D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:

D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

denny wrote:
Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B
compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the
better receiver?
R71A was the benchmark for many years. It was the standard receiver
used by three-letter agencies for monitoring. It even found its way into
the military. Sensitivity is good. Selectivity can be exceptional, and
when working crowded bands for a contact deep in the noise, there are
few that are it's rival.

In stock form.

For hobbyists, not so hot. Audio is poor, and like most rigs built
for professional users, it really doesn't deliver it's best performance
without a superb antenna. Don't misunderstand...most any antenna will
get you going, and performance will be very good. But to get the best
out of R-71, you really need as professional an antenna and transmission
system as the agenicies for which it was built.

That said, you can still find an array of filters for it, ceramic,
crystal and mechanical. Ergonomics are reasonably good, with most every
function on its own switch. And, in the hands of someone who knows what
they're doing, it's quite the cannon. Even on a random wire.

R-71 does not have a few of the more luxurient features that some in
the hobby consider essential, today.

Drake R8B was built more in line with today's hobbycraft users'
needs. Again, don't get me wrong...it's a very high performance
receiver....but it's not intended for the kind of installation you'd
encounter on a hidden island where men-in-black are listening to racks
of receivers for the clandestine, untoward, and subversive. R8B has a
cleaner layout than R-71, with much more luxurient features, ear
pleasing audio, and ergonomics more in line with the needs of a less
military user.

Side by side, the Drake will be more pleasant to operate for long
periods of time than R-71. And on simpler antennae will produce the same
or better results.

I had an R71 for many years, and still miss it, today. And R8B wasn't
around when I bought mine.

But, if I were looking for a heavy hitting receiver, today, and those
were my choices, I'd probably have more inclined toward R8B.

Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's
AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350,
RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250.
Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic,
small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's potent
performance.
I once owned a Yaesu FRG-7700 from Gilfer. What is interesting is that when I
had some serious noise issues here, a fellow from our now defunct FCC Monitoring
station south of here showed up with what I guess would be their 'covert'
vehicle, and it had a FRG-7700 in kind of a rack on the passenger side.


Yeah....long ago, in a life far, far away, there was an FCC monitor
in my neighborhood. 11 meters was the Wild West in those days, and he
had a cluster of receivers in a rack in his panel truck.

Really exciting stuff for a Jr High Schooler back then.

I've not worked FRG-7700. How did it handle compared to your
benchmark rigs?
It served me well and then I bought a Drake R7 in 1984. I used them both for a few
years, then I got the Kenwood R-5000 and sold the Yaesu.

I had some better filters installed in the '7700 from Gilfer, and I certainly heard a
lot of stations on it. I guess what got me back into the hobby back in '82 or so was
the digital readout.


That was certainly ground breaking territory, back then. And a lot of
kids I knew were drawn to the hobby because of it. I was still using a
Hammarlund BC-794 Super Pro that I'd aligned within an inch of its life.
Finding frequencies, even with the analog dials, was a snap. Still, it
turned off a lot of my friends, who were determined to go digital.

Of course, that was when the noise floor was low, and the bands were
full of stations like WNYW. And BBC/WS was still largely an
entertainment medium. So, that variable IF served me very well with some
fine audio.

Except for the Hammar, and a couple of Nationals that I'm putting up
for sale, everything else I've got has a digital readout. Digital
readouts aren't as fun as spinning the analog dials. But the rigs today
are a whole lot easier to work.

Yeah, that and timer controlled taping. It was a dream come true.

No kidding. An entirely new level of monitoring was possible. Which
led me into providing audio of international broadcasts for News.

I did that sort of thing during the *first* Gulf war and then again during the *second* and
now ongoing problem.

Actually made a few bucks. Doubt that will ever happen again.



Plug in the freq. and
either they were there or not, what fun!

Yep. And you could set up and trap stations as they were coming on.
No more hunting for one station while keepng an ear on another. Miss
nothing.

I bought a Switchcraft router out of a stereo store, and set up my
shack with several reel recorders. If something interesting broke, I
could route to a waiting recorder with the punch of a couple of buttons,
without disturbing what was being recorded elsewhere.

On Mar 30, 2:08 pm, RHF wrote:
On Mar 30, 1:45 pm, wrote:



On Mar 30, 8:18 am, D Peter Maus wrote:

denny wrote:
Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B
compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the
better receiver?

R71A was the benchmark for many years. It was the standard receiver
used by three-letter agencies for monitoring. It even found its way into
the military. Sensitivity is good. Selectivity can be exceptional, and
when working crowded bands for a contact deep in the noise, there are
few that are it's rival.

In stock form.

For hobbyists, not so hot. Audio is poor, and like most rigs built
for professional users, it really doesn't deliver it's best performance
without a superb antenna. Don't misunderstand...most any antenna will
get you going, and performance will be very good. But to get the best
out of R-71, you really need as professional an antenna and transmission
system as the agenicies for which it was built.

That said, you can still find an array of filters for it, ceramic,
crystal and mechanical. Ergonomics are reasonably good, with most every
function on its own switch. And, in the hands of someone who knows what
they're doing, it's quite the cannon. Even on a random wire.

R-71 does not have a few of the more luxurient features that some in
the hobby consider essential, today.

Drake R8B was built more in line with today's hobbycraft users'
needs. Again, don't get me wrong...it's a very high performance
receiver....but it's not intended for the kind of installation you'd
encounter on a hidden island where men-in-black are listening to racks
of receivers for the clandestine, untoward, and subversive. R8B has a
cleaner layout than R-71, with much more luxurient features, ear
pleasing audio, and ergonomics more in line with the needs of a less
military user.

Side by side, the Drake will be more pleasant to operate for long
periods of time than R-71. And on simpler antennae will produce the same
or better results.

I had an R71 for many years, and still miss it, today. And R8B wasn't
around when I bought mine.

But, if I were looking for a heavy hitting receiver, today, and those
were my choices, I'd probably have more inclined toward R8B.

Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's
AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350,
RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250.
Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic,
small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's potent
performance.

I've seen some homebrew programming for the R8B. I wouldn't exactly
call it a friendly interface.

It's funny that the AR7030+ was shown to be canceled in Japan via a
post to this forum, but the news never really made it elsewhere.
Anyway, I'd take a 7030+ over a used R8B, but I can handle menus.

Pro gear nearly always chooses high dynamic range over sensitivity.
The assumption is you will have serious iron on the front end or a
preamp. I got in the mood to do some antenna building a week ago and
increased the size of my "indoor" loop for my Wellbrook ALA100 to 20ft
(6ft x 4ft; eating up a bit of a spare room.) It now forces a few more
local MW station to turn on the attenuator in the old 7030, but no
overload problems. I've use 67ft of wire on the ALA100 when in the
boonies, but I can't vouch for how the radio would work in an urban
area, i.e. MW overload. However, it was just silly how well the set up
could pick up NDBs in the daylight. I was in Nevada and picking up
Canadian beacons.

- There really should be more emphasis
- on antennas versus the radio.

M...Sushi - Ditto That !

But a very good Shortwave Radio / Receiver can sit-on
a Desk-Top; and with few exceptions Real Antennas
take up a lot of Real Estate and can cost some Big
Bucks themselves to put into the Air.

~ RHF



Back to the Drake, if you have button mania, wouldn't an older R8A
(crappy sync) and an external synchro demod be another option? I read
about Sherwood's being hooked up to the R8. I never heard or saw this
in the flesh.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ah, but the Wellbrook ALA 100 and a roll your own loop is pretty
compact. Granted with the weak dollar, a Wellbrook ALA 100 costs more
than some radios. To this day the Bushies claim they don't have a
weak dollar policy. Here is the latest from the WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1205...googlenews_wsj
This really sucks because much shortwave gear is imported, and there
are no domestic substitutes.

Here is an example where the loop worked really well. A few weeks ago
I was checking out the local TIStations and heard a bible thumper
mixing with one. I'm not much for logging, but I wrote this one down.
The TIS was on 1620. I rotated the loop to null the local TIS and got
KSMH out of Sacto. This is from the south SF Bay.
http://www.ihradio.org/

You don't need a Kiwa to get a deep null. The ALA 100 does just fine.
I have a small 2ft on a side loop I use for DFIng. Try nulling with a
long wire. Ain't gonna happen.

Unrevealed Source wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's AR-7030+,
Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350, RX-340, and
if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250. Though HF-150
isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic, small...but its lack
of features is more than offset by it's potent performance.

I notice you didn't include the R-75 in that list. How come?




Because I wasn't thinking about it at the time.

D Peter Maus wrote:
Unrevealed Source wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's
AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D,
RX-350, RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and
HF-250. Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others.
Basic, small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's
potent performance.

I notice you didn't include the R-75 in that list. How come?



Because I wasn't thinking about it at the time.

I don't recommend the HF-150; you can't get it serviced.

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

The R8B is a more modern receiver with an excellent sync detector. BTW
Denny there is an R8A and R8B available on Ebay now.

--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html

"denny" wrote in message
...
Anyone have any thoughts or experience with either the Drake R8B
compared to the Icom R71A (with mods), which do you think would be the
better receiver?

The HF-150 isn't too bad to repair. About the only things that go wrong are
a blown
SL-6440 1st mixer, a bad 100uF cap at the output of the 8V regulator that
causes the audio to howl, and a 4569 programmable divider chip on the front
panel board that sometimes goes bad, causing the BFO injection frequency to
be outside of the I.F. passband.
Actually, these problems occur in most of the Lowe units, from time to time.
Every once in a while, I will repair them for a friend.

Pete

"friendlyneighborhooddisease" wrote in message
.. .
D Peter Maus wrote:
Unrevealed Source wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Widening the field abit, I'd recommend looking also at AOR's
AR-7030+, Palstar's R30 (and its variants), Ten-Tec's RX-320D, RX-350,
RX-340, and if you can find them, Lowe's HF-150, HF-225, and HF-250.
Though HF-150 isn't in quite the same class as the others. Basic,
small...but its lack of features is more than offset by it's potent
performance.

I notice you didn't include the R-75 in that list. How come?



Because I wasn't thinking about it at the time.

I don't recommend the HF-150; you can't get it serviced.

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