wrote:

On Mar 2, 11:18 am, wrote:
dxAce raised the point that he would prefer to upgrade to a 1000 foot
antenna rather than upgrade to a better radio. This is a bit like
which came
first? the chicken or the egg? I have had extensive experience of
using
1000ft longwires or beverage antenna's on my DXpeditions over the
years and
indeed they do pull in the signals something awesome. But they also
pull in
more interfering stations that want to blot out your faint DX target,
and
also whatever QRM/RFI noise is floating around, they pull more of that
in
too.

So at the end of the day it still means it is better to DX with a top
end
radio that suppresses and minimises the offending signals and QRM that
are
interfering with your faint DX target.

Over the years I gradually upgraded my radio's to what I thought was
the
ultimate, a Drake R8B. I was quite satisfied with that until I was
loaned a
Rohde & Schwarz. Although the R & S did not have any more bells and
whistles
than my Drake, it was so clearly superior to my R8B that from then on
I
hankered after a better radio. The R&S just pulled in faint stations
that
did not even register on the R8B and then was also better able to
resolve to
audibility stations that were interfered with much better than the
R8B.

So I watched developments and then my good friend Guy pointed me
towards the
Icom IC-756PROIII, which I later acquired. This radio was indeed
better than
my R8B, see:http://www.dxing.info/equipment/icom_ic756_plimmer.dx
So the 756Pro3 has really proved itself in the field, culminating in
the
catch of a lifetime: 1410 Khz, CFUN, Vancouver BC, Canada, some 14,000
miles
away from the Seefontein DX site. Whether or not I would have got this
catch
on my old R8B is a moot point - I don't think so as it was extremely
faint
and on the border of audibility, and my DX mates didn't get it either.
So I
am happy that the 756Pro3 paid for itself and that is why I am now
upgrading
to the new Icom IC-7700 which should be here in April. If I get only
one
more rare catch I will be satisfied that the 7700 has been a
worthwhile
investment.

But to keep things in perspective, I think the things that are
important to
good DX reception are, in order of importance:
1st.] A decent antenna, the best you can afford or rig up.
2nd.] Location. Most of us live in the city or suburbs and are either
in
condo's or on limited size plots, so our options are limited. That is
why
serious DXer's go to a lot of trouble and expense to find the "ideal"
DX
location. When you find a decent place, the results are VERY
rewarding.
3rd.] The radio. again, get the best you can afford. The results just
get
better and better.

I would liken our hobby to any sport. If you take golf and Tiger Woods
for
example. He has only the latest and most expensive cutting edge
equipment.
If he gets the latest $3000 putter and it allows him that extra inch
nearer
the hole, he is satisfied. So it is with radio gear and antenna's.

Have fun and good DX

John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa
South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s
RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods
Drake SW8 & ERGO software
Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100
BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A.
Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270
Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whiphttp://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx

It's been my experience with the Wellbrook ALA100 that more is more. I
have found increasing the length of a long wire to have diminishing
returns.

This would be a question for Andy Ikin at Wellbrook, but I believe the
ALA100 is gaining aperture based on the area of the loop. Making a
long wire longer should be a linear improvement, not a square power.
In the case of the ALA100, you would be increasing the length up to
the point where the loop is not longer considered small. For a long
wire, is their any improvement after reaching half a wavelength?

You're kidding, right?

On Mar 2, 2:05 pm, dxAce wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 2, 11:18 am, wrote:
dxAce raised the point that he would prefer to upgrade to a 1000 foot
antenna rather than upgrade to a better radio. This is a bit like
which came
first? the chicken or the egg? I have had extensive experience of
using
1000ft longwires or beverage antenna's on my DXpeditions over the
years and
indeed they do pull in the signals something awesome. But they also
pull in
more interfering stations that want to blot out your faint DX target,
and
also whatever QRM/RFI noise is floating around, they pull more of that
in
too.

So at the end of the day it still means it is better to DX with a top
end
radio that suppresses and minimises the offending signals and QRM that
are
interfering with your faint DX target.

Over the years I gradually upgraded my radio's to what I thought was
the
ultimate, a Drake R8B. I was quite satisfied with that until I was
loaned a
Rohde & Schwarz. Although the R & S did not have any more bells and
whistles
than my Drake, it was so clearly superior to my R8B that from then on
I
hankered after a better radio. The R&S just pulled in faint stations
that
did not even register on the R8B and then was also better able to
resolve to
audibility stations that were interfered with much better than the
R8B.

So I watched developments and then my good friend Guy pointed me
towards the
Icom IC-756PROIII, which I later acquired. This radio was indeed
better than
my R8B, see:http://www.dxing.info/equipment/icom_ic756_plimmer.dx
So the 756Pro3 has really proved itself in the field, culminating in
the
catch of a lifetime: 1410 Khz, CFUN, Vancouver BC, Canada, some 14,000
miles
away from the Seefontein DX site. Whether or not I would have got this
catch
on my old R8B is a moot point - I don't think so as it was extremely
faint
and on the border of audibility, and my DX mates didn't get it either.
So I
am happy that the 756Pro3 paid for itself and that is why I am now
upgrading
to the new Icom IC-7700 which should be here in April. If I get only
one
more rare catch I will be satisfied that the 7700 has been a
worthwhile
investment.

But to keep things in perspective, I think the things that are
important to
good DX reception are, in order of importance:
1st.] A decent antenna, the best you can afford or rig up.
2nd.] Location. Most of us live in the city or suburbs and are either
in
condo's or on limited size plots, so our options are limited. That is
why
serious DXer's go to a lot of trouble and expense to find the "ideal"
DX
location. When you find a decent place, the results are VERY
rewarding.
3rd.] The radio. again, get the best you can afford. The results just
get
better and better.

I would liken our hobby to any sport. If you take golf and Tiger Woods
for
example. He has only the latest and most expensive cutting edge
equipment.
If he gets the latest $3000 putter and it allows him that extra inch
nearer
the hole, he is satisfied. So it is with radio gear and antenna's.

Have fun and good DX

John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa
South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s
RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods
Drake SW8 & ERGO software
Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100
BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A.
Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270
Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whiphttp://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx

It's been my experience with the Wellbrook ALA100 that more is more. I
have found increasing the length of a long wire to have diminishing
returns.

This would be a question for Andy Ikin at Wellbrook, but I believe the
ALA100 is gaining aperture based on the area of the loop. Making a
long wire longer should be a linear improvement, not a square power.
In the case of the ALA100, you would be increasing the length up to
the point where the loop is not longer considered small. For a long
wire, is their any improvement after reaching half a wavelength?

You're kidding, right?

It would help if you asked the question in a more intelligent manner.
For instance, kidding about what in particular?

If it is the use of preamps with high end gear, this is obvious. Just
look at the high end icom gear. It is no where near as sensitive as a
say a HT. But you design a HT to have a small antenna, while your
R8600 will have larger iron attached. Also historically, preamps have
become quieter as technology improves. So with pro gear, you upgrade
the preamp and still keep the radio. The AR7030 is designed so that
you can turn the internal preamp off. This is not for dynamic range
consideration since the radio already has a wide dynamic range.
Rather, it is to allow for low noise preamps, multicouplers, etc.

You are welcome. Glad to be of service.

wrote:

On Mar 2, 2:05 pm, dxAce wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 2, 11:18 am, wrote:
dxAce raised the point that he would prefer to upgrade to a 1000 foot
antenna rather than upgrade to a better radio. This is a bit like
which came
first? the chicken or the egg? I have had extensive experience of
using
1000ft longwires or beverage antenna's on my DXpeditions over the
years and
indeed they do pull in the signals something awesome. But they also
pull in
more interfering stations that want to blot out your faint DX target,
and
also whatever QRM/RFI noise is floating around, they pull more of that
in
too.

So at the end of the day it still means it is better to DX with a top
end
radio that suppresses and minimises the offending signals and QRM that
are
interfering with your faint DX target.

Over the years I gradually upgraded my radio's to what I thought was
the
ultimate, a Drake R8B. I was quite satisfied with that until I was
loaned a
Rohde & Schwarz. Although the R & S did not have any more bells and
whistles
than my Drake, it was so clearly superior to my R8B that from then on
I
hankered after a better radio. The R&S just pulled in faint stations
that
did not even register on the R8B and then was also better able to
resolve to
audibility stations that were interfered with much better than the
R8B.

So I watched developments and then my good friend Guy pointed me
towards the
Icom IC-756PROIII, which I later acquired. This radio was indeed
better than
my R8B, see:http://www.dxing.info/equipment/icom_ic756_plimmer.dx
So the 756Pro3 has really proved itself in the field, culminating in
the
catch of a lifetime: 1410 Khz, CFUN, Vancouver BC, Canada, some 14,000
miles
away from the Seefontein DX site. Whether or not I would have got this
catch
on my old R8B is a moot point - I don't think so as it was extremely
faint
and on the border of audibility, and my DX mates didn't get it either.
So I
am happy that the 756Pro3 paid for itself and that is why I am now
upgrading
to the new Icom IC-7700 which should be here in April. If I get only
one
more rare catch I will be satisfied that the 7700 has been a
worthwhile
investment.

But to keep things in perspective, I think the things that are
important to
good DX reception are, in order of importance:
1st.] A decent antenna, the best you can afford or rig up.
2nd.] Location. Most of us live in the city or suburbs and are either
in
condo's or on limited size plots, so our options are limited. That is
why
serious DXer's go to a lot of trouble and expense to find the "ideal"
DX
location. When you find a decent place, the results are VERY
rewarding.
3rd.] The radio. again, get the best you can afford. The results just
get
better and better.

I would liken our hobby to any sport. If you take golf and Tiger Woods
for
example. He has only the latest and most expensive cutting edge
equipment.
If he gets the latest $3000 putter and it allows him that extra inch
nearer
the hole, he is satisfied. So it is with radio gear and antenna's.

Have fun and good DX

John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa
South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s
RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods
Drake SW8 & ERGO software
Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100
BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A.
Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270
Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof mini-whiphttp://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx

It's been my experience with the Wellbrook ALA100 that more is more. I
have found increasing the length of a long wire to have diminishing
returns.

This would be a question for Andy Ikin at Wellbrook, but I believe the
ALA100 is gaining aperture based on the area of the loop. Making a
long wire longer should be a linear improvement, not a square power.
In the case of the ALA100, you would be increasing the length up to
the point where the loop is not longer considered small. For a long
wire, is their any improvement after reaching half a wavelength?

You're kidding, right?

It would help if you asked the question in a more intelligent manner.
For instance, kidding about what in particular?

Your last sentence. Hope you listen better than you can read :-)

In article
,
wrote:

On Mar 2, 2:05 pm, dxAce wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 2, 11:18 am, wrote:
dxAce raised the point that he would prefer to upgrade to a 1000 foot
antenna rather than upgrade to a better radio. This is a bit like
which came
first? the chicken or the egg? I have had extensive experience of
using
1000ft longwires or beverage antenna's on my DXpeditions over the
years and
indeed they do pull in the signals something awesome. But they also
pull in
more interfering stations that want to blot out your faint DX target,
and
also whatever QRM/RFI noise is floating around, they pull more of that
in
too.

So at the end of the day it still means it is better to DX with a top
end
radio that suppresses and minimises the offending signals and QRM that
are
interfering with your faint DX target.

Over the years I gradually upgraded my radio's to what I thought was
the
ultimate, a Drake R8B. I was quite satisfied with that until I was
loaned a
Rohde & Schwarz. Although the R & S did not have any more bells and
whistles
than my Drake, it was so clearly superior to my R8B that from then on
I
hankered after a better radio. The R&S just pulled in faint stations
that
did not even register on the R8B and then was also better able to
resolve to
audibility stations that were interfered with much better than the
R8B.

So I watched developments and then my good friend Guy pointed me
towards the
Icom IC-756PROIII, which I later acquired. This radio was indeed
better than
my R8B, see:http://www.dxing.info/equipment/icom_ic756_plimmer.dx
So the 756Pro3 has really proved itself in the field, culminating in
the
catch of a lifetime: 1410 Khz, CFUN, Vancouver BC, Canada, some 14,000
miles
away from the Seefontein DX site. Whether or not I would have got this
catch
on my old R8B is a moot point - I don't think so as it was extremely
faint
and on the border of audibility, and my DX mates didn't get it either.
So I
am happy that the 756Pro3 paid for itself and that is why I am now
upgrading
to the new Icom IC-7700 which should be here in April. If I get only
one
more rare catch I will be satisfied that the 7700 has been a
worthwhile
investment.

But to keep things in perspective, I think the things that are
important to
good DX reception are, in order of importance:
1st.] A decent antenna, the best you can afford or rig up.
2nd.] Location. Most of us live in the city or suburbs and are either
in
condo's or on limited size plots, so our options are limited. That is
why
serious DXer's go to a lot of trouble and expense to find the "ideal"
DX
location. When you find a decent place, the results are VERY
rewarding.
3rd.] The radio. again, get the best you can afford. The results just
get
better and better.

I would liken our hobby to any sport. If you take golf and Tiger Woods
for
example. He has only the latest and most expensive cutting edge
equipment.
If he gets the latest $3000 putter and it allows him that extra inch
nearer
the hole, he is satisfied. So it is with radio gear and antenna's.

Have fun and good DX

John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa
South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s
RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods
Drake SW8 & ERGO software
Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100
BW XCR 30, Sangean 803A.
Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270
Kiwa MW Loop, PAORDT Roelof
mini-whiphttp://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx

It's been my experience with the Wellbrook ALA100 that more is more. I
have found increasing the length of a long wire to have diminishing
returns.

This would be a question for Andy Ikin at Wellbrook, but I believe the
ALA100 is gaining aperture based on the area of the loop. Making a
long wire longer should be a linear improvement, not a square power.
In the case of the ALA100, you would be increasing the length up to
the point where the loop is not longer considered small. For a long
wire, is their any improvement after reaching half a wavelength?

You're kidding, right?

It would help if you asked the question in a more intelligent manner.
For instance, kidding about what in particular?

SNIP

Specifically, a long wire high in the air would not be very directional
where a long wire near the ground would have beverage characteristics.

The beverage would have better signal to noise if pointed at the desired
signal where the very high wire would not.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California