On 30 Jan 2005 19:37:29 -0800, wrote:


I started thinking about this tonight. I was tuning around with a Lowe
HF-150, comparing it with some other receivers, and was struck by how
quiet the 150 is--and by what an advantage this is when it comes to
resolving weak AM signals.

So, just out of curiosity, what's the quietest receiver you've used
and/or owned?




The 1937 Zenith "black face" I owned as a kid was the quietest SW
receiver I owned. But performance, good as it was, was not in the
league of today's receivers.

Tony

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

wrote:
I started thinking about this tonight. I was tuning around with a Lowe
HF-150, comparing it with some other receivers, and was struck by how
quiet the 150 is--and by what an advantage this is when it comes to
resolving weak AM signals.

So, just out of curiosity, what's the quietest receiver you've used
and/or owned?

My Kenwood R-5000 has very good weak signal sensitivity. The R8A and
NRD-535Db are not far behind.

--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html

Brian Hill wrote:
"Geoff Burginon" wrote in message
news:41fe2980.12117500@news-server...
On 30 Jan 2005 19:37:29 -0800, wrote:

I started thinking about this tonight. I was tuning around with a
Lowe HF-150, comparing it with some other receivers, and was struck
by how quiet the 150 is--and by what an advantage this is when it
comes to resolving weak AM signals.

So, just out of curiosity, what's the quietest receiver you've used
and/or owned?

The WinRadio G313i by far. Noise floor -138 dBm and the continuously
adjustable IF filter let's you adjust the IF bandwidth to precisely
match the bandwidth of the signal. No other receiver comes close.

Geoff


R-390

B.H.

The Collins should win this contest hands down. Nothing, to my knowledge,
ever had a lower noise floor. The story is that it was only limited by the
Galactic background noise level. You can't do any better than that.

--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html

Jim,

I take it you are using the sub-receiver of the Orion for SWLing, as the
main receiver covers just the ham bands and MARS frequency extensions +/-
10 kHz.

The sub-receiver has poorer SSB sensitivity than the main receiver (.35 uV
versus .18 uV) and poorer third-order intercept point (+5 dB versus +25dB at
20 kHz spacing). Have you found this a drawback for DXing, or is your main
receive-only use of the Orion for general SWLing (not DXing)? I'm interested
in your further comments on this.

Also, I note that both of the Orion's receivers offer just two bandwidths
for AM mode. Is this a drawback, or do you like to tune an AM signal in SSB
("ECSS"), taking advantage of the many DSP filter choices in SSB?

I know the Orion is top-notch for ham band use, and its selectable roofing
filters for the ham bands help out immensely in this regard. For tuning the
SWBC bands, though, the sub-receiver of the Orion appears to be a step down
in performance (but maybe I'm missing something in the specs... :^)

From a quietness standpoint, do you find the main & sub-receivers to be
equal, given equal bandwidths, AGC, etc.?

73,

Guy Atkins
Puyallup, WA USA



R.F. Collins wrote in message
...
On 30 Jan 2005 19:37:29 -0800, wrote:

I actually use the Ten Tec Orion more for SW listening than amateur
use. It has the best audio I have ever heard from a receiver. I use an
Icom 756 Pro II for contacts because of its ergonomics even though the
filters and audio are not as good as the Ten Tec. So there are many
things to consider when looking at a radio.

Oh yeah. If you like boat anchors you will be happy with the Ten-Tec
Orion. It is huge. It takes up more desk space than my linear amp.

Jim

"Brian Denley" wrote in message
...
Brian Hill wrote:
"Geoff Burginon" wrote in message
news:41fe2980.12117500@news-server...
On 30 Jan 2005 19:37:29 -0800, wrote:

I started thinking about this tonight. I was tuning around with a
Lowe HF-150, comparing it with some other receivers, and was struck
by how quiet the 150 is--and by what an advantage this is when it
comes to resolving weak AM signals.

So, just out of curiosity, what's the quietest receiver you've used
and/or owned?

The WinRadio G313i by far. Noise floor -138 dBm and the continuously
adjustable IF filter let's you adjust the IF bandwidth to precisely
match the bandwidth of the signal. No other receiver comes close.

Geoff


R-390

B.H.

The Collins should win this contest hands down. Nothing, to my knowledge,
ever had a lower noise floor. The story is that it was only limited by
the
Galactic background noise level. You can't do any better than that.

--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html



They're pretty amazing receivers. Now if they only tuned like a SP-600

B.H.

Hallicrafters SX-146.

wrote in message
oups.com...
I started thinking about this tonight. I was tuning around with a Lowe
HF-150, comparing it with some other receivers, and was struck by how
quiet the 150 is--and by what an advantage this is when it comes to
resolving weak AM signals.

So, just out of curiosity, what's the quietest receiver you've used
and/or owned?

wrote:

I started thinking about this tonight. I was tuning around with a Lowe
HF-150, comparing it with some other receivers, and was struck by how
quiet the 150 is--and by what an advantage this is when it comes to
resolving weak AM signals.

So, just out of curiosity, what's the quietest receiver you've used
and/or owned?

Probably one of my boatanchors, like the HQ-145X.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

David wrote:

Racal RA-17 variant, Stewart-Warner R390-A

I had a Stewart-Warner speedometer on my bicycle that was pretty quiet.
:-)

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:49:49 -0800, "Guy Atkins"
wrote:

Jim,

I take it you are using the sub-receiver of the Orion for SWLing, as the
main receiver covers just the ham bands and MARS frequency extensions +/-
10 kHz.

Yes

The sub-receiver has poorer SSB sensitivity than the main receiver (.35 uV
versus .18 uV) and poorer third-order intercept point (+5 dB versus +25dB at
20 kHz spacing). Have you found this a drawback for DXing, or is your main
receive-only use of the Orion for general SWLing (not DXing)? I'm interested
in your further comments on this.

I have not noticed much of a difference in sensitivity between the two
receivers. I was quite surprised by the selectivity of the
sub-receiver. I just happened to have it on medium wave one day and
was very impressed on how well I could just turn off adjacent stations
by narrowing the bandwidth. See below...

Also, I note that both of the Orion's receivers offer just two bandwidths
for AM mode. Is this a drawback, or do you like to tune an AM signal in SSB
("ECSS"), taking advantage of the many DSP filter choices in SSB?

The manual shows only two bandwidths but the AM bandwidth is
continuously adjustable from 6kHz to 100Hz.

I know the Orion is top-notch for ham band use, and its selectable roofing
filters for the ham bands help out immensely in this regard. For tuning the
SWBC bands, though, the sub-receiver of the Orion appears to be a step down
in performance (but maybe I'm missing something in the specs... :^)

I don't have any nearby radio stations and I don't have any
measurement equipment available but I would say the two receivers are
very similar. Even when using the main receiver the digital filters
works so well I normally leave the roofing filter in the wide position
for most amateur work. I am sure there would be some conditions where
there would be some benefit to the narrow roofing filter - contesting,
CW, etc.

I really did not intend to use the sub-receiver that much but I am
originally a SW DXer turned amateur and I am always drawn over to the
SW bands when I hit the AM button on this radio. I would have to say
the sub receiver audio and performance are awesome. Maybe they are
afraid to let on how good it is at Ten-Tec since the RX-340 sales
might suffer.

From a quietness standpoint, do you find the main & sub-receivers to be
equal, given equal bandwidths, AGC, etc.?

Both receivers are very quiet. I will have to set up and do a direct
comparison some time and let you know if I can detect a difference.

Jim



73,

Guy Atkins
Puyallup, WA USA



R.F. Collins wrote in message


.. .
On 30 Jan 2005 19:37:29 -0800, wrote:

I actually use the Ten Tec Orion more for SW listening than amateur
use. It has the best audio I have ever heard from a receiver. I use an
Icom 756 Pro II for contacts because of its ergonomics even though the
filters and audio are not as good as the Ten Tec. So there are many
things to consider when looking at a radio.

Oh yeah. If you like boat anchors you will be happy with the Ten-Tec
Orion. It is huge. It takes up more desk space than my linear amp.

Jim

Geoff Burginon wrote:


Which particular one of Collins receivers? What was the actual
specified noise floor in figures? Frankly, I doubt you can get much
lower than the WinRadio G313i -138 dBm.

Read also this:

"If I had to choose between a Collins 95S-1 and the WR-G303i (ignoring
the obvious fact that the 95S-1 tunes to 2 GHz), I would take the
WR-G303i."

John Wilson, ShortWave Magazine
(more details on http://www.winradio.com/pdf/g303i-review-swm.pdf )

And this in fact refers to the *predecessor" of the WR-G313i, which is
a much better radio still - 5 stars by WRTH.

My WR-G313i does indeed have the advertized -138dBm noise floor, and
even the S-meter reliably measures down to that level - with 1dB
accuracy.

Not speaking of the ultra-sharp continuously variable IF filters down
to 1Hz bandwith.

Now *that's* what I'd call winning the contest hands down. ;-)

Geoff



Geoff:
We are talking about the legendary R-390 receiver that Collins designed fo
the US military. These were manufactured by Collins and other companies and
cost many thousands each. Their ability to hear weak signals remains
unmatched to this day. It's a vacuum tube based receiver and extremely
quiet.
--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html