Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
I don't much like the receivers I've used in contemporary tranceivers -- the general coverage synthisized open front end ones. (I hasten to add I haven't used any of the $4000 rigs; can't afford them). But the ones I have used seem plagued with near-signal desensitization, front end overload, etc., and I suppose all that comes from putting the selectivity so far downstream. I'm almost tempted to get an old 75s4 and shut up, but I really don't need another room heater, so, instead, I'm thinking of building my own receiver along the lines laid down by the late Doug DeMaw in his _QRP Notebook_. Single conversion 160m superhet with Collins mechanical filters in the IF and a series of down-converters for the other bands. Anybody got any experience with the DeMaw Design? Jim, K5YUT There was a project to design a REALLY good sigle conversion ham radio and here is the website: http://www.warc.org.uk/cdg2000/The%2...ransceiver.htm It was designed to have a fantastic dynamic range and, after seeing some of the schematics, it has quite a few good ideas. The mixers and crystal filters are worth studying. One of the designers made a helical coil VCO with really good phase noise, although the mechanical details were complex. These days, I'd want to look into the AD9954 DDS design. Probably still have to do something about DDS spurs, but they are fairly low as is. ================== So, it seems to me that there are a lot of designs for homebrew gear. You need to look at your specific requirements to see what will suit you. In my case, I live in a very RF HOT location, with quite a few powerful signals. I might take the extra effort to go for maximum dynamic range. Probably ovekill for most ham locations, but necessary for me. Jim N6BIU -- 15:10 Pacific Time Zone Dec 26 2006 International Time 23:10 UTC 26.12.2006 |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Guys, this is has been an interesting discussion. I wish I was more
knowledgeable - I would venture out building like that but I just don't know enough. --- I'm kind of starting over. Long story... What would be a good receiver - or good enough to listen for VFOs, test and build, etc. Or better yet what should I avoid? What about something like the Ten-Tec 1056 kit and some way to band switch - maybe modules... It's kind of a catch 22 - I have to have a receiver to build one (or transmitter). Dan KB9JLO |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well, for a reasonable starting point, the KK7B line of direct conversion
radios has a lot going for it. Good performance in a small package, and it can be set up for most frequencies by providing an LO nad a 90' shift for the LO in the band you want to play with. A kit can be purchased from Kanga which has all the parts needed. They also offer the microR2 which was in the recent QST article. http://www.kangaus.com/micror2_receiver.htm That particular kit is set up for 40 meters, but it'd serve as an excellent starting point. Kanga also has the slightly more general purpose miniR2 the does not ave an onboard VFO, so it is easier to use on other frequencies. The R2 series have good dynamic ranges, and make pretty good rigs. No AGC, which takes some getting used to, but fun to use. Jim N6BIU -- 22:25 Pacific Time Zone Dec 26 2006 International Time 06:25 UTC 27.12.2006 |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
bcdlr wrote:
Guys, this is has been an interesting discussion. I wish I was more knowledgeable - I would venture out building like that but I just don't know enough. --- I'm kind of starting over. Long story... What would be a good receiver - or good enough to listen for VFOs, test and build, etc. Or better yet what should I avoid? What about something like the Ten-Tec 1056 kit and some way to band switch - maybe modules... It's kind of a catch 22 - I have to have a receiver to build one (or transmitter). A good receiver is important in any ham shack. You can build state-of-the-art performance, especially for a single-band receiver. While some have talked about DDS/PLL VFOs, don't underestimate the perfor- mance of a good LC VFO built with modern components, after a bit of tweaking to nail down the temperature compensation. I know you have your heart set on building something, and there have been excellent suggestions in this thread, but it's not a crime to buy your first receiver to give you a known-good building block for further development. Laura Halliday VE7LDH "That's a totally illegal, Grid: CN89mg madcap scheme. I like it!" ICBM: 49 16.05 N 122 56.92 W - H. Pearce |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FS DX-394 General Coverage Receiver | Scanner | |||
FS:Conar Twins - Conar 500 Receiver & Conar 400 Xmtr | Swap | |||
FS: Icom R75 Receiver w/DSP | Equipment | |||
FS: Icom R75 Receiver w/DSP | Equipment | |||
FS: Icom R75 Receiver w/DSP | Swap |