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

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

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

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

Thanks, Doug. I did look at that circuit, and I also looked at a circuit
that used a 4046 Phase Detector. I will definitely consider this one. As
for myself, there is nothing like that sound of the selective fading, to
bring back those youthfull memories of my early DXing days.
On another note......................I could use an Analog Devices AD607. I
tried that chip in the past, but it seemed pretty finicky to work with,
getting the phase shift network to work properly. Maybe I will give it
another try............this would have the Sync Detector self-contained on
only one chip. As with many other chips AD gives an application note for a
10.7MHz based circuit....at 455kHz, you are on your own.

Pete

Doug Smith W9WI wrote in message
...
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

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

Thanks Tom.................I was considering the DSP approach for a much
later model. When I was working at Rockwell-Collins, I did get to play with
the 95S-1 a little bit, and it seemed to be a good receiver. I did have an
HF-2050 for awhile, and it seemed pretty good.
I know that there are some companies like Gray Chip that make some digital
receiver devices, and I am sure that others have jumped onto the bandwagon.

Thanks again, Tom!

Tom2000 wrote in message
...
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

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

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...

(@)@)
~~