I thought you sounded familiar. I also need to keep things clear on my end,
so I don't start speaking in Greek!
Anyway, you and the other folks on the NG are welcome to shout me down
anytime!

Pete Gianakopoulos KE9OA

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Pete KE9OA" wrote:

Hey Eric................anytime you have any questions, feel free to
shout
me down, and I will be glad to answer them as clearly as I know how!
The
coolest thing about knowledge it that it can be shared. Someday, I will
write a comprehensive book all about radio design...............I just
need
to learn more than the
.00000000000000000000000001% that I know right now!

Pete,

Thanks for the offer! We've talked in the past, but I must say that
part of the problem is being able to frame the question coherently.

Take care,

Eric


Pete

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"phil " wrote:

hi Eric:

i am responding here as my reader ate the thread...

Quite true, but that's not what you said -- you said it was
"resonant." A nit-pick, perhaps,

at 3/4 wavelenghts resonance is at 736-kHz. as a 2 wavelengths
beverage:
1.9-MHz. your antenna is quite capable on MW.

Oh, I don't argue *that*, I just argue that it wasn't resonant.

Not that it matters, really, my WR-G303i reports its signal strength
as 30 mV 120 miles away on a 400 foot wire broadside to the antenna.
Flamethrower, indeed.

As for the "flamethrower" at the end of the wire, they are in
violation of 47 CFR 22.369, which explicitly lays out the field
strength limits on Table Mountain. They may get grandfathered in,
but
now that the feds are reopening Table Mountain for NIST projects,
the
local HDTV wannabes are chafing at the restrictions -- even though
their antennas would be about 40 miles away.

what frequency are they on?


Dunno. I don't keep up with the local doings of the broadcasters
much. I assume they are in the old standard TV UHF band; 47 CFR 369
says that from 470 to 890 MHz, field strength on Table Mountain must
be less than 30 mV/m.

radios are black boxes: feed them signals within specs and they
perform
predictably. ICOM probably left off the LW BPF to save $1. companies
are
cheap.

Actually I got word from someone who said that the '75 was considered
a work in progress that never progressed.

i know what the R75 is and is not.

Then all I ask is that you remember that when you brag on it. Good
bargain? definitely. Ultimate radio? No.

i am lucky to
have Pete as a mentor.

That you are. I wish I was fluent enough in electronics to be able to
speak the same language as Pete.

if you gain access to that antenna try your RX340
and bring along a 7030 owner.

No radio is perfect; the '7030 wouldn't hold up out there... To me
the question would be whether or not the '340 would.

Eric

--
Eric F. Richards,
"Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940


--
Eric F. Richards,
"Don't destroy the Earth! That's where I keep all of my stuff!"
- Squidd on www.fark.com

It should be good..............I am shooting for a +40dBm IP3 on the loop
amplifier. About that 6790, the IP3 on that unit is rated at +30dBm, which
isn't bad, but they do have a wide open front end. Still, I haven't had any
overload problems with mine. It is my favorite receiver, but it so is
BIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG. Maybe, when I buy a house, I will build a nice deep night
table to keep it on. When you open up the 6790, you see that the
construction is very good. All of the RF modules are enclosed in a die-cast
"egg crate construction" style of assembly. The 45MHz I.F. filter is at
least 8 poles, so the 2nd mixer is protected quite well from out of bandpass
stations. I got mine from Ken G. down in St Louis. He is a great person to
deal with.

Pete

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"phil " wrote:

hi Eric:

Oh, I don't argue *that*, I just argue that it wasn't resonant.

if you knew that then why use this antenna for LW?


Sigh... round and round we go... because it was very effective for my
needs, specifically picking up NDBs east of the site. Which it did
very well.

Not that it matters, really, my WR-G303i reports its signal strength
as 30 mV 120 miles away on a 400 foot wire broadside to the antenna.
Flamethrower, indeed.

30mV at what frequency? can you fault the R8B and R75 for overloading?

...what are you, totally thick or what? The MW station that was
causing the problems.

Dunno. I don't keep up with the local doings of the broadcasters
much. I assume they are in the old standard TV UHF band; 47 CFR 369
says that from 470 to 890 MHz, field strength on Table Mountain must
be less than 30 mV/m.

that PAR LPF should severely attenuate UHF. spectral analysis of that
wire
is needed. low frequencies or potent RF energy can cause PIN diodes to
rectify.

The PAR LPF has no relevence to the federal regulations regarding
Table Mountain. What's your point? HDTV broadcasters at Lookout
Mountain are griping about the regs. My point, in case you missed it,
again, is that the flamethrower is in violation of the regs in 47 CFR
369.

No radio is perfect; the '7030 wouldn't hold up out there... To me
the question would be whether or not the '340 would.

the 7030 uses an SD5400 first mixer and has 40 dB of attenuation on
tap...
add a $50 homebrew LW BPF: your RX340 will overload first. either way an
R75 hooked to a LW loop will hear more NDBs.

Of course. The R75 solves all. Can't imagine that if you use your LW
loop with another radio, that it'll outperform that R75, can you?
Come on, this is really simple. Take whatever crutches you add to
your R75, apply them to nearly ANY other radio on the market, and
it'll leave your R75 in the dust. (Notably, your dream radio, the
Racal 6790, would be left in the dust as well. What's your affinity
to radios with crappy front-ends?)

Eric, you remind me of Captain Ahab, fighting that whale of an antenna,
Moby Dick. man versus nature, a classic... but the SOB already bit off
your
leg. shake the obsession... build a LW loop.

Actually I'll probably purchase what Pete comes up with, since his
loop probably will have a low NF and resistance to overload. Just a
guess. We'll see.

regards,
phil

So, what's the deal with the R75 schematic on Yahoo? I've been trying
to retrieve it for a week and the server acts dead. Is Yahoo that lax
in running their servers?

--
Eric F. Richards,
"The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most
experts agree, is by accident. That's where we come in;
we're computer professionals. We cause accidents."
- Nathaniel S. Borenstein

"Pete KE9OA" wrote:

It should be good..............I am shooting for a +40dBm IP3 on the loop
amplifier.

Cool!

About that 6790, the IP3 on that unit is rated at +30dBm, which
isn't bad, but they do have a wide open front end.

Yeah. I know it has a pretty solid front end, but no preselector.
I'm just returning the favor for phil needling me. The only real
problem with that receiver is that it generally is bare-bones when you
get it and you have to fill out all the filter options.

Eric

Still, I haven't had any
overload problems with mine. It is my favorite receiver, but it so is
BIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG. Maybe, when I buy a house, I will build a nice deep night
table to keep it on. When you open up the 6790, you see that the
construction is very good. All of the RF modules are enclosed in a die-cast
"egg crate construction" style of assembly. The 45MHz I.F. filter is at
least 8 poles, so the 2nd mixer is protected quite well from out of bandpass
stations. I got mine from Ken G. down in St Louis. He is a great person to
deal with.

Pete


--
Eric F. Richards

"The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
- Dilbert

"phil " wrote:

hi Eric:

...what are you, totally thick or what? The MW station that was
causing the problems.

at what *frequency* is that MW station transmitting?

670 kHz. KLTT. "The nations most powerful Christian voice." For
someone who keeps track of all the flaws in my past statements, you
should remember that one.

Of course. The R75 solves all. Can't imagine that if you use your LW
loop with another radio, that it'll outperform that R75, can you?
Come on, this is really simple. Take whatever crutches you add to
your R75, apply them to nearly ANY other radio on the market, and
it'll leave your R75 in the dust. (Notably, your dream radio, the
Racal 6790, would be left in the dust as well. What's your affinity
to radios with crappy front-ends?)

the R75 was used to drive home a point: ANY tabletop using the LW loop i
suggested will outperform your antenna.

We'll see. I have no argument with using an LW loop, only with using
the R75.

only you cannot admit you were
wrong. thinking is a crutch! rip on the 7030 and Racal all you want genius.

Thank you, I think I will.

who could not figure out that a simple $50 homebrew LW BPF in front of
either will smoke your $4000 RX340 in terms of IP3, dynamic range, phase
noise, ultimate rejection, etc. explain how your radio will leave any
tabletop "in the dust" when both are hooked to a LW loop? quote specs.

Tell me, phil, what's the hyping on the price of the '340? The
half-octave BPFs in the front end were only one reason I got it. Most
of the reasons I bought it were based on operating it and getting a
feel for how capable it was. Specs? You can look them up yourself.
I'm not a walking calculator. We can argue about 1, 3, 10 or 20 dB of
dynamic range for close-in spacing, but that isn't the issue. You
know that.


regards,
phil

--
Eric F. Richards,
"Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940

hi Eric:

honestly i was trying to help. if you hook a large air-core air-cap [high-
Q] tuned loop to your RX340 you should be very happy with the results on
LW. you are correct, DR is not a big issue with this setup. if you hate the
R75 that is fine. one of the best out of the box units is the R8B. people
who say one cannot program listen or DX with the [insert tabletop name
here] are full of it. i've done experiments bearing this out. the tabletops
are more similar than they are different. buy whatever suits your fancy and
use the best antenna possible. i will call a spade a spade. the 7030 and
6790 have high IP3 mixers. AFA that 1000' antenna: 670-kHz is 3/4
wavelengths resonant at 1099'. radios are going to suffer from overload. i
suggest trying a series-resonant trap that: this should dump much of that
670-kHz energy to ground before it enters the radio.

regards,
phil

I know that...............I think that both of you are good guys. Radio fun!

Pete

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Pete KE9OA" wrote:

It should be good..............I am shooting for a +40dBm IP3 on the
loop
amplifier.

Cool!

About that 6790, the IP3 on that unit is rated at +30dBm, which
isn't bad, but they do have a wide open front end.

Yeah. I know it has a pretty solid front end, but no preselector.
I'm just returning the favor for phil needling me. The only real
problem with that receiver is that it generally is bare-bones when you
get it and you have to fill out all the filter options.

Eric

Still, I haven't had any
overload problems with mine. It is my favorite receiver, but it so is
BIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG. Maybe, when I buy a house, I will build a nice deep
night
table to keep it on. When you open up the 6790, you see that the
construction is very good. All of the RF modules are enclosed in a
die-cast
"egg crate construction" style of assembly. The 45MHz I.F. filter is at
least 8 poles, so the 2nd mixer is protected quite well from out of
bandpass
stations. I got mine from Ken G. down in St Louis. He is a great person
to
deal with.

Pete


--
Eric F. Richards

"The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
- Dilbert

"Pete KE9OA" wrote:

I know that...............I think that both of you are good guys. Radio fun!

Pete


anyone else belive that?


(crickets chirping)

Hmpf. Thought so.

:-)

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Pete!

Eric

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Pete KE9OA" wrote:

It should be good..............I am shooting for a +40dBm IP3 on the
loop
amplifier.

Cool!

About that 6790, the IP3 on that unit is rated at +30dBm, which
isn't bad, but they do have a wide open front end.

Yeah. I know it has a pretty solid front end, but no preselector.
I'm just returning the favor for phil needling me. The only real
problem with that receiver is that it generally is bare-bones when you
get it and you have to fill out all the filter options.

Eric

Still, I haven't had any
overload problems with mine. It is my favorite receiver, but it so is
BIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG. Maybe, when I buy a house, I will build a nice deep
night
table to keep it on. When you open up the 6790, you see that the
construction is very good. All of the RF modules are enclosed in a
die-cast
"egg crate construction" style of assembly. The 45MHz I.F. filter is at
least 8 poles, so the 2nd mixer is protected quite well from out of
bandpass
stations. I got mine from Ken G. down in St Louis. He is a great person
to
deal with.

Pete


--
Eric F. Richards

"The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
- Dilbert


--
Eric F. Richards,
"Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940

EFR,

OMG - You almost paid the Icom IC-R75 a 'backhanded' Compliment.

tdsgdih ~ RHF
= = = This Day Shall Go Down In History )
..
..
= = = Eric F. Richards
= = = wrote in message . ..
- - - S N I P - - -

Yeah. I know it has a pretty solid front end, but no preselector.
I'm just returning the favor for phil needling me. The only real
problem with that receiver is that it generally is bare-bones when you
get it and you have to fill out all the filter options.

Eric

- - - S N I P - - -

(RHF) wrote:

EFR,

OMG - You almost paid the Icom IC-R75 a 'backhanded' Compliment.

I was talking about the Racal 6790, not the R75.

tdsgdih ~ RHF
= = = This Day Shall Go Down In History )
.
.
= = = Eric F. Richards
= = = wrote in message . ..
- - - S N I P - - -

Yeah. I know it has a pretty solid front end, but no preselector.
I'm just returning the favor for phil needling me. The only real
problem with that receiver is that it generally is bare-bones when you
get it and you have to fill out all the filter options.

Eric

- - - S N I P - - -

--
Eric F. Richards

"The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
- Dilbert

In article ,
"Pete KE9OA" wrote:

They might be able to fix that problem in the RX340 if they use a longer
time constant in the loop filter. They could even use a dual time constant
loop filter, they way it is done in fast lock time synthesizers.

The Sync is executed is DSP so that would take a software change and if
that is the case you would think it would be fixed but since it is not
the problem must be more complicated.

Like you I suspected that the problem might be loop timing since it was
improved with a software revision and that the sync has another
interesting aspect to it and that is a narrow lock range compared to
other analog radios I own. The RX340 will lock more consistently when
tuned right on a stations frequency. Since most stations are on channel
this normally requires no additional action in operating the radio.

A more complex reason for the RX340 non-lock is that the radio has a
front-end analog RF AGC followed by a DSP AGC. The locking problem
could be related to the way the two loops interact in various reception
situations.


"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Kenneth) wrote:

Telamon wrote in message

What quotes this quotes from passport to world band radio?:
The Ten Tec RX340 [$3,999]test findings:The sync selectable
sideband lose look relatively easily,Passport recomend an
external Sherwood SE-3 [500.00],poor dynamic range,static crashes
sound harsher than on analog receivers.Spurious signal noted
around 6MHZ segment,notch filter does not work in AM,Sync
selectable sideband or ISB modes,Noise blanker not effective
ect, ect, ect,


You play fast and loose with the facts, misstating or exaggerating
them. I used to think that you were just confused but you continue
although corrected so I can only conclude that your thoughts are
completely prejudicial whatever your motivation. You have no
credibility.
What the problem? Do you don't like this passport RX 340 flaws
report? This is NOT MY OPPINION but the "con" part of the passport to
world band radio magazine review.Do you think they are "prejudiced
whatever their motivations"?.Then why you not call them and protest?
You are making a ridiculous ninny paper prattling "You have no
credibility" "you have not credibility" but this is only your
nonsense oppinion because you want to deflect the attention and hide
the passport report about your expensive receiver.Why don't accept it
or complain with the right people [passport reviewers staff]about the
review and stop this nonsense? This sample of the report [the flaws
part] is an accurate quote of what the passport reviewer wrote and
NOT MY OPPINION.I don't add anything or exaggerate anything.You are
the only one confused and with credibility deficiency here. Ken

You have no credibility. You may have copied what is written in
Passport and twisted it for your own evil ends but that does not
constitute a quote.

Here is the way to do it.

In the 2004 Passport RX340 review I read "Noise blanker not effective
at some locations; for example, other receivers (but not the POS
IC-R75) work better in reducing noise from electric fences." This means
it is effective against some noise types but not all. This entire quote
about the noise blanker reads differently from your writing (sic)
"Noise blanker not effective ect, ect, ect," as an example of your
bias.

I think Passport had their hands on a bum unit. I have not had the
problems they describe in my RX340 with one exception and that is it
does lose sync lock on rapid and deep fading signals. The signal can be
very weak or deeply fading and it is not a problem unless the fade is
rapid. The fading can be rapid without a locking problem as long as it
is not deep. The radio will lose lock if both conditions exist at the
same time to a great enough extent. It is one area of the radios
performance I whish was better.

The other cons as I've told you several times are not evident in my
unit and I would expect other people that own this radio to come back
and post that their unit does have the other problems but you don't see
those posts do you? What you do see is Kenneth flapping in the breeze
trying to justify his decisions by knocking other people.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California



--
Telamon
Ventura, California