On Apr 14, 12:30*am, John Plimmer wrote:
On Apr 14, 12:24*am, Gregg wrote:

Is there a certain measurement of a radio for it too be deemed fit for
an Ultra LIte?

Would the Radio Shack DX 399 be in that category, it's pretty small,
not as small as some of those little Sonys.

Anyone in here other than John P. that indulges in that specific type
of monitoring? I've been thinking about it.

Yes there is - see the ulralight website:http://www.dxer.ca/

Also, join the group who will answer all your questions:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ultralightdx/

ultralighting is great fun - have a go

JP

Yeah John, thanks - I am a member of that group (dxer.ca). I was
wondering if anyone in here was into this particular aspect of the
hobby. I think I'm going to get one of the two little Sonys off
Amazon. Which one do you have? I thought I remembered you saying you
had one of those tiny radios.

On Apr 13, 11:18*pm, Michael Black wrote:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010, Gregg wrote:
Is there a certain measurement of a radio for it too be deemed fit for
an Ultra LIte?

Would the Radio Shack DX 399 be in that category, it's pretty small,
not as small as some of those little Sonys.

Anyone in here other than John P. that indulges in that specific type
of monitoring? I've been thinking about it.

I had the impression that the "size" is more about specs than physical
size.

Something with shortwave doesn't really qualify, since it's a better than
average receiver.

It's *a sub-hobby, not unlike low power transmitters in amateur radio.
Use common broadcast band radios and see what you can do with it. *No
q-multipliers, no fancy filters, no fancy detectors. *What you can receive
will not match what you can do with a much fancier receiver, but it resets
things. *With a simpler receiver, you will have to work hard to receive
stations that might be easy with fancier receivers, but it gives you a
challenge that might be more difficult with a fancier receiver. *Any
improvement of the receiver/antenna beyond a certain point will be
incremental, so the fancier the equipment the harder it will be to see
any improvement.

Most people don't tune up and down the AM band, so they don't realize
what they can receive. *Broadcast companies want "Coast to Coast" on
their stations because then they can sell ads for it, *but a listener can
hear it up and down the band, without any effort at all.

So they get amazed if they do tune up and down the band one night, "wow,
I can hear XXX, that's amazing", just like the way most people enter the
hobby of radio listening (or at least did at one point, I don't know if
that's changed). *The first few nights, it's really easy to accumulate
quite a number of stations, which is impressive at the beginning. *But
then beyond that it takes more effort, if only because you need to wait
for conditions to allow a different selection of stations to come through..
Then you need to work harder and then eventually you'll need a better
receiver, not so much sensitivity wise but with other specs, so you can
better isolate two different stations on adjacent frequencies. *But you
won't get a dramatic increase in stations with that better receiver, you
will simply make it easier to hear stations when they come in.

Ultralight seems to be about resetting all that. *Start again, get a
simple receiver, and see what you can do with it, stretch that receiver
to the limits instead of going for something better.

* *Michael

Thanks for the response, I've stretched a few already. I think my GE
P780 is pretty stretched ;-)