That's the amazing thing about this design; it does have that tube like
sound. As far as performance, we are talking about 18 tube performance, not
6 or 7 tube performance. I do understand your doubts, but I think that you
will be pleasantly surprised.

Pete

donut wrote in message
...
"Pete KE9OA" wrote in
:

E-mail me directly, and we will see what happens. Any of you who have
built any of me receivers know what I am talking about...............I
plan to take the design to the next couple of steps up in performance.

You will never go above the 1950s 6 tube superhet in performance. Forget
it.

Looking and listening to all of your replies, it looks as if I will need to
design a small (but not too light) tabletop model AND a portable model.
Thanks for the good input!

Pete

MJC wrote in message
...
To answer your first question about size and portability, take a look
at
the CCRadioPlus. It is a perfect mixture of size, portability, reception
and
sound quality. It works off both AC and battery, and it's battery life is
exceptional off of C cells. It's sound is as good as any table top radio
(or
better).
As for all the rest, I think everyone else here has already listed all
the desired technical features and if you manage to incorporate them all
into the package as I described (like the CCRadioPlus), you'll have a
winner.
The only concern then is if you will be able to offer it at anything
reasonable in cost. We all know you can't set something for nothing so, as
the designer, you're the one who'll have to figure out the best compromise
of cost and features that will sell well on the open market.

MJC

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
My employer has given me the go ahead to design a new product. If there
is
enough interest, I will design a new MW receiver for the market. What
would
you be more interested in......................a small table top type,
or
a
portable?
Performance wise, I am talking about something like that of an AOR7030.
I don't think that I would be inplementing Sync Detection, but a couple
of
I.F. bandwidths could be possible. Definitely, double conversion, and
digital readout, with good audio quality.
Would you want any presets? How about target price? Do you want a
built
in
antenna, or external antenna only? High and low impedance antenna
inputs?
How about a built in tunable preselector?
E-mail me directly, and we will see what happens. Any of you who have
built
any of me receivers know what I am talking about...............I plan to
take the design to the next couple of steps up in performance.

Pete

I'm getting excited about this new MW receiver. I have the CCRadio
and believe it's reception is only fair, with poor selectivity
compared to my Grundig Satellit 800. Even my Grundig S350 is better
than the CCRadio.

My biggest problem with MW is interference from hologen lamps,
dimmers, etc. I don't know if there is any NB that will eliminate
this type of interference.

What I would like to see is:
A portable with a large enough quality speaker to get a decent bass
response, separate tone controls (or even better, a graphic equalizer
tailored to reduce certains frequencies associated with different
types of interference), at LEAST two GOOD bandwidths, a superior
built-in directional antenna, and of course a selectable sideband
option would certainly be nice.

If your set is a real step up from what I currently have, I will
definitely be a buyer!

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 11:25:58 -0500, Gary wrote
(in message ) :

I'm getting excited about this new MW receiver. I have the CCRadio
and believe it's reception is only fair, with poor selectivity
compared to my Grundig Satellit 800. Even my Grundig S350 is better
than the CCRadio.

My biggest problem with MW is interference from hologen lamps,


Generally, there is no interference from halogen lamps themselves, I have two
in my radio room and there is no interfernce whatsoever from them.

However (and you knew this was coming, right? grin) these have off-lo-hi
switches. I have one in the living room which has a dimmer switch and it
tears up anything that gets close. Some of this latter design will even
interfere when they're turned off.


dimmers, etc. I don't know if there is any NB that will eliminate
this type of interference.

What I would like to see is:
A portable with a large enough quality speaker to get a decent bass
response, separate tone controls (or even better, a graphic equalizer

Over the years, I've used from one tone control to nine and the simplest that
worked well was three controls, the standard trebel and bass and a "midrange"
that covered (typically) from 300 to 3000cps/Hertz.


tailored to reduce certains frequencies associated with different
types of interference), at LEAST two GOOD bandwidths, a superior
built-in directional antenna, and of course a selectable sideband
option would certainly be nice.

If your set is a real step up from what I currently have, I will
definitely be a buyer!


Gray

SMHL,

IIRC: DRM requires 12kHz or 15kHz.
So the first two are A-OK at 2.5kHz and 6kHz; but a third at 12/15kHz
would made the radio's IF Section up-grade-able to DRM is desired.


jm2cw ~ RHF
..
..
= = = "Stephen M.H. Lawrence"
= = = wrote in message link.net...
"Gregg" wrote:

| IF BW of 2.5KHz 6KHz and 10KHz per side band for itelligibillity through
| audio quality.

I dunno about the 10 kc, Gregg. I'd go for
something really tight, at NRSC BW. Anything
wider than that, you're just asking for noise.

73,

Steve Lawrence
Burnsville, MN


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/03

MJC,

You ar right the CCRadio (Grundig S350?) are nice size radios.
- - - The Sangean ATS-909 and Grundig YB-400 are simply to small.


Pete,

If a Portable Radio, I would prefer something the Size and layout of
an Panasonic RF-2200 and nothing smaller than a Sony ICF-2010.

If a Desk Top Radio, then I would prefer something the Size and layout
of a JRC NRD-515 (Drake SW2?).

TBL: Basically, a Radio that's Size and layout is "Human Engineered"
for Big Old Fingers and Tired Old Eyes.


~ RHF
..
..
= = = "MJC"
= = = wrote in message ...
To answer your first question about size and portability, take a look at
the CCRadioPlus. It is a perfect mixture of size, portability, reception and
sound quality. It works off both AC and battery, and it's battery life is
exceptional off of C cells. It's sound is as good as any table top radio (or
better).
As for all the rest, I think everyone else here has already listed all
the desired technical features and if you manage to incorporate them all
into the package as I described (like the CCRadioPlus), you'll have a
winner.
The only concern then is if you will be able to offer it at anything
reasonable in cost. We all know you can't set something for nothing so, as
the designer, you're the one who'll have to figure out the best compromise
of cost and features that will sell well on the open market.

MJC

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
My employer has given me the go ahead to design a new product. If there is
enough interest, I will design a new MW receiver for the market. What
would
you be more interested in......................a small table top type, or
a
portable?
Performance wise, I am talking about something like that of an AOR7030.
I don't think that I would be inplementing Sync Detection, but a couple of
I.F. bandwidths could be possible. Definitely, double conversion, and
digital readout, with good audio quality.
Would you want any presets? How about target price? Do you want a built
in
antenna, or external antenna only? High and low impedance antenna inputs?
How about a built in tunable preselector?
E-mail me directly, and we will see what happens. Any of you who have
built
any of me receivers know what I am talking about...............I plan to
take the design to the next couple of steps up in performance.

Pete

Pete,

Start with a simple Product "Indevelopment" internet website to
provide information and a potential client list: beyond the first
page the webee has to 'sign-up' to view the rest of the website and
you offer an eMail Up-Dates Subscription List. These things can help
in creating the before market BUZZ !

Then when the product is ready to ship, transform the internet website
into a Product "For Sale" Market Basket OnLine Ordering System for
Direct Marketing and Sales.

Simply with "Word of Mouth" and a Internet "Tell A Friend" based
program a large maket can be tapped at a low cost.


st3a ~ RHF
..
..
= = = "Pete KE9OA"
= = = wrote in message ...
I want to thank all of you for your input.................I will be copying
all of these replies into a Word document, and presenting them to my
employer tomorrow morning. Hopefully, we can make this thing really fly. I
am really excited about some of the refinements that some of the folks at
work have brought up. We had a design meeting that lasted almost 2 hours
this evening, so I think that things look good. Oh, one more
thing......................I believe that we will be selling directly to the
public initially, instead of going to distributers. Once we get this
product to market, I will be there to provide technical support, answer any
questions, etc. Thanks again, folks! You are a great bunch!

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
That's the amazing thing about this design; it does have that tube like
sound. As far as performance, we are talking about 18 tube performance,
not
6 or 7 tube performance. I do understand your doubts, but I think that
you
will be pleasantly surprised.

Pete


18 tube performance? Now you've got my attention. Will it weigh at least
60 lbs? Will it have more knobs and controls than a Wurlitzer theater
organ? Will the wrinkle paint be tight and even? When I ask what it costs,
will you say "Dollar a pound, maybe less, just don't start whining about a
strained back."?

Frank Dresser

I think the idea of a high performance MW radio is a great idea!
There is definately a good market for it. The main competitor I would
imagine would be the CC Radio, so your end price would have to be
comparative to that. I am a MW DXer, so I hope I can give you some
helpful advice and encouragement. No matter how the radio takes
shape, it probably goes without saying that it should be able to be
powered by both AC and DC. If you can only pick one, go with DC.

First, I offer three suggestions if you must keep it cheap.

1. Analog tuning. However please keep the dial accurate and as even
and as spread as possible, with a marking for each kHz. This will
enable the listener to know if he is tuned to 832 kHz or 837 kHz for
example. The needle which shows the listener where he is tuned should
be narrow yet brightly colored. Many current radios suffer from
squashing the high end frequencies together... this should be avoided.
In fact, I'm sure many MW DXers would agree with me that although they
might prefer digital tuning, if you could produce a radio with a very
accurate and evenly spread analog dial, they would gladly accept the
trade-off. No matter what you do, please keep the noise floor as low
as humanly possible in this radio (another reason to go analog).

2. Make sure the radio's own antenna can swivel independently from
the radio itself. Some old radios have this helpful feature. It
allows you to keep the radio pointed right at you so you can read the
dial, and just swivel the antenna. Make the antenna as big and as
sensitive as possible, whether it be a loop or a stick. Also, please
allow for the ability to switch off this antenna so that an external
antenna could be added by the listener. Would it be possible to
incorporate some sort of phasing relationship between the external
antenna and the radio's antenna without adding much cost? If so, that
could be a third switch position on the radio's antenna controls.

3. Use high quality filters with 3 different positions... wide,
narrow, and super narrow. If only two are feasible, I would strongly
recommend narrow and super narrow.... not many listen to music for
enjoyment on MW radio these days, and since this radio is designed
mainly for distance listening I'm sure a wide position wouldn't be
missed.


If you can add a few more expensive features, I'll rank them in
importance.

1. Sync detector. The sync detector on my Sony 2010 really helps me
dig out stations that my other non-sync radios cannot. How much per
unit would a sync detector cost?

2. If this radio does take a digital form, a dozen presets would be
nice. If at all possible, it would be great to have a memory scan
feature where these 12 stations could be scanned repeatedly, with the
radio pausing 10 seconds on each frequency before moving on to the
next. The listener could program in 12 MW stations they use as
benchmarks for DX conditions, and then let the radio scan through them
automatically.


That's it for me... I really think this is a great project and wish
you all the luck in the world. I would be glad to publiicize too on
the various MW groups and lists on the net as well once it is
produced.

Behold, Stephen M.H. Lawrence signaled from keyed 4-1000A filament:


"Gregg" wrote:

| IF BW of 2.5KHz 6KHz and 10KHz per side band for itelligibillity
through | audio quality.

I dunno about the 10 kc, Gregg. I'd go for something really tight, at
NRSC BW. Anything wider than that, you're just asking for noise.

Besides the DRM noisemakers, there's still a few stations smart enough to
use Khan ;-)

--
Gregg
*Perhaps it's useful, even if it can't be SPICE'd*
Visit the GeeK Zone - http://geek.scorpiorising.ca

In article , Matt wrote:
1. Sync detector. The sync detector on my Sony 2010 really helps me
dig out stations that my other non-sync radios cannot. How much per
unit would a sync detector cost?

The sync detector on the 2010 was born because Sony had tons of AM stereo
demultiplexor chips and nothing to do with them. By the time the 2010
came out AM stereo was dead.

Anyone out there with a AM stereo receiver? (mine was stolen in 1989).

A brilliant engineer figured out that with a slight circuit modification,
he could add a sync detector (unheard of on a consumer radio) and get
rid of those chips.

With the demise of the SW77, I doubt those chips are still available.

Now, to throw my own two cents in. :-) I'd like to see the unit
"EMP hardened" to the point that a nearby lightening strike would not
damage it. I live 3,000 feet up in the desert and we get some very strong
lightening storms.

Geoff.


--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson 972-54-608-069
Icq/AIM Uin: 2661079 MSN IM: (Not for email)
Carp are bottom feeders, koi are too, and not surprisingly are ferrets.

"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote in message
...

The sync detector on the 2010 was born because Sony had tons of AM stereo
demultiplexor chips and nothing to do with them. By the time the 2010
came out AM stereo was dead.


It's true that AM stereo isn't the big deal that it's promoters claimed it
was,
but it's hardly dead. It certainly wasn't when the 2010 was introduced.

By the mid 80's, I'd say the AM stereo receiver market was still growing.
AM stereo was approved in 82.

There's three AM stereo stations here.

Anyone out there with a AM stereo receiver? (mine was stolen in 1989).

Two. One's the car radio.

[snip]


Geoff.



Frank Dresser

Okay, gotcha, RHF. My thought on the thing is that the
Ten - Tec RX320D model has DRM capability, and is
priced right for that application. I wonder when or if we
will ge DRM for mediumwave?

At any rate, point taken.

73,

Steve

"RHF" wrote in message
om...
| SMHL,
|
| IIRC: DRM requires 12kHz or 15kHz.
| So the first two are A-OK at 2.5kHz and 6kHz; but a third at 12/15kHz
| would made the radio's IF Section up-grade-able to DRM is desired.
|
|
| jm2cw ~ RHF
| .
| .
| = = = "Stephen M.H. Lawrence"
| = = = wrote in message
link.net...
| "Gregg" wrote:
|
| | IF BW of 2.5KHz 6KHz and 10KHz per side band for itelligibillity
through
| | audio quality.
|
| I dunno about the 10 kc, Gregg. I'd go for
| something really tight, at NRSC BW. Anything
| wider than that, you're just asking for noise.
|
| 73,
|
| Steve Lawrence
| Burnsville, MN
|
|
| ---
| Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
| Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
| Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/03


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.516 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/03

I wish they all would, Gregg!

73,

Steve


"Gregg" wrote in message
news:WZM7b.105483$kW.105432@edtnps84...
| Behold, Stephen M.H. Lawrence signaled from keyed 4-1000A filament:
|
|
| "Gregg" wrote:
|
| | IF BW of 2.5KHz 6KHz and 10KHz per side band for itelligibillity
| through | audio quality.
|
| I dunno about the 10 kc, Gregg. I'd go for something really tight, at
| NRSC BW. Anything wider than that, you're just asking for noise.
|
| Besides the DRM noisemakers, there's still a few stations smart enough to
| use Khan ;-)
|
| --
| Gregg
| *Perhaps it's useful, even if it can't be SPICE'd*
| Visit the GeeK Zone - http://geek.scorpiorising.ca


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.516 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/03

I did present all of your comments yesterday, and it seems that a small desk
top unit might be the first way to go, with a rotating loopstick on top,
similar to the way Palomar does it with their antenna. Depending on price,
we may go with an LCD graphics type of display, so that BW, tuning step,
RSSI, and frequency will be displayed. Tone controls could also be an
option. If we can find a reliable source of Sync Detector chips, that could
also be an option, but usually, these types of devices are on allocation
with the larger radio manufacturers. I went through just this type of thing
when I was working for one of the research divisions at Motorola. If we
weren't buying 10,000 devices a week, vendors of some of these specialty
items were not interested.
It was interesting; you look at some of these vendors such as CTS, our in
Sandwich, Illinois. I needed some OCXOs for a critical project. I was told
by one of their engineers (I am not going to name him) that they were not
interested in selling us only 30 units, at 400 dollars each. Same thing
with the Oak Frequency Group.
Murata pulled the same thing on one of the smaller radio manufacturers in
this country; their rep told that company that they were going to
discontinue all ceramic filter production. I called their headquarters down
in Smyrnia, Georgia, and asked them about this. I asked them if they had
another source where we could purchase our ceramic filters from (Motorola),
since they were discontinuing their filter line. They changed their tune.
The point of all of this is that unless you are a very large entity, most
companies don't want to deal with you. Exceptions are Analog Devices,
Mini-Circuits, Phillips, Coilcraft, and a few others. The companies that DO
want to deal with smaller entities will provide us with the wherewithall to
put this radio into production. I still need to find a reliable source of
4kHz and 6kHz ceramic filters. A couple of you mentioned the use of
Mechanical Filters...............this is a possibility, but we are talking
about 86 dollars each for these filters, unless you buy at least a couple
hundred at a time. The price then goes down to 50 dollars each. An example
of this is Palstar.....................when Paul provides the optional
Mechanical Filter for his radio, at a slightly higher price, he isn't making
any money on that filter. I know what he pays for those filters. Another
thing, these are the same filters that some of the other manufacturers are
selling as options in the $120.00 plus range.
In conclusion, I want to thank all of you for your input...........I am
listening, and presenting this information to my employer. We will be
moving carefully on this project; we want to make sure that we come out with
a product that people want to buy. I do believe that a portable unit will
also be on the horizon, but that will probably be our next product.
I have also contacted the National Radio Club, to see what some of their
members might be looking for. My next move is to
put my feelers out on my website.

Pete


RHF wrote in message
om...
MJC,

You ar right the CCRadio (Grundig S350?) are nice size radios.
- - - The Sangean ATS-909 and Grundig YB-400 are simply to small.


Pete,

If a Portable Radio, I would prefer something the Size and layout of
an Panasonic RF-2200 and nothing smaller than a Sony ICF-2010.

If a Desk Top Radio, then I would prefer something the Size and layout
of a JRC NRD-515 (Drake SW2?).

TBL: Basically, a Radio that's Size and layout is "Human Engineered"
for Big Old Fingers and Tired Old Eyes.


~ RHF
.
.
= = = "MJC"
= = = wrote in message ...
To answer your first question about size and portability, take a look at
the CCRadioPlus. It is a perfect mixture of size, portability, reception
and
sound quality. It works off both AC and battery, and it's battery life
is
exceptional off of C cells. It's sound is as good as any table top radio
(or
better).
As for all the rest, I think everyone else here has already listed
all
the desired technical features and if you manage to incorporate them all
into the package as I described (like the CCRadioPlus), you'll have a
winner.
The only concern then is if you will be able to offer it at anything
reasonable in cost. We all know you can't set something for nothing so,
as
the designer, you're the one who'll have to figure out the best
compromise
of cost and features that will sell well on the open market.

MJC

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
My employer has given me the go ahead to design a new product. If
there is
enough interest, I will design a new MW receiver for the market. What
would
you be more interested in......................a small table top type,
or
a
portable?
Performance wise, I am talking about something like that of an
AOR7030.
I don't think that I would be inplementing Sync Detection, but a
couple of
I.F. bandwidths could be possible. Definitely, double conversion, and
digital readout, with good audio quality.
Would you want any presets? How about target price? Do you want a
built
in
antenna, or external antenna only? High and low impedance antenna
inputs?
How about a built in tunable preselector?
E-mail me directly, and we will see what happens. Any of you who have
built
any of me receivers know what I am talking about...............I plan
to
take the design to the next couple of steps up in performance.

Pete

Hi Frank,
No, it won't weigh that much, but I can fill it with some
very dense ballast, if you like! Seriously, you will be able to expect the
kind of RF handling performance that you get out of an R390. One of the
things that some of the people at Rockwell-Collins commented on was the AGC
performance. Some of those folks have actually built one of the earlier
designs.
I took a couple of my units to work yesterday, in an all metal building. The
AM-FM radios that they have been using will not pull in even the local
Chicago stations without quite a bit of noise. When I was able to show them
WTMJ, in Milwaukee, coming in pretty clearly, they were convinced. When they
asked me to tune in a distant station, I tuned in WLW, on 700kHz. This was
at 4:00 yesterday afternoon. Granted, the signal was at a low level, but
were were able to discern the audio, even in that metal building. Thanks
for your comments!

Pete

Frank Dresser wrote in message
...

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
That's the amazing thing about this design; it does have that tube like
sound. As far as performance, we are talking about 18 tube performance,
not
6 or 7 tube performance. I do understand your doubts, but I think that
you
will be pleasantly surprised.

Pete


18 tube performance? Now you've got my attention. Will it weigh at least
60 lbs? Will it have more knobs and controls than a Wurlitzer theater
organ? Will the wrinkle paint be tight and even? When I ask what it
costs,
will you say "Dollar a pound, maybe less, just don't start whining about a
strained back."?

Frank Dresser

Thanks, Gary. I think that a portable will definitely be on the horizen, and
the tone control circuit is beginning to sound like a better and better
idea. I think that this can be implemented into the design. The main thing
is the choice of turnover frequencies of the tone control circuit, for the
best sound. Back in the early to mid 90s, I used to design and build custom
acoustic instrument amplifiers, so I've got a bit of experience with tone
control circuitry.
Thanks for those comments!

Pete

Gray Shockley wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 11:25:58 -0500, Gary wrote
(in message ) :

I'm getting excited about this new MW receiver. I have the CCRadio
and believe it's reception is only fair, with poor selectivity
compared to my Grundig Satellit 800. Even my Grundig S350 is better
than the CCRadio.

My biggest problem with MW is interference from hologen lamps,


Generally, there is no interference from halogen lamps themselves, I have
two
in my radio room and there is no interfernce whatsoever from them.

However (and you knew this was coming, right? grin) these have off-lo-hi
switches. I have one in the living room which has a dimmer switch and it
tears up anything that gets close. Some of this latter design will even
interfere when they're turned off.


dimmers, etc. I don't know if there is any NB that will eliminate
this type of interference.

What I would like to see is:
A portable with a large enough quality speaker to get a decent bass
response, separate tone controls (or even better, a graphic equalizer

Over the years, I've used from one tone control to nine and the simplest
that
worked well was three controls, the standard trebel and bass and a
"midrange"
that covered (typically) from 300 to 3000cps/Hertz.


tailored to reduce certains frequencies associated with different
types of interference), at LEAST two GOOD bandwidths, a superior
built-in directional antenna, and of course a selectable sideband
option would certainly be nice.

If your set is a real step up from what I currently have, I will
definitely be a buyer!


Gray

Hi Gregg,
That is exactly what I plan to use..............I have been
using that topology for several years now, so I've got the Diplexer design
nailed down pretty well. Take a look at my website, and you can see how
I've got this implemented. I've got a few downloadable zip files of some of
my designs (no, I won't hide the schematic from the final product).
I am not sure why more manufacturers don't use doubly-balanced mixers,
especially when you can purchase a Mini-Circuits ADE-3 mixer for around 3
dollars. We are talking about a mixer with an SSB conversion loss of around
4.7dB, which, since this is a passive topology, translates approximately to
a noise figure of around 5dB. Since this is a Level 7 mixer, the IP3 should
be around +14dBm. Compare this to an Analog Devices AD831 mixer, which has a
+20dBm IP3, but has a 12dB NF. To reduce the NF to that of the ADE-3, you
need to have an RF amplifier ahead of that mixer. Let's say that we need
10dB of takeover gain from the RF amplifier; we now have an IP3 of only
+10dBm from that AD831, and we still need all of those external support
components for that mixer.

Pete

Gregg wrote in message
t...
Behold, Pete KE9OA signaled from keyed 4-1000A filament:

You do have some good ideas, and I am listening. A DX switch won't be
necessary; we will have a great dynamic range.

Am I to assume then that you plan a double-balanced diode ring mixer?

--
Gregg
*Perhaps it's useful, even if it can't be SPICE'd*
Visit the GeeK Zone - http://geek.scorpiorising.ca

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
Thanks, Gary. I think that a portable will definitely be on the horizen,
and
the tone control circuit is beginning to sound like a better and better
idea. I think that this can be implemented into the design. The main thing
is the choice of turnover frequencies of the tone control circuit, for the
best sound. Back in the early to mid 90s, I used to design and build
custom
acoustic instrument amplifiers, so I've got a bit of experience with tone
control circuitry.
Thanks for those comments!

Pete

Do you have any experience with the Motorola tone control chips? Those are
quite nice, and just fit right in the normal audio chain with just a few
external components (capacitors, mostly). IIRC, they have about a 12 or 16
dB boost/cut, and I would imagine that you could tailor the crossover
frequencies with the external components..

That wide bandwidth would be pretty nice, but what I am shooting for is a
DXing machine. With that wider bandwidth, I am not sure if we would need
good group delay characteristics, but I do know that the IP3 of the 2nd
mixer would suffer from out of bandpass signals. I do like the idea of the
2.5kHz bandwidth, but right now, Murata has discontinued production of the
CFJ/CFR series of filters that have that bandwidth. I would surmise that
the larger manufacturers have made a lifetime buy of those filters. I think
that the only option for a narrow bandwidth filter is the Mechanical FIlter.

Pete

RHF wrote in message
om...
SMHL,

IIRC: DRM requires 12kHz or 15kHz.
So the first two are A-OK at 2.5kHz and 6kHz; but a third at 12/15kHz
would made the radio's IF Section up-grade-able to DRM is desired.


jm2cw ~ RHF
.
.
= = = "Stephen M.H. Lawrence"
= = = wrote in message
link.net...
"Gregg" wrote:

| IF BW of 2.5KHz 6KHz and 10KHz per side band for itelligibillity
through
| audio quality.

I dunno about the 10 kc, Gregg. I'd go for
something really tight, at NRSC BW. Anything
wider than that, you're just asking for noise.

73,

Steve Lawrence
Burnsville, MN


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/03

Hi Kent,
I am up in Mount Prospect; if you want to come down and
audition one of the current units, that would be ok. I still have to work
out the details for a high level AGC loop, and I am also working on a low
noise synthesizer for the next generation, but feel free to shout me down
when you are coming to town. Hey, have you ever made it to the Madison
DXer's gathering? One of the fellows has moved to Milwaukee, so the next
gathering will be in that town. This last one was pretty good, although I
didn't make it. They did have some well known folks up there, such as Gerry
Dexter, Neil Katsiros, etc.

Pete

Kent wrote in message
...
Willing to sell one of the "Current": units??

Also, you say you are in Chicago. What side of town? I get to Chicago on
a
weekly basis.

Kent Winrich, K9EZ
Menomonee Falls, WI

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
I was thinking about using 1kHz tuning; this way, the radio would be
more
universal. No need to worry about 9 or 10kHz steps if this is done.
With
my current units, you can connect an untuned 6 foot loop directly to the
the
50 Ohm antenna input, and the results are pretty dramatic. From my
location
in the Chicago area, I can receive WLW, on 700kHz, with an S8 signal
level.
WJR, on 760kHz, comes in at about an S7, while on 610kHz, I can receive
Kansas City Missouri, and the Ohil station fighting each other, at an S7
signal level. If I want to listen to MW, I don't even bother using my
AOR7030, Palstar R30, Icom R75, or Yaesu
FRG100...........................none of them is as hot.
Radioman390 wrote in message
...
I would prefer a table radio like a Tivoli or old KLH21


Ceratinly some DRM capability, or a place to add a plug-in card which
could be
either DRM, C-QUAM stereo, or the digital AM (IBOC or Kahn?).

Depending on how the digital standard goes, at least the RF could be
constant.

10/9 khz tuning (US vs Euro)

Noise blanker

Before I implement a noise blanker, I want to develop a NB design that I
have been slowly working on..............this would be a Quadrature
type.
The advantage to this type is that it would have dynamically variable
blanking width, with a null of right around 50dB. Still working on that
one

An input for a loop antenna

An input with DC phantom power for an outdoor active antenna

Maybe an antenna switch to switch between lop and other antenna, or
two
loops.

Good tone controls

Perhaps something like the old Scott DYNAURAL circuit which shaped the
flatness
of the audio depending on signal strength, or something like
Worcester's
AM
circuit which made the IF passband narrower as the signal strength
decreased.

Good speaker!

Amen!

Pete

Thanks, Clifton! I will definitely make this a worthwhile effort.

Pete

Clifton T. Sharp Jr. wrote in message
...
Dale Parfitt wrote:
Kent wrote:
If you do a hot MW receiver for about $150, I will place the first
order!

and you had to ask, Pete! Just build it- they will come.

I actually aimed him at $150 believing it will be considerably higher.
We want features that might not fit into a $150 retail price. Still,
give this enough goodies and purchase time is defined by how fast I
save my milk money.

--
"Here, Outlook Express, run this program." "Okay, stranger."

Thanks, Matt. I will definitely be going with a
synthesizer....................system noise floor will be down around -138
to
-142dBm. I worked in the Synthesizer Group at Rockwell-Collins for awhile,
so I learned all of the things that my mother was afraid to tell me about
synthesizer. Those Rockwell-Collins folks were great!
It probably will be DC powered, using a low noise power supply of my own
design.
Matt wrote in message
...


I think the idea of a high performance MW radio is a great idea!
There is definately a good market for it. The main competitor I would
imagine would be the CC Radio, so your end price would have to be
comparative to that. I am a MW DXer, so I hope I can give you some
helpful advice and encouragement. No matter how the radio takes
shape, it probably goes without saying that it should be able to be
powered by both AC and DC. If you can only pick one, go with DC.

First, I offer three suggestions if you must keep it cheap.

1. Analog tuning. However please keep the dial accurate and as even
and as spread as possible, with a marking for each kHz. This will
enable the listener to know if he is tuned to 832 kHz or 837 kHz for
example. The needle which shows the listener where he is tuned should
be narrow yet brightly colored. Many current radios suffer from
squashing the high end frequencies together... this should be avoided.
In fact, I'm sure many MW DXers would agree with me that although they
might prefer digital tuning, if you could produce a radio with a very
accurate and evenly spread analog dial, they would gladly accept the
trade-off. No matter what you do, please keep the noise floor as low
as humanly possible in this radio (another reason to go analog).

2. Make sure the radio's own antenna can swivel independently from
the radio itself. Some old radios have this helpful feature. It
allows you to keep the radio pointed right at you so you can read the
dial, and just swivel the antenna. Make the antenna as big and as
sensitive as possible, whether it be a loop or a stick.

I think that we will go this route, with the antenna. I've got several
pounds of Litz wire, to prototyping isn't a problem. I still need to get
ahold of some Type 61 ferrite rod stock for the antennas.

Also, please
allow for the ability to switch off this antenna so that an external
antenna could be added by the listener. Would it be possible to
incorporate some sort of phasing relationship between the external
antenna and the radio's antenna without adding much cost? If so, that
could be a third switch position on the radio's antenna controls.

That is out of my realm of knowledge, although it it a great idea.

3. Use high quality filters with 3 different positions... wide,
narrow, and super narrow. If only two are feasible, I would strongly
recommend narrow and super narrow.... not many listen to music for
enjoyment on MW radio these days, and since this radio is designed
mainly for distance listening I'm sure a wide position wouldn't be
missed.

I think that we will go with two. Even with the 6kHz bandwidth, though, the
skirt selectivity is sharp enough to separate the sideband component from
the carrier of an AM signal.


If you can add a few more expensive features, I'll rank them in
importance.

1. Sync detector. The sync detector on my Sony 2010 really helps me
dig out stations that my other non-sync radios cannot. How much per
unit would a sync detector cost?

This is a good feature, but so far, I haven't been able to locate a good
source of these chips

2. If this radio does take a digital form, a dozen presets would be
nice. If at all possible, it would be great to have a memory scan
feature where these 12 stations could be scanned repeatedly, with the
radio pausing 10 seconds on each frequency before moving on to the
next. The listener could program in 12 MW stations they use as
benchmarks for DX conditions, and then let the radio scan through them
automatically.

This is a good idea; we were also thinking of incorperating this feature
into some sort of Spectrum Scope function. Still up in the air on this one.


That's it for me... I really think this is a great project and wish
you all the luck in the world. I would be glad to publiicize too on
the various MW groups and lists on the net as well once it is
produced.

Thanks for your input, Matt! You've got some good ideas. I appreciate your
offer on the MW group thing!

Pete

Thanks; this sounds like a good way to go. I am not sure how we are selling
thing off of our website right now.

Pete

RHF wrote in message
om...
Pete,

Start with a simple Product "Indevelopment" internet website to
provide information and a potential client list: beyond the first
page the webee has to 'sign-up' to view the rest of the website and
you offer an eMail Up-Dates Subscription List. These things can help
in creating the before market BUZZ !

Then when the product is ready to ship, transform the internet website
into a Product "For Sale" Market Basket OnLine Ordering System for
Direct Marketing and Sales.

Simply with "Word of Mouth" and a Internet "Tell A Friend" based
program a large maket can be tapped at a low cost.


st3a ~ RHF
.
.
= = = "Pete KE9OA"
= = = wrote in message
...
I want to thank all of you for your input.................I will be
copying
all of these replies into a Word document, and presenting them to my
employer tomorrow morning. Hopefully, we can make this thing really
fly. I
am really excited about some of the refinements that some of the folks
at
work have brought up. We had a design meeting that lasted almost 2
hours
this evening, so I think that things look good. Oh, one more
thing......................I believe that we will be selling directly to
the
public initially, instead of going to distributers. Once we get this
product to market, I will be there to provide technical support, answer
any
questions, etc. Thanks again, folks! You are a great bunch!

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in
:

That's the amazing thing about this design; it does have that tube
like sound. As far as performance, we are talking about 18 tube
performance, not 6 or 7 tube performance. I do understand your
doubts, but I think that you will be pleasantly surprised.

I had a 28 tube radio - Collins R-392. My Radio Shack DX-440 (Sangean 803A)
easily equalled it in performance on MW.

I'm a bit of a weirdo, so bear with me. I want a huge analog slide rule
dial with a small digital counter embedded in the center. In other words, I
like to tune analog, but want digital accuracy. I hate digital stepped
tuning, which is why I no longer use the DX-440.

I like knobs. You can grasp a knob and turn it. I hate sliders.

I want 2-4-6-8-10 filters.

I like the idea of a rotating ferrite bar for casual listening, but want an
antenna in jack as well.

Sync detection is great.

How about a backlit dial that is continually lighted.

Behold, Pete KE9OA signaled from keyed 4-1000A filament:

Hi Gregg,
That is exactly what I plan to use..............I have
been
using that topology for several years now, so I've got the Diplexer
design nailed down pretty well.

You sir, are a god! Do you know how many people that are so-called
"engineering professionals" that do not know how to diplex the output of a
diode DBM?

I'm sold, when can I buy it ;-)


I am not sure why more manufacturers don't use doubly-balanced mixers,
especially when you can purchase a Mini-Circuits ADE-3 mixer for around
3 dollars.

Because they can pay 15 cents for a 2SCxxxx.

It all comes down to money. Nothing is about quality, just mark-up and
useless features.

You seem to be doing something that hasn't been done since the late 1950's
- engineering a soul into the unit :-)

You have my highest respect.

--
Gregg
*Perhaps it's useful, even if it can't be SPICE'd*
Visit the GeeK Zone - http://geek.scorpiorising.ca

Behold, Pete KE9OA signaled from keyed 4-1000A filament:

We were thinking of either LCD, or statically driven LEDs, with the
microprocessor going into sleep mode with no user activity. Oh, I do
like those knobs...........I wouldn't have it any other way. Anyway,
the problem with the flourescent displays is that they are pretty noise.
I plan on this receiver having an MDS of 40 to 50nV, so things have to
be pretty quiet. I think that I will also go with an outboard supply;
this avoids that UL qualification. Another advantage to this approach
is that my outboard power supply can be used with other people's
equipment. Take a look at the power supply on my website, and you will
see that it doesn't take much to design a quiet power supply. On my
general coverage receivers, even when operating off the AC line, when I
tune down to 9 or 10kHz, all I hear is atmospheric noise.

Gotcha on the noise factor. I don't multiplex, but use "static" driven
nixies, so I never thought of the noise.

I use outboard supplies on all my tube low-level audio designs like mic
preamps and mixers. Works awesome!

LCD's are cool. If you choose that route, may I suggest LED backlighting?
That would eliminate electroluminescent driver noise and last forever
compared to incandescent.

My #1 repair call that's not computer related lately is "my lights burned
out". I replace them all with superbright white LED's, or if the customer
wishes, a funky color of their choice :-)

--
Gregg
*Perhaps it's useful, even if it can't be SPICE'd*
Visit the GeeK Zone - http://geek.scorpiorising.ca

BTW - what *is* your website? I must have missed the URL somewhere.

--
Gregg
*Perhaps it's useful, even if it can't be SPICE'd*
Visit the GeeK Zone - http://geek.scorpiorising.ca

NONE:

ALL of these features described above & in previous posts sound great,
but there is a price point at which,
no matter how gorgeous the set looks or how many features, the customer will
slide by & buy another one..

- A great looking Base Unit that "runs circles" around the " average set"
and a slew of Plug in and Add on features may be the way to go . . .


In article , donut
writes:


I like knobs. You can grasp a knob and turn it. I hate sliders.

I want 2-4-6-8-10 filters.

I like the idea of a rotating ferrite bar for casual listening, but want an
antenna in jack as well.

Sync detection is great.

How about a backlit dial that is continually lighted.

Pete KE9OA wrote:
option. If we can find a reliable source of Sync Detector chips, that could
also be an option, but usually, these types of devices are on allocation
with the larger radio manufacturers. I went through just this type of thing
when I was working for one of the research divisions at Motorola. If we
weren't buying 10,000 devices a week, vendors of some of these specialty
items were not interested.

FWIW there's a sync detector circuit on page 15.34 of the current ARRL
Handbook. (I think it's been in the Handbook for several years) It
uses two NE602s and a NE604, the latter seems to be a FM IF/detector
chip. It's a fair number of parts (may be too expensive simply due to
component count) but I don't think any of them would be particularly
hard to get.

Having used it on the ICF-2010 IMHO you *REALLY* need to consider a sync
detector, dropping other features if necessary. Especially if you hope
to sell to program listeners as well as DXers.
--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

Have you considered using a single, less expensive IF filter and a Q
multiplier or Q multipliers to change it's shape and bandwidth?

The notch/peak of a Q-multiplier is a very sharp exaggeration of single
tuned circuit. Could a double tuned band pass circuit also be used?
Tuneable band pass notches at both the upper and lower sidebands with a peak
in the middle would be very useful and would reduce the need for several
fixed filters.

I use a Heathkit Q-multiplier. When it's tuned to the center of the IF
frequency, advancing the regeneration control will smoothly sharpen the peak
and progressively cut the side bands until it breaks into oscillation. It's
like an IF frequency tone control! Pretty cool. Another good trick is
tuning in the sidband farthest from the interference. Then I bring the
carrier back up with the Q-multiplier. Or I can use the tunable notch to
get rid of hets.

Frank Dresser

On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 13:10:56 GMT, "Pete KE9OA"
wrote:

My employer has given me the go ahead to design a new product. If there is
enough interest, I will design a new MW receiver for the market. What would
you be more interested in......................a small table top type, or a
portable?
Performance wise, I am talking about something like that of an AOR7030.
I don't think that I would be inplementing Sync Detection, but a couple of
I.F. bandwidths could be possible. Definitely, double conversion, and
digital readout, with good audio quality.
Would you want any presets? How about target price? Do you want a built in
antenna, or external antenna only? High and low impedance antenna inputs?
How about a built in tunable preselector?
E-mail me directly, and we will see what happens. Any of you who have built
any of me receivers know what I am talking about...............I plan to
take the design to the next couple of steps up in performance.


Great news, Pete!

How about a different approach? Direct conversion architecture, tail
ended by a high-performance DSP processor.

Perhaps if you post your project's design constraints and target
customer base we could give you some real-world suggestions. The way
you phrased it, I'm very tempted to "ivory tower" you into the finest
tabletop that $23,000 can buy! g

Good luck with your project, and have fun. Please keep us apprised
of your progress.

Very 73,

Tom

Pete,

Until then, you can continue your dialog here.

Or - You could simply start up a YAHOO! eGroup
- - - "High-Performance-MW-Receiver-Project"

There you can create a Message Archive, Photos, Links and Files for
all to share and add to the knowledge base.

Plus the Membership List is a Ready List of 'potential' Customers.

st3a ~ RHF
..
..
= = = "Pete KE9OA"
= = = wrote in message ...
Thanks; this sounds like a good way to go. I am not sure how we are selling
thing off of our website right now.

Pete

RHF wrote in message
om...
Pete,

Start with a simple Product "Indevelopment" internet website to
provide information and a potential client list: beyond the first
page the webee has to 'sign-up' to view the rest of the website and
you offer an eMail Up-Dates Subscription List. These things can help
in creating the before market BUZZ !

Then when the product is ready to ship, transform the internet website
into a Product "For Sale" Market Basket OnLine Ordering System for
Direct Marketing and Sales.

Simply with "Word of Mouth" and a Internet "Tell A Friend" based
program a large maket can be tapped at a low cost.


st3a ~ RHF
.
.
= = = "Pete KE9OA"
= = = wrote in message
...
I want to thank all of you for your input.................I will be
copying
all of these replies into a Word document, and presenting them to my
employer tomorrow morning. Hopefully, we can make this thing really
fly. I
am really excited about some of the refinements that some of the folks
at
work have brought up. We had a design meeting that lasted almost 2
hours
this evening, so I think that things look good. Oh, one more
thing......................I believe that we will be selling directly to
the
public initially, instead of going to distributers. Once we get this
product to market, I will be there to provide technical support, answer
any
questions, etc. Thanks again, folks! You are a great bunch!

I have been to a few of them, but not as many as I would like to. They are
nice gatherings!!

I will email you direct so we can talk further!

Kent, K9EZ

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
Hi Kent,
I am up in Mount Prospect; if you want to come down and
audition one of the current units, that would be ok. I still have to work
out the details for a high level AGC loop, and I am also working on a low
noise synthesizer for the next generation, but feel free to shout me down
when you are coming to town. Hey, have you ever made it to the Madison
DXer's gathering? One of the fellows has moved to Milwaukee, so the next
gathering will be in that town. This last one was pretty good, although I
didn't make it. They did have some well known folks up there, such as
Gerry
Dexter, Neil Katsiros, etc.

Pete

Kent wrote in message
...
Willing to sell one of the "Current": units??

Also, you say you are in Chicago. What side of town? I get to Chicago
on
a
weekly basis.

Kent Winrich, K9EZ
Menomonee Falls, WI

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
I was thinking about using 1kHz tuning; this way, the radio would be
more
universal. No need to worry about 9 or 10kHz steps if this is done.
With
my current units, you can connect an untuned 6 foot loop directly to
the
the
50 Ohm antenna input, and the results are pretty dramatic. From my
location
in the Chicago area, I can receive WLW, on 700kHz, with an S8 signal
level.
WJR, on 760kHz, comes in at about an S7, while on 610kHz, I can
receive
Kansas City Missouri, and the Ohil station fighting each other, at an
S7
signal level. If I want to listen to MW, I don't even bother using my
AOR7030, Palstar R30, Icom R75, or Yaesu
FRG100...........................none of them is as hot.
Radioman390 wrote in message
...
I would prefer a table radio like a Tivoli or old KLH21


Ceratinly some DRM capability, or a place to add a plug-in card
which
could be
either DRM, C-QUAM stereo, or the digital AM (IBOC or Kahn?).

Depending on how the digital standard goes, at least the RF could be
constant.

10/9 khz tuning (US vs Euro)

Noise blanker

Before I implement a noise blanker, I want to develop a NB design that
I
have been slowly working on..............this would be a Quadrature
type.
The advantage to this type is that it would have dynamically variable
blanking width, with a null of right around 50dB. Still working on
that
one

An input for a loop antenna

An input with DC phantom power for an outdoor active antenna

Maybe an antenna switch to switch between lop and other antenna, or
two
loops.

Good tone controls

Perhaps something like the old Scott DYNAURAL circuit which shaped
the
flatness
of the audio depending on signal strength, or something like
Worcester's
AM
circuit which made the IF passband narrower as the signal strength
decreased.

Good speaker!

Amen!

Pete

Here are some non-technical requests.

Please, no slider controls for anything!

Also, please consider a mechanical on/off switch like the Sony 2010.
This enables one to keep in "on" state and turn it on/off via digital
timer and make unattended recordings and be able to vary the # of
recordings and length of them.

For battery power, please consider C or D cells for longer life. It
will also help add weight to the radio to prevent the slide around
problem.

Any chance of a gyro antenna, a la Panasonic RF-2200?

Thanks - please keep us updated!

Russ K3Pi

Pete KE9OA wrote:
Clifton T. Sharp Jr. wrote in message
...
[posted and mailed.]

Those do sound like good ideas, but I think that with what you are asking
for, the price would probably be around the 250 dollar range.

I figured as much or more myself. I said "$150 might be a nice target"
just to lower the aim, not move the target. :)

I've got a dozen products on the burner
right now. It's pretty cool, working for an employer that wants to do these
kinds of things.

If I had the qualifications, I'd probably come be your assistant. :)

--
"Here, Outlook Express, run this program." "Okay, stranger."

Pete KE9OA wrote:
Thanks again, folks! You are a great bunch!

I know you'll thank us by offering a really great radio. :)

--
"Here, Outlook Express, run this program." "Okay, stranger."

Looks like the price point on this wunderempfanger is going to be way more
than my pocketbook will cough up...

(@)@)
~~

Looks like the price point on this wunderempfanger is going to be way more
than my pocketbook will cough up...

(@)@)

Tend to disagree Brenda;
- IF theres a BASIC Model
with a menu of add-ons
:)

- Everyone should win !!


In article , "Brenda Ann Dyer"
writes:


Looks like the price point on this wunderempfanger is going to be way more
than my pocketbook will cough up...

(@)@)
~~

On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:29:22 -0500, radiok3pi wrote
(in message ):

Here are some non-technical requests.

Please, no slider controls for anything!


Russ got this right!! Slider controls have just gotta be the dirtiest
controls ever made. I think that the factory must put the dust in them as
part of the assembly process.


I'm going to throw this out (up? grin) just because I want to.


How 'bout separating the case into two separate cases: the radio itself and
the audio section and speaker?

And, then, offering two audio sections: one solid-state and one with tubes?



Gray Shockley
-----------------------
DX-392 DX-398
RX-320 DX-399
70¹ Longwire
Torus Tuner (3-13 MHz)
Select-A-Tenna
-----------------------
Vicksburg, MS US



Ouch! That hurt!!