reduce manmade noise, power line noise, switching power
supply noise, noisy power insulators, Computer monitor noise, tv set noise, etc
by 60 to 70 dB. A S9 noise level can be reduced to less than S1 approaching S0.
Both units have a slight reduction in net RF gain of about 1/2 S unit. Either
unit will allow you to copy a S1 signal in the presence of S8 or S9 external
manmade noise [NOT adjacent channel QRM!!][They are VERY broadband noise
amplifiers].

The ANC is physically smaller and has two adjustment and two push switches. The
MFJ has three adjustments. I have not opened the case of either unit so I can't
comment on construction quality.

I bought my MFJ new from HRO. I bought my ANC off eBay. Why two noise
cancellers? I have two HF rigs operating simultaneously in my shack.

The ANC is my favorite because of ease of operation. It is on my IC-756 Pro III
[basic HF rig]. The MFJ-1025 is on my 60 meter dedicated radio.

/s/ DD, W1MCE

Sun Tzu wrote:
There are 2 noise reducing units on the market I am considering for
purchase either one, MFJ-1025 1.5 - 30 MHz Noise Canceling Antenna and the
Timewave ANC-4.

A number of yrs ago I made my one and only purchase of "Mighty Fine Junk"
and have'nt been back since.

So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.

Which is the better unit.............
 

On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:15:09 -0400, Dave wrote:

Clearspeech units do NOT keep noise OUT of the first RF stage. They
operate as audio DSP. It is a totally different approach from either the
ANC-4 and the MFJ 1025.

I own both the ANC-4 and the MFJ-1025.

These units use a separate noise sensing antenna mounted close to ground.
Mine are about 20 feet long and about 3 inches above the ground.

Both units use analog operational amplifiers to cancel manmade noise
BEFORE the noise enters the receiver [before the first rf amplifier
stage].

Operation is easier to describe in terms of two op-amps. Op-amp#1 adjusts
the gain of the input#1 noise to match the noise level and inverts the
noise signal. [-mmnoise#1 @ input#1]

Op-amp#2 has one input from the station antenna that contains signal plus
manmade noise [signal + mmnoise] and the second input from the noise
amplifier [-mmnoise#1] that has inverted noise only. This amplifier
algebraically adds the two signals [eg: signal + mmnoise - mmnoise]. The
output of this amplifier has just signal. The manmade noise has been
canceled!!

In my station the ANC-4 is used primarily because it is simpler to use.
There are only two adjustments, noise gain and noise phase.

The MFJ-1025 has three adjustments, noise gain, noise phase and T/R delay
[for QSK type usage]. I don't use QSK so I can't comment on this feature.

Each unit has several push buttons for basic frequency range.

Both units will easily reduce manmade noise, power line noise, switching
power supply noise, noisy power insulators, Computer monitor noise, tv set
noise, etc by 60 to 70 dB. A S9 noise level can be reduced to less than S1
approaching S0. Both units have a slight reduction in net RF gain of about
1/2 S unit. Either unit will allow you to copy a S1 signal in the presence
of S8 or S9 external manmade noise [NOT adjacent channel QRM!!][They are
VERY broadband noise amplifiers].

The ANC is physically smaller and has two adjustment and two push
switches. The MFJ has three adjustments. I have not opened the case of
either unit so I can't comment on construction quality.

I bought my MFJ new from HRO. I bought my ANC off eBay. Why two noise
cancellers? I have two HF rigs operating simultaneously in my shack.

The ANC is my favorite because of ease of operation. It is on my IC-756
Pro III [basic HF rig]. The MFJ-1025 is on my 60 meter dedicated radio.

/s/ DD, W1MCE

Sun Tzu wrote:
There are 2 noise reducing units on the market I am considering for
purchase either one, MFJ-1025 1.5 - 30 MHz Noise Canceling Antenna and
the Timewave ANC-4.

A number of yrs ago I made my one and only purchase of "Mighty Fine
Junk" and have'nt been back since.

So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.




you use an antenna thats 20 ft long would that be a dipole?
3 inches off the ground?? no kidding, any idea why so low?
what kind of wire do you use to connect the noise unit to the antenna?

would you say the units eliminate the noise equally as well?
or does one seem to be better than the other?


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Which is the better unit.............
 

Sun Tzu wrote:

REDACTED


you use an antenna thats 20 ft long would that be a dipole?
3 inches off the ground?? no kidding, any idea why so low?
what kind of wire do you use to connect the noise unit to the antenna?

would you say the units eliminate the noise equally as well?
or does one seem to be better than the other?



The 20 feet long antenna is exclusively a NOISE SENSING antenna. It is used for
the NOISE channel on the ANC-4/MFJ-1025. It is simply a wire plugged into the
back of the units.

Mounting it close to ground minimizes the HF/RF signals while picking up the
manmade noise [mmnoise from my previous post] signals.

The ANC-4 works very well with the short NOISE Sensing antenna. The MFJ-1025
works better IF the NOISE SENSING antenna is longer and higher [like a second HF
antenna]. The MFJ states that it can be used to eliminate adjacent channel
interference. I have never used it in this mode. [My ICOMS have an excellent ANF
feature and DSP]

The ANC is very easy to use [two independent adjustments]. The MFJ takes a
little learning to use [three interdependent adjustments]. Both do work!

If I had to choose one ... the ANC-4 ... ease of use and less noise antenna
requirements.

Which is the better unit.............
 

On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 09:35:42 -0400, Dave wrote:

Sun Tzu wrote:

REDACTED


you use an antenna thats 20 ft long would that be a dipole? 3 inches off
the ground?? no kidding, any idea why so low? what kind of wire do you
use to connect the noise unit to the antenna?

would you say the units eliminate the noise equally as well? or does one
seem to be better than the other?



The 20 feet long antenna is exclusively a NOISE SENSING antenna. It is
used for the NOISE channel on the ANC-4/MFJ-1025. It is simply a wire
plugged into the back of the units.

Mounting it close to ground minimizes the HF/RF signals while picking up
the manmade noise [mmnoise from my previous post] signals.

The ANC-4 works very well with the short NOISE Sensing antenna. The
MFJ-1025 works better IF the NOISE SENSING antenna is longer and higher
[like a second HF antenna]. The MFJ states that it can be used to
eliminate adjacent channel interference. I have never used it in this
mode. [My ICOMS have an excellent ANF feature and DSP]

The ANC is very easy to use [two independent adjustments]. The MFJ takes a
little learning to use [three interdependent adjustments]. Both do work!

If I had to choose one ... the ANC-4 ... ease of use and less noise
antenna requirements.

thanks for all the info Dave.
looks like the ANC-4 is the way to go. I have downloaded the manual for
both. the noise sensing antenna that you use is it in a dipole
configuration or like a long wire?
what kind of wire do you use to go between the ANC-4 and the noise antenna?


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Which is the better unit.............
 

If you can call a 20 feet long antenna a 'long wire', it is a 'long wire'. :-)

Sun Tzu wrote:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 09:35:42 -0400, Dave wrote:


Sun Tzu wrote:

REDACTED


you use an antenna thats 20 ft long would that be a dipole? 3 inches off
the ground?? no kidding, any idea why so low? what kind of wire do you
use to connect the noise unit to the antenna?

would you say the units eliminate the noise equally as well? or does one
seem to be better than the other?




The 20 feet long antenna is exclusively a NOISE SENSING antenna. It is
used for the NOISE channel on the ANC-4/MFJ-1025. It is simply a wire
plugged into the back of the units.

Mounting it close to ground minimizes the HF/RF signals while picking up
the manmade noise [mmnoise from my previous post] signals.

The ANC-4 works very well with the short NOISE Sensing antenna. The
MFJ-1025 works better IF the NOISE SENSING antenna is longer and higher
[like a second HF antenna]. The MFJ states that it can be used to
eliminate adjacent channel interference. I have never used it in this
mode. [My ICOMS have an excellent ANF feature and DSP]

The ANC is very easy to use [two independent adjustments]. The MFJ takes a
little learning to use [three interdependent adjustments]. Both do work!

If I had to choose one ... the ANC-4 ... ease of use and less noise
antenna requirements.


thanks for all the info Dave.
looks like the ANC-4 is the way to go. I have downloaded the manual for
both. the noise sensing antenna that you use is it in a dipole
configuration or like a long wire?
what kind of wire do you use to go between the ANC-4 and the noise antenna?

Which is the better unit.............
 

Sun Tzu wrote in
:

There are 2 noise reducing units on the market I am considering for
purchase either one, MFJ-1025 1.5 - 30 MHz Noise Canceling Antenna and
the Timewave ANC-4.

A number of yrs ago I made my one and only purchase of "Mighty Fine
Junk" and have'nt been back since.

So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.

I have an MFJ-1026. The little noise whip that came with it had the
wrong thread in its base, but no huhu, I just wedged a pen top in beside
it to hold it against the pin. Sometimes it's no help, but other times
it's spectacular, especially with some big splashy TV birdie that I get
here a lot (I think it's in the building here but there are 45 suites, 15
of them on the back of the building where I am and a lot of commercial
garbage within a block. That TV birdie can be 20 over 9 on my old Ten
Tec 546B (which has a very parsimonious S-meter) on 75 and I can drop it
to inaudible in the S4 hash.

Haven't tried the Timewave job, but they both work on the same principle,
which is to pick up the noise with a separate antenna and amplifier and
vary the gain and the phase until you cancel it out against the version
from the main antenna.

It has certainly helped me work a number of stations that could not be
heard without it.

--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

Which is the better unit.............
 

Cecil Moore wrote in news:_d0Ig.11107$%j7.5218
@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net:

Sun Tzu wrote:
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:44:21 +0000, Cecil Moore wrote:

Sun Tzu wrote:
So I need some input here. Which unit is better and why.
Don't forget the ClearSpeech system. I have two of them and they
really
work.

tell mew about this system and where do I find more info on it

A Google search turned up almost 10K pages for "ClearSpeech"
including this one:
http://www.universal-radio.com/CATAL...kers/2980.html

This is a different approach to noise reduction. It will not help with
swamping or third order products in the receiver, whereas the 1026 may
well do that. I also use an MFJ 784B. It's very useful, both on CW and
on SSB, reducing noise and shaping the bandpass.

In a noisy urban area like mine you need all the help you can get. :-)



--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667