"John Barnard" wrote in message
...
I have the HQ-180, R-390A and the SP-600 and I have found that each has
pros and
cons with regards to AM reception. When I was back east (in Montreal) I
found that
the phasing control on the SP-600 gave an advantage for chasing down
Europeans and
Middle Eastern stations (ie. Saudi Arabia on 1521 kHz vs Buffalo on 1520
kHz).
Phasing sent Buffalo in the dirt and the Saudi station came through
nicely. I use
the KIWA MW loop for AM DXing.

I second John's praise of the SP-600. I'm not nostalgic for boatanchors but
mine was the best MW DX receiver I ever used. Among its other advantages was
its excellent shielding. Signals just couldn't get in anywhere but through
the coax from the antenna. I lived on a high hill with a direct view to a
50-kW MW BC station about 5 miles (8 km) away. I had a large radio room with
no foil insulation in the walls, and a 4-foot (1.1-m) square loop on a wood
frame, that tilted and turned. Working close in frequency to the local BC
station, the loop's ability to null wouldn't have been as effective if the
receiver had allowed the signal to leak in through other paths. There is
more to a good receiver than the oft-cited on rrs "sensitivity." True
sensitivity can be more curse than blessing. The receiver needs enough
_gain_ to make weak signals hearable, but more important is immunity to
strong, adjacent signals, steep-sided variable selectivity, low internal
noise (like synthesizer phase noise) and low-distortion audio. Short of the
Drake R8, you just don't get all those features in modern consumer
receivers, especially portables. Of course, the SuperPro was not a consumer
receiver, either. McSangeans are fine for _listening_. For serious DXing you
need more. To forestall reports of "Well, PM, I heard this and that on my
McSangean/McSuperRadio," yes, you can hear distant stations with almost any
receiver, sometimes. A high-quality _communications_ receiver (what's
inside, not what it says on the front panel) lets you hear more stations,
more reliably.

"PM"

Another good receiver for MW DXing was the R388/51J series. Also, a true
test of a receiver is how well it works in the daytime. With a loop antenna,
it should be possible to hear MW stations on the low end of the band up to
300 miles.
Here is Chicago, I can hear WLW on 700kHz all day, along with WJR 760, and
even the Iowa City beacon on 524kHz all day. The key is making sure that
your receiving system can hear the ambient noise in the first place,
although a larger aperture loop antenna does wonders for those weak signals.

Pete

"Paul_Morphy" wrote in message
...

"John Barnard" wrote in message
...
I have the HQ-180, R-390A and the SP-600 and I have found that each has
pros and
cons with regards to AM reception. When I was back east (in Montreal) I
found that
the phasing control on the SP-600 gave an advantage for chasing down
Europeans and
Middle Eastern stations (ie. Saudi Arabia on 1521 kHz vs Buffalo on 1520
kHz).
Phasing sent Buffalo in the dirt and the Saudi station came through
nicely. I use
the KIWA MW loop for AM DXing.

I second John's praise of the SP-600. I'm not nostalgic for boatanchors
but
mine was the best MW DX receiver I ever used. Among its other advantages
was
its excellent shielding. Signals just couldn't get in anywhere but through
the coax from the antenna. I lived on a high hill with a direct view to a
50-kW MW BC station about 5 miles (8 km) away. I had a large radio room
with
no foil insulation in the walls, and a 4-foot (1.1-m) square loop on a
wood
frame, that tilted and turned. Working close in frequency to the local BC
station, the loop's ability to null wouldn't have been as effective if the
receiver had allowed the signal to leak in through other paths. There is
more to a good receiver than the oft-cited on rrs "sensitivity." True
sensitivity can be more curse than blessing. The receiver needs enough
_gain_ to make weak signals hearable, but more important is immunity to
strong, adjacent signals, steep-sided variable selectivity, low internal
noise (like synthesizer phase noise) and low-distortion audio. Short of
the
Drake R8, you just don't get all those features in modern consumer
receivers, especially portables. Of course, the SuperPro was not a
consumer
receiver, either. McSangeans are fine for _listening_. For serious DXing
you
need more. To forestall reports of "Well, PM, I heard this and that on my
McSangean/McSuperRadio," yes, you can hear distant stations with almost
any
receiver, sometimes. A high-quality _communications_ receiver (what's
inside, not what it says on the front panel) lets you hear more stations,
more reliably.

"PM"

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
news
Another good receiver for MW DXing was the R388/51J series. Also, a true
test of a receiver is how well it works in the daytime. With a loop
antenna,
it should be possible to hear MW stations on the low end of the band up to
300 miles.

That receiver was designed for use with a whip antenna, wasn't it? That
would explain the sensitivity. I recall there being a mod to improve
front-end selectivity or to prevent mixer overload, when used with better
antennas. It was in CQ, back in the Middles Ages. IMO, the 51Js were about
the prettiest receivers of the era, right up there with the earlier SX-28. I
never had the pleasure of owning one.

73,

"PM"

I believe that they did have a high impedance input, but it has been years
since I had one. Over time, I have owned the 51J, the 51J-2, 51J-3, 51J-4,
R-388, 51S-1, and the 651S-1. They were all great receivers. I did mod a few
of my 51Js converting the cathode follower for the I.F. output to a product
detector for SSB. Best sounding SSB audio I ever had, probably due to the
wider I.F. bandwidth. Another modification for gain-hungry people like
myself was to move the output connection from the tap of one of the I.F.
transformers to the end connection, the way it was configured in the 51J-4.
Oodles of gain after that mod!

Pete

"Paul_Morphy" wrote in message
news

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
news
Another good receiver for MW DXing was the R388/51J series. Also, a true
test of a receiver is how well it works in the daytime. With a loop
antenna,
it should be possible to hear MW stations on the low end of the band up
to
300 miles.

That receiver was designed for use with a whip antenna, wasn't it? That
would explain the sensitivity. I recall there being a mod to improve
front-end selectivity or to prevent mixer overload, when used with better
antennas. It was in CQ, back in the Middles Ages. IMO, the 51Js were about
the prettiest receivers of the era, right up there with the earlier SX-28.
I
never had the pleasure of owning one.

73,

"PM"

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
I believe that they did have a high impedance input, but it has been years
since I had one. Over time, I have owned the 51J, the 51J-2, 51J-3, 51J-4,
R-388, 51S-1, and the 651S-1. They were all great receivers. I did mod a
few
of my 51Js converting the cathode follower for the I.F. output to a
product
detector for SSB. Best sounding SSB audio I ever had, probably due to the
wider I.F. bandwidth. Another modification for gain-hungry people like
myself was to move the output connection from the tap of one of the I.F.
transformers to the end connection, the way it was configured in the
51J-4.
Oodles of gain after that mod!

There's "communications bandwidth," and then there's fidelity. : The late
V31BB had a modified Icom transceiver with a wide filter in the transmit
side. When you're DX, you can get away with that. I wish I still had the DBX
decompressor. It was intended for noise reduction, but it did a fair job of
'improving' the source dynamic range. AM stations use so much compression,
that might be a good way to improve the way they sound.

73,

"PM"