Sanjaya wrote:

I've read and heard both sides of the argument about
antenna tuners being great, or not helping at all and are
a waste of money. I've been told they are only for shortwave
transmitting, and I've been told they work well to improve shortwave
reception on faint signals. I've had it suggested to me that I
get a pre-selector instead.

I can't find anyone who actually experimented with either a tuner or pre-selector... at least
none of what I've read and heard was stated as "experience"... rather
it seemed like theory or conjecture.

Does anyone here actually use a tuner or pre-selector for shortwave listening, and if so,
with what results? I'm looking at the MFJ-959C antenna tuner at
http://www.universal-radio.com/catal...amps/2574.html
Note that it says "for receive only".

If you're using a portable receiver with a fairly long external antenna,
a passive preselector would be the most useful device between the
antenna and receiver. It would help to eliminate the symptoms of signal
overloading caused by insufficient dynamic range in the receiver. I used
a preselector with the Sony-2010, connected to an inverted-L antenna. It
made a big difference with reducing intermod's.

Quality table-top receivers like the Drake-R8, Icom-R75, AOR-7030 and
many others, don't need a pre-selector or antenna tuner to enhance
reception. They work very well when connected directly to a well
designed external antenna. My R8B uses an inverted-L with a good 'RF'
grounding system to reduce the noise from domestic sources like
televisions and computers. Keeping the noise down is more important than
getting the last bit of energy from the antenna with a tuner.

BTW- The MFJ-959C is "for receive only" because it's componants can't
handle the power from a transmitter. Universal is not trying to give
their opinion on whether you should or should not use an antenna tuner
for receiving.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"starman" wrote in message ...
Sanjaya wrote:

I've read and heard both sides of the argument about
antenna tuners being great, or not helping at all and are
a waste of money. I've been told they are only for shortwave
transmitting, and I've been told they work well to improve shortwave
reception on faint signals. I've had it suggested to me that I
get a pre-selector instead.

I can't find anyone who actually experimented with either a tuner or pre-selector... at least
none of what I've read and heard was stated as "experience"... rather
it seemed like theory or conjecture.

Does anyone here actually use a tuner or pre-selector for shortwave listening, and if so,
with what results? I'm looking at the MFJ-959C antenna tuner at
http://www.universal-radio.com/catal...amps/2574.html
Note that it says "for receive only".

If you're using a portable receiver with a fairly long external antenna,
a passive preselector would be the most useful device between the
antenna and receiver. It would help to eliminate the symptoms of signal
overloading caused by insufficient dynamic range in the receiver. I used
a preselector with the Sony-2010, connected to an inverted-L antenna. It
made a big difference with reducing intermod's.

Quality table-top receivers like the Drake-R8, Icom-R75, AOR-7030 and
many others, don't need a pre-selector or antenna tuner to enhance
reception. They work very well when connected directly to a well
designed external antenna. My R8B uses an inverted-L with a good 'RF'
grounding system to reduce the noise from domestic sources like
televisions and computers. Keeping the noise down is more important than
getting the last bit of energy from the antenna with a tuner.

BTW- The MFJ-959C is "for receive only" because it's componants can't
handle the power from a transmitter. Universal is not trying to give
their opinion on whether you should or should not use an antenna tuner
for receiving.


Thanks for clearing that up Starman.