Hi Jim. Any interest in attending the rrcb bonanza next year?

-YOU- gotta be there we're, counting on ya! g


(Jim Hampton) wrote:
Hello, Twist

Dave was referring to 'S' units at the other end of the circuit. One
'S' unit is *supposidly* equal to 6 dB. 6 dB is an increase in power
of four times.

itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge wrote:
Steveo wrote in news:20041006190307.240
:

Hi Jim. Any interest in attending the rrcb bonanza next year?

-YOU- gotta be there we're, counting on ya! g

Will you have men in draG there for markie beck

How do you look in a too too?

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 21:26:31 GMT, "Marty B."
wrote in :

YOU GUESS ARE SO SMART, WHAT THE **** YOU DOING ON CB ?


Sorry, I didn't know CB was reserved for illiterate morons.

"Steveo" wrote in message
...
itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge wrote:
Steveo wrote in news:20041006190307.240
:

Hi Jim. Any interest in attending the rrcb bonanza next year?

-YOU- gotta be there we're, counting on ya! g

Will you have men in draG there for markie beck

How do you look in a too too?

Who cares! I say invite him, see if he spouts
his crap to our faces, he won't......... LMAO!!!

Landshark


--
The world is good-natured to people
who are good natured.

"Landshark" wrote:
"Steveo" wrote in message
...
itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:
Steveo wrote in
news:20041006190307.240 :

Hi Jim. Any interest in attending the rrcb bonanza next year?

-YOU- gotta be there we're, counting on ya! g

Will you have men in draG there for markie beck

How do you look in a too too?

Who cares! I say invite him, see if he spouts
his crap to our faces, he won't......... LMAO!!!

Landshark

He's invited! This wing ding is open to anyone that posts here.

--
F the CC - Steve Earle

notiamnotgeorge wrote:
Steveo wrote in news:20041006195103.820
:

itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:
Steveo wrote in
news:20041006190307.240
:

Hi Jim. Any interest in attending the rrcb bonanza next year?

-YOU- gotta be there we're, counting on ya! g

Will you have men in draG there for markie beck

How do you look in a too too?

wouldnt you like to know Big Boy ... LOL Is that the only way I get
invited to the party??

Nope, and please don't dress that way if you can help it. :)

You are assured safe passage and are welcomed as long as you're
not there to start trouble. You'd have fun.

--
F the CC - Steve Earle

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 12:03:41 -0400, (Twistedhed)
wrote:


I invoke your defense,,,,"If the shoe fits...."

You can't even be original.


But it doesn't. You were asked to provide for your unsolicited bolster
that you "made the Davemade spectrally pure". Still waiting for you to
tell the masses how you did it, but you won't because you never did it,
you lied about it, just as you lie about everything in your world

I provided the information. I'm sorry if the information was too
general for you. Technical details would 've gone over your head.

And for the record, I never said that the amp was "spectrally pure". I
stated that the amp was now within FCC emissions specs for use in the
H.F. Ham radio bands.

DXing IS illegal,

Never was contested. What was contested and shot full of holes, was your
ignorant claim that those who talked dx were by virtue, a felon.

They are criminal. As soon as you get it through you thick head that
someone who engages in breaking a law, whether you want to call it
criminal or civil, especially one which provides jail time, is
considered a criminal. Whether they are caught or ultimately convicted
is only a smoke screen for those who try to justify their behavior.


An still doesn't excuse your ignorance..ignorance of the law is no
excuse. You said they *were* illegal, not that they *used* to be
illegal.

I have seen no revised documentation which clarifies that a roger
beep is now an acceptable device.

I would hurry up and start tooting my own horn
about another area of which I have slightly
more knowledge than that of the law which
governs "your" element.

I guess you would, but then again you were so blatantly wrong twice in a
row, no one blames you for not starting to "toot your own horn about
another area" in which you claim knowledge.

Do you always answer yourself? You do realize that you're commenting
on your own statement. Please try to pay attention.....

Nevertheless, tuning a 4 watt radio will not affect any "S" unit on the
receiving end. You go on and believe it will and continue to sling your
voodoo bull**** that is found in your posts from your claim of making a
Davemade "spectrally pure" (something which you are unable to define,
but claim you did) to your bull**** about increased S units from a 4
watt radio.

You are completely off the rails. Why else would you tune a radio's
transmitter, other than to either increase or decrease the power? If
you do, then you will affect your signal on the receive end.


Are you THAT literal?

Not at all, you're THAT off-topic and reaching for anything but the
topic which was being discussed in the thread to which I replied,,,,, .a
4 watt radio.

No, the topic was whether or not a peak job was worth the money.


Are you disputing my
claim because you're hung up on the absolute
definition of a "4 watt radio"?

See above.


The term "4 watt
radio" in this context, refers to a stock (legal)
CB.

As was being discussed.

If you peak the radio, of course it will no longer
put out 4 watts, otherwise why do it?

Lowering the deadkey to 3 watts.

Ok, let's run with that. Are you saying that lowering the power to 3
watts will not have any difference on your signal?



I said a peak and tune on this radio will not result in a net change
(increase of S units) and you began menstruating....again.

It certainly will. People are duped into believing that a peak job
will make them "put out better". How else do you put out a better
signal without increasing the power? My point, of course, is that the
amount of power increase available from a peak job, is not significant
enough to make it worth what "screwdriver technicians" charge.


Peaking and tuning are not synonymous, yet
you have voodoo'd them into a merger on many occasion.

Why else would you "tune" a radio if not to alter the power output?
Please stop grasping at straws and enjoy the shoe leather you're
munching on.


A typical "S" meter is "calibrated" in 6db
increments. Therefore, assuming a linear (no
not the amplifier) scale, an increase of 6 db (1
"S" unit) is the equivalent of taking a 4 watt
carrier, and increasing it to 16 watts.
Something that is not possible from a simple
"peak job".

And you danced around it until just now. Let's see my comment that has
you running all amok....."You would be best served putting your voodoo
radio bull**** to rest. Assuming a peak and tune job is somehow related
to increased "S" units is imbecilic."

Why else would you peak a radio?

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

Once again, intently satiated am I.

Sedated more likely......

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:47:29 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 07:19:53 -0400, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
Geeze! Why don't you tell him what you REALLY think. ;-)

Actually the term "compression" refers to the condition where a
normally linear device, starts to lose that linearity. If the gain of
your amp is 10 db, then 5 watts in should give 50 watts out. 10 watts
in should give 100 watts out. If 15 watts in only results in 120 watts
out, you are now "in compression". You call that clipping, but
compression is also a valid term for this condition. We use this term
all the time where I work. Granted the amps I work with are not as
powerful, they are still governed by the same characteristics.
Usually once "compression" is reached the incidents of second order
harmonic generation increases disproportionately with the output,
usually at a 2:1 ratio.


Let's try and clarify a few terms here.....

Clipping -- distortion that occurs on the top of a waveform due to the
signal exceeding the limitations of the circuit.

No argument.


Limiting -- the result of intentionally preventing a signal from
exceeding a given level. This can be done by clipping, automatic gain
control, or both.

Also correct.



Compression -- a term usually applied to audio conditioning where the
amplification of a signal is varied inversely to it's input level. One
of the most common types of audio compressor is called "constant
volume amplifier".

That is but one type of compression. For a more detailed discussion of
RF amplifier compression, please refer to the following related link:

http://cp.literature.agilent.com/lit...5965-7710E.pdf

Generally speaking, amplifier compression occurs when the input:output
power ratio no longer increases db for db.


But the problem here is that the term 'compression' has been adopted
by voodoo techs as a euphamism for 'clipping', making it sound as if
the distortion-causing effect is not only benign, but sometimes
preferred. It is neither.

After reading the link, you might want to revise your definition.
There are a bunch of very talented engineers here who would be a bit
insulted to find out that you refer to them as "voodoo techs".


But you are right about one thing. a -33dbc harmonic rating from a
single carrier signal is pretty poor. Perhaps a chebychev lowpass
filter on the output will fix it up.....


That would be nothing more than a kludge. The fault is in the design.
The response isn't even close to linear. That may be due to the bias
class, the bias regulator, the choice of active device, or just crappy
engineering overall. I suspect it's a little of everything.

Usually, if it is a push-pull design, device matching plays an
important part. Bias is also important, as is impedance matching. But
even a "good" design should have a follow-up low pass filter to
minimize any harmonic content.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 21:26:31 GMT, "Marty B."
wrote:

YOU GUESS ARE SO SMART, WHAT THE **** YOU DOING ON CB ?


So in other words, only dummies should use CB? I'm sure there are a
few people who would take offense to (and some who would resemble)
that comment.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On 6 Oct 2004 14:37:46 -0700, (Jim Hampton)
wrote:

Hello, Twist

Dave was referring to 'S' units at the other end of the circuit. One
'S' unit is *supposidly* equal to 6 dB. 6 dB is an increase in power
of four times.


You know that, I know that, most knowledgable people know that, and I
suspect Twisty knows that as well. He just likes to argue for the sake
of arguing.

It's true that most CB "S" meters are far from linear, and consistent.
On the lower part of the scale, 1 "S" unit might be only 2 or 3 db. At
the upper end, 1 "S" unit might be closer to 10db. But the theory is
sound.

Dave
"Sandbagger"