On Sat, 14 Apr 2018 22:22:58 -0400, Derek Schur wrote:

+AD4 On Sat, 14 Apr 2018 17:45:26 -0400, Derek Schur
+AD4 +ADw-derek.s777+AEA-protonmail.com+AD4 wrote:
+AD4
+AD4APg-So I have the above listed reciever (Radio Shack DX-375) that has long
+AD4APg-since had the built in telescopic whip antenna broken off. I'm looking
+AD4APg-for advice in making do without. Does anyone have any advice on this,
+AD4APg-besides simply addind a random wire in it's place?
+AD4
+AD4
+AD4 So, I'll add onto this. First of all, thanks to those who have
+AD4 answered, so far. I'll both consider them, and leave them for others
+AD4 in the same situation. What I also want to cnsider, is this. Are there
+AD4 any homebrew antennas that might work on the shortwave bands, that are
+AD4 worth considering, in my situation?

Does your radio have a connector for an external antenna?

On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 02:38:53 -0000 (UTC), Frank
wrote:

On Sat, 14 Apr 2018 22:22:58 -0400, Derek Schur wrote:

On Sat, 14 Apr 2018 17:45:26 -0400, Derek Schur
wrote:

So I have the above listed reciever (Radio Shack DX-375) that has long
since had the built in telescopic whip antenna broken off. I'm looking
for advice in making do without. Does anyone have any advice on this,
besides simply addind a random wire in it's place?


So, I'll add onto this. First of all, thanks to those who have
answered, so far. I'll both consider them, and leave them for others
in the same situation. What I also want to cnsider, is this. Are there
any homebrew antennas that might work on the shortwave bands, that are
worth considering, in my situation?

Does your radio have a connector for an external antenna?

No. Amy replacement would need to attatch to where the telescope
screwed on to the base of where the telescopic antenna was attatched,
if not internally to the radio.

On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 00:35:01 -0400, Derek Schur wrote:

+AD4 On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 02:38:53 -0000 (UTC), Frank +ADw-analogdial+AEA-mail.com+AD4
+AD4 wrote:
+AD4
+AD4APg-On Sat, 14 Apr 2018 22:22:58 -0400, Derek Schur wrote:
+AD4APg
+AD4APgA+ On Sat, 14 Apr 2018 17:45:26 -0400, Derek Schur
+AD4APgA+ +ADw-derek.s777+AEA-protonmail.com+AD4 wrote:
+AD4APgA+
+AD4APgA+AD4-So I have the above listed reciever (Radio Shack DX-375) that has long
+AD4APgA+AD4-since had the built in telescopic whip antenna broken off. I'm looking
+AD4APgA+AD4-for advice in making do without. Does anyone have any advice on this,
+AD4APgA+AD4-besides simply addind a random wire in it's place?
+AD4APgA+
+AD4APgA+
+AD4APgA+ So, I'll add onto this. First of all, thanks to those who have
+AD4APgA+ answered, so far. I'll both consider them, and leave them for others
+AD4APgA+ in the same situation. What I also want to cnsider, is this. Are there
+AD4APgA+ any homebrew antennas that might work on the shortwave bands, that are
+AD4APgA+ worth considering, in my situation?
+AD4APg
+AD4APg-Does your radio have a connector for an external antenna?
+AD4
+AD4 No. Amy replacement would need to attatch to where the telescope
+AD4 screwed on to the base of where the telescopic antenna was attatched,
+AD4 if not internally to the radio.

If your fabrication skills are good, you could construct a tuned loop for SW. There's plans on the web and youtube videos. I think you'd be able to get by without the coupling loop, just put the radio close to the antenna, in the right direction, and radio's internal ferrite antenna will pick it up.

The loop doesn't have to be circular.

In article , Frank writes:
If your fabrication skills are good, you could construct a tuned loop for SW. There's plans on the web and youtube videos. I think you'd be able to get by without the coupling loop, just put the radio close to the antenna, in the right direction, and

The problem without having an antenna input is that you do not have
any specs for input impedance, All you know is it is almost certainly
_not_ 75 ohms.

If you think about it, a quarter wave antenna for 30 Mhz, by the hams'
rule of thumb L = 234/f, is 7.8' . It gets longer for everything else,
up to 250' or so for the broadcast band. This means a high negative
(capacitive) reactance, typically, is expected at the input circuit,
and if they were to tune some of that out with an inductor they would
see a low, resistive, source impedance feeding the RF amp stage.

That's about as far as I am able to analyze this, but I would
recommend an SWL antenna tuner, which is likely capable of adjusting
to anything from a random wire to a multielement beam. The manual
may just tell you what you need to know about feeding the receiver at
the whip antenna input point.

I'm out of touch, but I think MFJ, and maybe Ten-Tec, might have
had such tuners in the past. There may also be preselectors -
basically RF preamps - in case your receiver does not have
a high performance RF input stage.

The ARRL Handbook, and the Antenna Handbook, will both have
sections on antenna couplers. A simple L network is basically
only two components, with at least one of them being tunable.
The trick is choosing the components and their configuration,
and that's where the commercial product comes in: they've already
worked out compromise values.

After that, the actual antenna you decide on is not so important.
You can start with a random wire and move up to something more
sophisticated.

George

In article , I wrote:
The ARRL Handbook, and the Antenna Handbook, will both have
sections on antenna couplers. A simple L network is basically
only two components, with at least one of them being tunable.
The trick is choosing the components and their configuration,
and that's where the commercial product comes in: they've already
worked out compromise values.

There is an external antenna specified in the manual, and an aBay search
for completed listings, worldwide, for a 278-1374, gives this item
(hope it's usable):

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Radio-Shack...p2047675.l2557

Note that elsewhere in the listing it gives another part number, I think
one I saw listed somewhere as a "similar item". Looks like it might just
be a clip-on, retractable, extension wire?

Price was $8.88 plus shipping from Plano, TX, a Dallas suburb near Texas
Instruments headquarters.

Also, I wrote that you might need an antenna tuner for an external
antenna, but this just seems to clip on directly, so that's a good sign.
Otherwise I was going to guess that the receiver had inductive
antenna impedance compensation, varying by band, and building just a
series capacitor substitution box that went by decade from 50pf to
50nf might compensate for that in order to work with an antenna of
design impedance of, say, 50-300 ohms.

Also, the manual I found on the web states that below 7100 Mhz, the 375
(has gap from 6250-7100), and the 396 as well, use a combination of the
whip and the internal loopstick.

George

In article , I wrote:
Also, the manual I found on the web states that below 7100 Mhz, the 375

It's kHz.

(has gap from 6250-7100), and the 396 as well, use a combination of the
whip and the internal loopstick.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 04:17:33 -0400, George Cornelius wrote:

+AD4 Also, I wrote that you might need an antenna tuner for an external
+AD4 antenna, but this just seems to clip on directly, so that's a good sign.
+AD4 Otherwise I was going to guess that the receiver had inductive antenna
+AD4 impedance compensation, varying by band, and building just a series
+AD4 capacitor substitution box that went by decade from 50pf to 50nf might
+AD4 compensate for that in order to work with an antenna of design impedance
+AD4 of, say, 50-300 ohms.

Most portables have an untuned high impedance connection to the whip
antenna. Basically just coupled to the gate of a FET.

A high input impedance input is good enough for a rod antenna. The
antenna is electrically short at SW frequencies and the +ACI-ground+ACI half of
the antenna is whatever capacitive coupling the radio can get to the rest
of the world.

An antenna tuner would be helpful because the untuned input stage is
going to overload first on the strongest signal, which is likely a local
BCB station.

In article , Frank writes:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 04:17:33 -0400, George Cornelius wrote:

Also, I wrote that you might need an antenna tuner for an external
antenna, but this just seems to clip on directly, so that's a good sign.
Otherwise I was going to guess that the receiver had inductive antenna
impedance compensation, varying by band, and building just a series
capacitor substitution box that went by decade from 50pf to 50nf might
compensate for that in order to work with an antenna of design impedance
of, say, 50-300 ohms.

Most portables have an untuned high impedance connection to the whip
antenna. Basically just coupled to the gate of a FET.

Unaware of that. Untuned input stages? I'm not sure I
have ever looked at the circuit diagram for any shortwave
receiver that was not tube based, so I'll accept that as
something quite possible.

I know FET's are marvelous for input stages. But beyond that
everything I say about the input to this receiver is based upon
pure wild-assed guess.

Please note, though, that the users' manual explains that the
internal loop antenna is involved, as well as the whip, below 7200
khz. So they (a) have a bit of band switching and (b) do most
likely have a tuned input stage, at least below 7200 .

A high input impedance input is good enough for a rod antenna. The
antenna is electrically short at SW frequencies and the ground half of
the antenna is whatever capacitive coupling the radio can get to the rest
of the world.

Yes, and you do tend to have capacitive coupling to the AC line,
which in turn, has all sorts of coupling to ground.

Anyway, I only know what theory says. I am told that typically one does
not bother with impedance matching for shortwave listening; but
theory is that for best benefit from an external antenna you want
a conjugate match. That means the resistive part of the impedance
should match the resistive part of the load, and any reactance at
the source should be balanced out - cancelled - by equal and opposite
reactance at the load.

Now I could easily understand a 10:1 energy loss (3:1 impedance
matching error) not being too much of an issue, but once you get
to 100:1 losses and worse, it would seem that some kind of antenna
tuning would be in order.

An antenna tuner would be helpful because the untuned input stage is
going to overload first on the strongest signal, which is likely a local
BCB station.

Yes, of course. You're really getting killed with an untuned input
stage if there are powerful sources nearby.

George