--- John Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nobody here mentioned using a home brewed receiver or an HF to BC
> converter even. I know that Chuck in Midland TX is using a totally
> HB
> receiver, and a very fine one at that, with lots of modern
> features.
>
> The Best
Wow -- the assortment of receivers in use is really astounding. When
I have the time, I'll tabulate how many of each kind there is and
report it to the group. Just for fun.
73,
Kim Elmore, N5OP
__
Our Main Website: http://www.amfon
My first receiver was a circa 1938 American Bosch model 585 floor console.
It covered 150 kc/s to 18 mc/s in four bands. It had one rf stage followed
by the usual mixer, oscillator, i.f. stages, diode detector and audio.
I removed the power transformer, rectifier and filter caps, and used th
I use a modified 75A-4. All mods are reversible.
Outboard mechanical filters plus the internal slots give the following
choices of mechanical filters: 300~, 3.1 kHz, 4, 6, 8, 9.7, 16.
Use outboard 10w hi-fi audio amplifier driving 16" coaxial speaker in G-E
broadcast studio monitor box. The
Somehow, I've managed to hang on to the HQ110A/VHF that my folks gave me for
Christmas in 1968.
It needs a good alignment job, and will hopefully have that soon. Then, it
will be paired with a DX60.
Anyone remember the Lafayette HA500? I almost settled for that one, but
chose the HQ110A/VHF be
Kim, this has been a fun thread. Thanks for starting it. Interesting to see
what people are using. Also, interesting that almost everyone has several
receivers. How different from the old days when you were lucky to have one.
Receiver line-up here:
75A-4 (my favorite) (great audio with 6KC filt
will i did forget the work shop setup.
R390
51J3
SX 101A
SX71
73 Tony
Anthony W. DePrato WA4JQS
QCWA # 23602 10X # 3621
A1-OP FISTS # 10573 VBA # 55 AMI # 1274
NCDXF # 1036 RNARS # 1309 SKCC # 1227
DXCC PHONE DXCC RTTY DXCC CW
Lis. 1962 Calls Held
VP8BZL VP8SSI 3Y0PI V31SS ZD8JQS
WA4J
wll i ahave a few that i use
SX115
HQ-140
75A2
HQ110A
and a mint S40B
73 Tony
Anthony W. DePrato WA4JQS
QCWA # 23602 10X # 3621
A1-OP FISTS # 10573 VBA # 55 AMI # 1274
NCDXF # 1036 RNARS # 1309 SKCC # 1227
DXCC PHONE DXCC RTTY DXCC CW
Lis. 1962 Calls Held
VP8BZL VP8SSI 3Y0PI V31SS ZD8J
Interesting topic, and many responses. Seems we all have a great deal to be
thankful for.
Here, at KC8JX, I have:
National NC-303 paired with a Heathkit DX-100B (main AM station; NC-303 great
on SSB and CW))
Drake 2C/2CQ paired with a Drake 2NT (Yes, it's for CW but do listen to AM on
the 2C o
Rcvrs Here:
Hammarlund SP-600 JX-26
Hammarlund HQ-170A
E.H. Scott RCH (Navy)
Espey R366 (Navy)
Hallicrafters SX-28
Flex Radio SDR-1000 (Excellent Sync Detector, but only good for lower
bands in regard to sens.)
73
wa5am
--
"Money is only temporary, but radios are forever" - Jim Little aka
"the
guess it's like driving a Studebaker...you do it because you
want to.
73,
Tom K3TVC
>
> From: Kim Elmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2007/09/18 Tue PM 09:27:00 EDT
> To: amradio@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [AMRadio] Receivers
>
> Much of the traffic here concern
This was going to be my next question; How might I use a modern rx with a
boatanchor tx? I'll have to look at my Orion II Manual again...
What a fabulous list of Golden Age receivers! Hat's off to all of you who keep
them going!
With some luck, at some point somewhere down the road, I'll get my
ember 18, 2007 8:27 PM
Subject: [AMRadio] Receivers
> Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to
> receivers seem relatively sparse in comparison. With that subjective
> impression as an opening, what sort of receivers are in use in the AM
> com
John Coleman wrote:
Nobody here mentioned using a home brewed receiver or an HF to BC
converter even. I know that Chuck in Midland TX is using a totally HB
receiver, and a very fine one at that, with lots of modern features.
The Best receiver I ever used was a car ra
Nobody here mentioned using a home brewed receiver or an HF to BC
converter even. I know that Chuck in Midland TX is using a totally HB
receiver, and a very fine one at that, with lots of modern features.
The Best receiver I ever used was a car radio from a 1955 dodge.
Hi Frank,
Yes, those were the days!!! I probably had more fun as a novice for that first
year than I have had in all the years since. What a cool experience as a 14 yr
old kid.having my own radio station and actually talking with other people
with equipment that I built/haywired myself!!
Jack,
your comment about the Zenith reminded me of the first receiver I used
as a newly licensed ham in 1957. It was an RCA model 8K console that I
pulled the chassis out of and set on the desk. I fabricated a Masonite
front panel and added a bfo and a Heath QF-1 q multiplier! Next, in
1958
I have a bunch of receivers but not all are set up for operation.
Set up and usable at the moment are:
Hallicrafters SX-28
National HRO-5TAI
National RAO-7
RCA ACR-175
Patterson PR-16
RCA R-203A/SR
Swan 500CX SS-16B
Collins 51S-1
and an Yaesu FT-1000MP driving a Kenwood TL-922 for the modern ra
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Grant Youngman
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 9:46 PM
To: 'Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service'
Subject: RE: [AMRadio] Receivers
> Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to
Main receiver is a 51J4, with others in use: R388, AR88, SP-600, HQ-170.
Have my original Trio 9R59 on the shelf which I use for nostalgia,
(I cut my eye-teeth with that receiver).
Waiting restoration and repair is a nice NC-303.
My main transceiver is a Yaesu FT-990, which has a decent AM re
Lots of receivers here also. A Collins R390A is the main AM receiver
utilizing detector output to an external audio amplifier with a pair of 6L6s
and a large speaker for nice audio. Also have a National NC 240D that really
sounds great on AM with its matching speaker. A Collins 75A-1 and a 7
IL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 9:27 PM
> Subject: [AMRadio] Receivers
>
>
> > Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to receivers
> > seem relatively sparse in comparison. With that subjective impression as
> > an opening
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use an R-390A for the station, a Halicrafters S-85 for general listening
that has fallen to disuse because I built a little regen that performs better
than the Hallicrafters...
Odd, but from the replies, it seems that not many people on the list home
brew recieve
Elmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 9:27 PM
Subject: [AMRadio] Receivers
Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to receivers
seem relatively sparse in comparison. With that subjective impression as
an opening, what sort of receivers are
to do it all of the time,
as the receiver can end up permanently desensed.
73,
Ellen - AF9J
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Miller WB5OXQ in Waco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service"
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:38 P
Jim Miller WB5OXQ in Waco wrote:
When using a receiver and a transceiver as a transmitter how do you
switch the antenna off of the stand alone receiver when transmitting.
I used to have a HQ180 that was a real good receiver with the
transmitter section of a ts 2000 but I could not share the an
I use an R-390A for the station, a Halicrafters S-85 for general listening
that has fallen to disuse because I built a little regen that performs better
than the Hallicrafters...
Odd, but from the replies, it seems that not many people on the list home
brew recievers, but a lot home brew t
Hi Steve,
Nice station.
73, John Dilks, K2TQN
At 10:15 PM 9/18/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kim,
HRO 60 and a HQ 160 are in the primary operation position here.
Look my call up on QRZ for a picture W1TAV
Steve
__
Our Main Websi
National wrote a lot more service bulletins to fix a number of things in
the NC-300. I believe there was only one for the NC-303. AM quality
seemed to be the same on both receivers but the NC-303 definitely had far
better stability for CW and SSB reception. Had two NC-300's and got rid
of them but
When using a receiver and a transceiver as a transmitter how do you switch
the antenna off of the stand alone receiver when transmitting. I used to
have a HQ180 that was a real good receiver with the transmitter section of a
ts 2000 but I could not share the antenna and when using a separate rx
value.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service
Sent: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 9:55 pm
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] Receivers
While we're on the subject...
What's the difference
KE9PQ has several of K9RJ's NC300 for sale on his Web-site
__
Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
AMRadio mailing list
List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amrad
While we're on the subject...
What's the difference (physical, electrical, or ephemeral) between the
NC-300 and NC-303?
I want to buy one as my main AM receiver, especially for use with my
Johnson 6N2 converter
with it'd weird IF frequency. Is one decidedly better than the other?
73,
Mark
Kim said: With that subjective impression as an opening, what sort of receivers
are in use in the AM
community?
Well, lets see. Lately I've been using my HRO-60T that I brought back from the
dead and a NC-183D. They are my favorites that I'm using now. I like the
HQ-140X, the HQ-129, the BC-77
Daily driver: R-388
2nd radio:R-390 (non A)
Also I have a Beckman/Berkeley multi-band WWV reciever - I use it to get
a 'quick fix' on propagation across the HF band, and once in a while, to
actually recieve WWV...
Cheers
John
KB6SCO
DM09fg
_
I should also mention my idea to retune one of the excellent old AM car
radios from the 1960s as a convenient AM receiver for 160m. I've got a
couple on the way from eBay auctions. I remember how good a receiver a
radio pulled from a 1964 Dodge was for me as a young AM DXer.
And I think it
> Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to
> receivers seem relatively sparse in comparison. With that subjective
> impression as an opening, what sort of receivers are in use in the AM
> community?
R-390 with Sherwood detector, SP-600, NC-303. Also have an R-390A, but
pre
by on transmit if band conditons, etc. are cooperative.
The 390A is still my favorite. Paired with my DX-100, they're an
unbeatable combo.
73 de W4MIL
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: Kim Elmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: amradio@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 9:27 pm
S
Kim Elmore wrote:
Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to
receivers seem relatively sparse in comparison. With that subjective
impression as an opening, what sort of receivers are in use in the AM
community?
I have (3) Hallicrafter R-274's here, Kim and an (on loan) RCA
d and fantastic
sounding AM receiver. I have one and will use it when I fix a problem.
Enjoy AM! Joe, KF9EU
- Original Message -
From: "Kim Elmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 9:27 PM
Subject: [AMRadio] Receivers
Much of the traffic here co
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm at my ancestral home this week, and I just loaded my old RBB navy
battleship receiver into the car to take home for possible use as the
mate to my Gates BC1T transmitter on 160m AM. 82 lbs without power
supply! I've got to find a manual or at least a schematic,
I mainly use a Heathkit Comanche MR-1 (with a DX-40
TX). Audio on AM isn't bad at all and I got it for
free.
Ken, KC8QO
--- Kim Elmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters.
> References to
> receivers seem relatively sparse in comparison. With
> that subject
Kim,
HRO 60 and a HQ 160 are in the primary operation position here.
Look my call up on QRZ for a picture W1TAV
Steve
__
Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
AMRadio mailing list
List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq
PM
> To: amradio@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [AMRadio] Receivers
>
> Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to
> receivers seem relatively sparse in comparison. With that subjective
> impression as an opening, what sort of receivers are in use in the AM
For the "old" stuff, I frequently use the National HRO-500. I also
frequently use the McKay Dymek DR-33C or the older Squires Sanders SS-1R.
Pete, wa2cwa
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:27:00 -0500 Kim Elmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to
> re
Hi Kim, missed you at the OKC fest. You shudda come we had a good
lunch.
I have an HRO 60R, NC 183D, HQ 140X and SX 117. All of which I like for
the job they are assigned.
Jim/W5JO
Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to
receivers seem relatively sparse in compar
I use a Halicrafters SX-110. While the Halicrafters receivers don't have the
stability for SSb they are just fine on AM.
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa,
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio
what sort of receivers are in use in the AM community?
I have a lot of good receivers, but for easy AM operating I usually
reach for my Kenwood R-1000. I also have an HQ-110 on the operating
desk, and I'm considering restoring my Collins 75A2 as a main receiver
as well.
I'm at my ancestr
OK Kim,
I'm using a Hallicrafters SX-96.
Ellen - AF9J
__
Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
AMRadio mailing list
List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
H
Much of the traffic here concerns transmitters. References to
receivers seem relatively sparse in comparison. With that subjective
impression as an opening, what sort of receivers are in use in the AM
community?
Kim Elmore, N5OP
__
O
Rick,
Considering that EVERYONE should have an R-390, and the fact that you
don't intend on doing a lot of "band cruising" I think you have made
an excellent choice.
Not to sway you because it's an entirely different deal but... Last year
I was ove a buddy's shack and heard his HRO-SR with matchi
Hi Todd... thanks for the sound advice. I agree with Don too and Bill
is absolutely right, however, my pocketbook revolted. I hope to have
all three one day, but for now I am hot on the trail of the R-390. I
have an HQ-180 and HQ-170 that I like real well. Both have nice audio
and tune quit
at 12 Noon EST
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of AM Radio"
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 1:22 PM
Subject: RE: [AMRadio] Receivers
Another good one (and much cheaper and easier to work on)
is the NC300/NC303 receivers.
The 303 is one of my perso
20 -0400
From: "John E. Coleman (ARS WA5BXO)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Discussion of AM Radio'"
Subject: RE: [AMRadio] Receivers
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:12:57 -0500
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charse
I eventually gave up on commercial receivers, all of them had
some flaw, some had many flaws.
My runner up was the R390 series receivers tho, for mostly
one or two bands, AM, as a station receiver, its good.
It has the diode load takeoff, the frequency resolution is good,
fidelity is not bad, has
Hiya Rick -
I'll weigh in with my 2ยข worth since I've been away and missed all the fun.
The 75A-4 was designed primarily for SSB operation and is therefore
tailored more to that kind of listening: product detector, mechnical
filters, etc. It is indeed 'ham bands only' with some additional
covera
Thanks Don...
Do you mean it is a better SSB than AM receiver?
Rick
Don Merz wrote:
The 75A4 is a ham bands only SSB receiver. So
comparing it to a 390 or 390A is apples and oranges
The 75A4 is a ham bands only SSB receiver. So
comparing it to a 390 or 390A is apples and oranges. I
have an A4 too and again, would not be without one in
the shack. That's another one that I sold, but
regretted and had to come back to.
Good luck.
73, Don M.
--- Rick Brashear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
me know it alls like the rest of us. But get started and buy what you
can afford and sell it and buy another.
Bill Marx W2CQ
- Original Message -
From: "Rick Brashear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of AM Radio"
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 9:20 AM
Subje
Thanks to everyone for their comments on the receivers. It seems the
R-390 is a top candidate, but hard to service and slow to tune. I have
always wanted one of these receivers, but have never made the decision
to let go of enough cash to have one. I'm not much on paying for a name
and it se
rrcs-fep-12.hrndva.rr.com (rrcs-fep-12b.hrndva.rr.com
[172.28.200.150])
by rrcs-mta-02.hrndva.rr.com (8.13.5+Sun/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
k6T5OG98003077
for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2006 01:24:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from home1 ([68.89.47.126]) by rrcs-fep-12.hrndva.rr.c
Mark,
Thanks for the reply. You brought up some interesting points. The bulk
of my listening activity is on 160, 75 and 40 meters. I seldom listen
to short-wave broadcasts, so that won't come into play. As for
fidelity, I'm no spring chicken and my ears are not as sharp as they
once were,
Rick,
In my opinion:
1. You can't go wrong with an R-390 if you use the audio available at the
diode detector into a decent amp and speaker AND you are going to park the
390 on your favorite band. If you are a short wave listener, you will soon
tire of the hundreds of revolutions of the gea
nt: Friday, July 28, 2006 8:50 PM
> To: AMRadio@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [AMRadio] Receivers
>
>
> I know this may spark a geyser of opinions, but I am in need of
> assistance. I'm shopping for a new (new to me) receiver and I'm mainly
> looking at the SP-600 and R-390.
Thanks Joe, Don, Ernie for the info. Do you guys feel the 390A has an
advantage or disadvantage when compared to the 390? How about the 75A4?
Rick
by web56104.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP;
Fri, 28 Jul 2006 18:20:40 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 18:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Don Merz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] Receivers
To: Discussion of AM Radio
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type:
R-390 the better of the two, although to me the SP-600 is easier to use.
Joe W4AAB
- Original Message -
From: "Rick Brashear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 7:50 PM
Subject: [AMRadio] Receivers
> I know this ma
I know this may spark a geyser of opinions, but I am in need of
assistance. I'm shopping for a new (new to me) receiver and I'm mainly
looking at the SP-600 and R-390. I'm sure price will play a
considerable role in what I get, but I want to get the most bang for my
buck. What's your advice?
68 matches
Mail list logo
