Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

junius wrote:
John S. wrote:
The Tecsun-Degen group are capable of producing good quality radios

Could well be that I'm just not too up on my Chinese manufacturers, but
aren't Tecsun and Degen two different companies? Are they together
part of some larger entity?

Junius

I'm fairly confident that Tecsun is part of Degen.

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

Once in a while I find me a good old radio over there at the Goodwill
store,fixin to head on over there right now.It's only about seven tenths
of a mile South of me.Wish me Luck.
cuhulin

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

ROFLMAO......Like your guitar playing (By the way I've heard you!)

Don't quit your day job!!!

Sorta like your credibility....Any idiot can past pics off the net on a page
and pretend he has radio's.

"Brian Denley" wrote in message
. ..
Rob wrote:
My 14 and 16 year old son's listen to the local High School radio
station on them....Sorry if you cant understand that but at least
someone gets some use out of them??

Are you really a "Typical Troll" Brian?


Stupid post - doesn't deserve a reply. No credibility whatsoever.
--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

Rob wrote:
ROFLMAO......Like your guitar playing (By the way I've heard you!)

Don't quit your day job!!!

Sorta like your credibility....Any idiot can past pics off the net on
a page and pretend he has radio's.



Guitar playing? You lost me there.

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

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

David wrote:
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

The 390s have a great noise floor when properly tuned up. Other
than that, a modern PLL receiver has many more features.
The question was about AM mode. There's no bells and whistles on an
R8B that make it better than an R-390A for AM radio.

David:
Don't get me wrong - I love that R-390. But you're wrong about the bells a
whsitles. A sync detector is a wonderful AM tool. A sideband selectable
sync detector is even better: reduced fading distortion AND less adjacent
channel interference.

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

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 02:42:20 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"David" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 03:26:14 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"David" wrote in message
...
The question was about AM mode. There's no bells and whistles on an
R8B that make it better than an R-390A for AM radio.

It just gets more stations.


No. It doesn't. The R390A is quieter.

No way. I have run both, extensively, for MW DX where noise is a critical
consideration. The Drake can dig things out that the R390 masks. And that
was an R8. The 8B is a bit better.



Did you have a well-aligned R-390A, i.e. did I set it up?

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:08:57 -0500, "Brian Denley"
wrote:

David wrote:
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

The 390s have a great noise floor when properly tuned up. Other
than that, a modern PLL receiver has many more features.
The question was about AM mode. There's no bells and whistles on an
R8B that make it better than an R-390A for AM radio.

David:
Don't get me wrong - I love that R-390. But you're wrong about the bells a
whsitles. A sync detector is a wonderful AM tool. A sideband selectable
sync detector is even better: reduced fading distortion AND less adjacent
channel interference.
Am old-style Collins Mechanical Filter (with the trimmer mod) is just
as advantageous. You can work the passband against the steep skirt.

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 22:03:59 -0500, "Brian Denley"
wrote:

David wrote:
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:08:57 -0500, "Brian Denley"
wrote:

David wrote:
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

The 390s have a great noise floor when properly tuned up. Other
than that, a modern PLL receiver has many more features.
The question was about AM mode. There's no bells and whistles on an
R8B that make it better than an R-390A for AM radio.

David:
Don't get me wrong - I love that R-390. But you're wrong about the
bells a whsitles. A sync detector is a wonderful AM tool. A
sideband selectable sync detector is even better: reduced fading
distortion AND less adjacent channel interference.
Am old-style Collins Mechanical Filter (with the trimmer mod) is just
as advantageous. You can work the passband against the steep skirt.

And how does an 'old style' Collins mechanical filter reduce distortion
during deep fades? That's what a sync detector does. No filter can do
that.
We were talking about DXing, not program listening.

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

David wrote:

We were talking about DXing, not program listening.



I use sync for DX all the time - it often helps weak signal copy.

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

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

In article ,
"Brian Denley" wrote:

David wrote:

We were talking about DXing, not program listening.



I use sync for DX all the time - it often helps weak signal copy.

People that do not have a receiver with a properly operating sync
detector do not understand how it improves reception.

These poor souls don't understand what they are missing.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

Carter-K8VT wrote:
wrote:

I've never used any of the modern drake stuff, but I
have a lot of the old. IE: 2C receiver, 2CQ speaker/multiplier,
R4 receiver, T4XB transmitter, etc, etc. They are very good
radios overall. In the 60's when they came out, they were
probably 2nd to only collins. And some, but not all,
actually preferred the drake 4 line over the collins S line.


Count me in for "actually preferring the Drake", at least my "4B line"
as opposed to the Collins "S-line".

The collins is probably slightly better, but it ain't by a
whole lot.


Well, it clearly depends on your definition of "better". Possibly the
Collins mechanical filters gave better ultimate selectivity performance,
but they sure fell apart in QRN conditions.

To me, the beauty of the Drake was its flexibility--you could add bands
by just adding crystals, it had provision for crystal controlled
transmit for your favorite net frequency or auto-start RTTY net, you
could easily FSK the transmitter for RTTY and the receivers had
provision for placing a spare audio output jack to feed your RTTY
demodulator. Also, the Drakes were great for CW, while the Collins was
noted mainly as an SSB rig.

Sorry, forgot to mention a couple of other nifty Drake features--the
great pass band tuning that let you do rtty and shift interference out
of the pass band for CW and SSB, and the inclusion of 160 meters. Also,
even though it was not an inexpensive radio, it was waaay more
inexpensive than Collins.

Best SWL RCVR to buy?
 

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
"Brian Denley" wrote:

David wrote:

We were talking about DXing, not program listening.



I use sync for DX all the time - it often helps weak signal copy.

People that do not have a receiver with a properly operating sync
detector do not understand how it improves reception.

These poor souls don't understand what they are missing.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
----------------------------------
You can say that again.

Since I built an outboard synch detector with the AD607 I have been
amazed
each and every time I receive a signal with fading. The difference
between
a synch detector and a standard diode detector is HUGE. Even the simple

improved AM
detectorat:http://www.amwindow.org/tech/htm/alowdisdet.htm
will offer significant improvements over most stock detectors.

The addition of an AD607 to my R2000s and my R390 has given me what
amounts
to new radios.

I have listened to SW since 1962 and I still can't get use to lack of
"flanging"
distortion on DX stations.
I almost miss it.
Almost.

I would love to have the Kiwa MAP and the Sherwood SE-3 outboard
detectors
to compare to my simple efforts.

Terry