Boatanchor Transmitter... Good for Novice?
 

I began collecting and restoring vintage tube gear about a year ago. I
started with some test equipment and radios (from 30s AM, to 60s FM
stereo), then did a couple of B&W TVs.

Most recently, I got a Hallicrafters SX-71 recapped and aligned
(thanks to some good advice from here). I have been having a lot of
fun with this, for the first time experiencing the HAM bands by using
the BFO to listen to SSB. Of course it also does CW really well,
although I don't know the code. Sunday afternoon I happened across
some really high quality sounding AM HAM transmissions from some kind
of club... I think it was using vintage gear. All this using a 10ft
piece of wire for the antenna... and I have no idea how much better
this can get.

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan

geojunkie wrote:

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan

I've owned both a HT-32 (B-model) and an HT-37 although it was years
ago. I think they are both good rigs and if one was wanting a vintage
xmtr neither would be a bad choice.
Problem with many old xmtrs is that the audio bandwidth tends to be
wider than some people like and there will always be some tinny,
over-compressed rice box user to point that out to you on the band.
The other problem with the filters is that often they have drifted off
their centre/skirt freqs making 'by-the-book' alignment difficult.
I'm not going to categorically toss the HT-anything into being a problem
but its something often encountered with many vintage SSB rigs.
HT-37s go for dirt cheap these days and for the money its not a bad
choice when it comes to bang for the buck. Plus its a neat looking rig!

-Bill

I was licenced in 1988, and got on the air with a SB-102. Since then I've
used a Galaxy V with much success. I haven't made a single HF contact that
didn't go through more tubes (on my side) than transistors (the Galaxy has a
transistorized audio chain). I think that a tube transmitter would be a
fine thing for a novice, as long as you're comfortable with it and take the
responsibility to make sure that it works right.

I _would_ hesitate to run SSB unless I had the provisions to check it
thoroughly. According to the ARRL you really need a spectrum analyzer and
they may be right, but the Handbooks from the 50s and 60s have directions on
checking SSB linearity using an O-scope.

"geojunkie" wrote in message
om...

-- snip --

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan

"- - Bill - -" exray@coquidotnet wrote in message
...
geojunkie wrote:

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan

I've owned both a HT-32 (B-model) and an HT-37 although it was years
ago. I think they are both good rigs and if one was wanting a vintage
xmtr neither would be a bad choice.
Problem with many old xmtrs is that the audio bandwidth tends to be
wider than some people like and there will always be some tinny,
over-compressed rice box user to point that out to you on the band.
The other problem with the filters is that often they have drifted off
their centre/skirt freqs making 'by-the-book' alignment difficult.
I'm not going to categorically toss the HT-anything into being a problem
but its something often encountered with many vintage SSB rigs.
HT-37s go for dirt cheap these days and for the money its not a bad
choice when it comes to bang for the buck. Plus its a neat looking rig!

-Bill


Bill makes some very good points. Here are a few more to consider.

Using a separate transmitter and receiver, particularly when they weren't
specifically designed to directly interface with each other, may make it
harder to initiate or maintain a QSO. They have to be zero-beated and if
the radios drift at all you may end up spending more time chasing your tail
than rag-chewing. For a beginner, it may get very frustrating.

Some of the parts, particularly the mechanical filters, can be hard to find.
If the filters have detuned, as Bill eludes to in his posting, you'll suffer
mild to excessive reduction in transmit audio quality. I have no experience
with the HTs when it comes to filters, but have replaced several in the
Collins S lines. Sometimes you can buy them for cheap, sometimes not. I
always sweep mine before installation to avoid a lot of work for nothing.

One other poster asked a similar question a few months ago. I pointed out
that the operator needs to be prepared to retune the rig when making
significant changes in frequency. This can get more complicated and time
consuming if you use a non resonant antenna and tuner as you have to tune
the radio first into a dummy load, then tune the antenna tuner. Yes, it can
be done. I do it all the time and I love my boat anchors (all ten of them).
But it can be a hindrance to enjoyment for some people, especially new
operators.

Good luck with your decision and license quest, and hope to hear you on the
air soon

73,
Scott, WN1B




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article , "Scottm"
writes:

Some of the parts, particularly the mechanical filters, can be hard to find.
If the filters have detuned, as Bill eludes to in his posting, you'll suffer
mild to excessive reduction in transmit audio quality. I have no experience
with the HTs when it comes to filters, but have replaced several in the
Collins S lines.

Wow, I hadn't realized that mech filters (and maybe even xtal lattices?) can go
sour with age.

Presumably this would happen in receivers as well -- now maybe I know why some
of my BA RX sound better on SSB than others? Though all are more than
acceptable.

Given a transceiver, where the same filters are used in tx and rx, if most
received SSB signals sound good, cna you assume the tx side is good also? Not
counting problems in the diver and final, of course.

I have only one Collins set, a KWM-2, which makes any SSB signal sound
terrific. I've had goon on-air reports from it, so I guess its filter is
hanging in there.
73, Mike K.

Oscar loves trash, but hates Spam! Delete him to reply to me.

geojunkie wrote:

snip. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.


The HT-32A or B is a nice transmitter, but a beginner may have some
trouble setting the mic gain correctly. There is no
Automatic Level Control (ALC), so it is possible to hit
the finals too hard on voice peaks, causing splatter
up and down the band. The key is to take it very easy
on the audio gain. Asking someone for an audio check is practically
a waste of time: most fellows can't widen up their receivers
enough to be able to give you a useful report.

73,
Ed Knobloch K4PF

"Mike Knudsen" wrote in message
...
In article , "Scottm"

writes:
Wow, I hadn't realized that mech filters (and maybe even xtal lattices?)
can go
sour with age.

I'm wouldn't say its with age, specifically, but use and mositure migration
appear to be the culprit. I've opened bad ones up and found breaks in the
tiny spot welds that attach the wire to the disks. I assume that either a
good solid jolt (read UPS drop test) or the constant minute vibrations the
filter experiences could do this. I have also opened them up to find
moisture migration that has curroded or rusted the wire and disks. Any
change in the spacings of the disks will dramatically change the filter's
charactoristics.


Presumably this would happen in receivers as well -- now maybe I know why
some
of my BA RX sound better on SSB than others? Though all are more than
acceptable.

Given a transceiver, where the same filters are used in tx and rx, if most
received SSB signals sound good, cna you assume the tx side is good also?
Not
counting problems in the diver and final, of course.

Yes. But sometimes it really hindges on the ear of the critic as well as the
mic response. You can lose a couple hundred cycles on receive and still
think that it sounds OK. You can lose a couple hundred cycles on TX and it
will still transmit but not sound nearly as good as it should. This is
particularly true with the S lines that use a 2.1 KC filter. You lose 200
cycles on the lower side and now your bandwidth is only 1.9 KC and sounds
very tinny. Conversely, however, the opposite sideband sounds great because
it has widened its passband. Also, when you transmit you are being compared
against every other transmitter. When you receive, everyone is going to
sound equally broad or narrow to you unless you compare it directly to
another receiver.

One final point, shifting of the 455 IF crystals can cause a similar result.
If they drift off frequency, they will shift the IF. If they shift the
lower too low or the upper too high it will cut part of the response the
same way that a change in the filter will.

I have only one Collins set, a KWM-2, which makes any SSB signal sound
terrific. I've had goon on-air reports from it, so I guess its filter is
hanging in there.

The KWM-2 is a great radio. I have a RE 2A and love it.

73, Mike K.

Oscar loves trash, but hates Spam! Delete him to reply to me.




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

The HT-37 is not a filter type rig but a phasing type. Regards Sparks

Tim posted:
I _would_ hesitate to run SSB unless I had the provisions to check it
thoroughly. According to the ARRL you really need a spectrum analyzer and
they may be right, but the Handbooks from the 50s and 60s have directions
on
checking SSB linearity using an O-scope.

I was licensed in 53 and there was a long time that I built most of my
equipment, as many did. Innovation was required when it came to testing; some
of us couldn't afford even a scope. And there weren't any spectrum analyzers.
The ARRL is full of itself today, in more ways than I hate to see. They AREN'T
correct about needing a spectrum analyzer

A scope is an excellent way to check a SSB signal for linearity and to assure
you aren't over-modulating. If you don't have one, but have a reasonably good
receiver, use it to listen to what a test signal sounds like. Use it with the
antenna terminals shorted, and RF gain reduced so the receiver is not
overloaded.

In the late 50s I owned an HT32B, a great rig. It was easy to use and never
gave me any trouble. I recommend it, but also recommend against buying an HT37
if you aren't comfortable about working on a phasing transmitter. They are
more difficult to align without good test equipment, but it can be done if you
have a good, selective, receiver. I built a Central Electonics 10B phasing
exciter (5 Watts as I recall) and aligned it with my SX100. While I was out in
the Aleutian Islands, I often ran it barefoot and got great reports from all
over the US.

Don't be afraid of a boatanchor that is in good working condition.

By the way, the SX-101 is better than the SX100 in my opinion. The HT32B would
be a great match for it.

Good luck

Don