Thanks to all who have shared their comments and experience on the LM567 for CTCSS Encode and Decode. I have many ideas to work with now and in the future. You have all given me several ways to go from Skips comments on how to prefect the 567 to Ken and Jeff's recommendations on the CML Micro MX IC's.
Again this group is the best resource for Amateur Radio Information available anywhere. Thanks to all who has taken the time to share information. 73 JIM KA2AJH Wellsville, NY On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 11:13 AM, skipp025 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Chuck, > > > "Chuck Kelsey" <wb2...@...> wrote: > > Skipp, > > I suspect that you were the exception rather than the > > rule, then. > > I'm often told the above... for more than one reason. Why > some of you are smiling sideways when you say that is another > subject unto itself. > > > To me there are better ways to do it than a 567. > > Sure there are... but back in the early 1980's I had a lot > more time than pocket money so I built a lot more discrete > circuits and the 567 was pretty inexpensive. > > > I remember playing with various 567 circuits back in the > > 70's. Never could get reliable performance. > > I tried a number of different circuits using a lot of the > different chip available at the time. I didn't have much of a > problem with the 567 circuit once the support parts stopped > changing value or I used better quality parts. > > > Used them for paging frequencies. Gave up and started > > using commercial encoders and decoders and never looked > > back. > > Of course when it became time to do things on a more professional > level... I used more professional equipment. But I built most > of my early ham repeater controllers from scratch. > > > Maybe you can give the guy some guidance to get some > > stability and choke down the bandwidth so that adjacent > > tones don't false the thing. > > Chuck > > Rather than reinvent the wheel... I provided a real world CTCSS > circuit references for those who would actually care to chase > that information down. > > There are more practical methods to decode CTCSS... but the > NE-567 or equivalent will do the job. As Jeff said, yes it > is "old school" but at least it is possible to use the chip > for the cause. > > cheers, > s. > > > -- Jim Cicirello 181 Stevens Street Wellsville, N.Y. 14895 (585)593-4655
