Hi, yes, a pure and simple XTAL LO would be better than any synthesizer but making a full coverage HF receiver that works with a soundcard would require hundreds of XTALs!...
On my lab bench, I use a HP8640B for LO but it cannot be accused for beeing portable ;-) Maybe it is time to brush the dust off the old "CB style" synthesizer which used two banks of crystals, with small/big steps, and mix/filter the two oscillator signals to get the LO frequency. There will be some unwanted mixing products, of course, but they are predicatble in a much better way than a DDS "spur' forest". 73 Johan SM6LKM W2XJ wrote: > Programs like soft rock would be better with a crystal front end it > seems to me. The computer does the actual tuning. Beside the spur > problem a crystal has less phase noise.
