Date   

Re: Grundig G6

ferrite61 <dxrx@...>
 

Actually, it sounds like hash considering the numerous devices, but power-line generated noise is a buzz. Sodium vapor or Sodium Argon Street-lights are the worst offenders. Even in operation at closer distances of under 100m, there is the tell-tale arc-buzz to them.

Paul S. in CT

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "jaypolicow@..." <jaypolicow@...> wrote:

You have to separate noise floors in the radios you compare with the noise level in your environment. The only really accurate comparisons of radio sensitivity are done where the ambient RF noise level (RFI) is low enough to reveal the inherent signal to noise ratio difference of the rreceivers under test. If there is local RFI the tests ae skewed and not very meaningful.

Also local noise usually manifests itself as a buzz, not a pure hiss such as when listening to a very weak AM signal in a very quiet RF environment.

Jay Allen

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, Scott Macatee <scottmac112@> wrote:

On 8/9/2010 5:04 AM, ferrite61 wrote:
I've had power outages here in the last few years, and when the grid goes down, a great majority of that hiss dissapears. The E100/PL200 are quiet with some hiss. Even the WRX911 quieted down considerably. The G6 still had internal artifacts. The G5 is deathly silent... I would say clean signal. My PL310 and R911 have not had such a test. I find it valuable to "noise floor" readings.

Paul S. in CT


--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "jaypolicow@"<jaypolicow@> wrote:
Paul S,

As one Connecticutian to another I agree with your assessment that the PL-200/Eton E100 is a little gem. Mine matches my PL310 on MW but without the occasional spurious tones and noises of every DSP radio I've tried so far...when a weak signal is tuned on the PL-200 it always has pure hiss behind it, never any odd noises.

Jay Allen

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "ferrite61"<dxrx@> wrote:
Yes but I can do that on any of my 3 ULR's, including the el-cheapo R-911. Its APITA on it but doable. (Re: my old comments on the R-911's 'station locking'. The WRX-911 didn't grab as strongly, and was a bit better tuning station to station.) Nonetheless, I find the PL-200 and PL-310 at least as good as the G6... at a lesser price. One lives and learns... I really don't need a PL-210, but I'm very interested in how it compares with its predecessor the E-100 or PL-200. ie: is quality slipping in favor of memory? Is the tuning knob an improvement over the 310's unusual variable-velocity speed-tuning? Any degradation of the ferrite rod quality? etc. I am concerned that if one missed out on the E100/PL200, should I (or anyone else here) consider or recommend the PL-210 as substitute. Off hand, and at first glance I would, as the DSP radios aren't noticably better (but with due respect, they're less expensive).

IMHO one will pretty much have to pry my PL-200 from dead cold fingers. The PL-310 can beat it on the low AM-BCB out of the box, but has issues with the soft-mute, and the 380 was ferrite-bar compromised... quality IS slipping as time marches on. Convenience seems to be winning, dumbing-down the receivers from enthusiast to consumer. /MHO

Paul S. in CT


--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com,<dmccorm@> wrote:
I hate to tell you this guys, but my G6 Buzz edition beats my G8 in the AM and shortwave band barefoot. Even after alignment of the stock G8 loopstick for the BCB. I listen to WGN and WBBM regularly on my G6. I took it camping in the UP of MI and had a blast with it.

73's, Dave K9DV

---- Rick Robinson<w4dst@> wrote:
Thanks to Tony and Keith for the info regarding the G6. My Sony 2010 is
not much on the air band unless you are at an airport. Including the
air band in radios must've been included to give an airline traveler
something to pass time while waiting on a flight to arrive.

I've been very pleased with my G8 and PL-380 and the G6 sounds like it
would be a disappointment compared to the other 2.

Rick W4DST
Well, that looks like a consensus there, folks. Is the mini 400 any
better? I could snag one from Amazon right now for $30. Or which of
these brands is better: Tecsun or Degen, and is either better than
Grundig/Eton? I'm not much into SWL, but if it performs better than my
G8 in that respect, I might give it a whirl. I'm mainly concerned with
MW and FM (especially), because longwave is useless down here, and it
takes a special radio to pick up the OCCASIONAL tropospheric episode we
get. Thanks to all!

Scott
Hobbs, NM


Re: Curious minds want to know ... why no SSB?

ferrite61 <dxrx@...>
 

Actually, RF-Bosters are in Ultralights... just not intended for the AM-BCB. Both the Eton E100 and Tecsun PL-200 have them, and I presume the new PL-210 will also have it. These work on FM and SW freqiencies.

Paul S. in CT

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "dhsatyadhana" <satya@...> wrote:

If a small radio had an RF gain control or a pre-amp, being able to boost or cut the RF signal wouldn't, in my experience, provide the same sort of advantage as SSB or synch, and would not be a disqualifier. I am not aware of these controls being in a small, under-$100 set - my guess is that it would cost too much to implement - so it may not ever be an issue. As you say, large external antennas do indeed offer a big advantage, which is why we differentiate between "barefoot" class and "unlimited" class for reception records and contests. Putting new filters and ferrites into off-the-shelf receivers also propels one into the unlimited class. Even with these augmentations, as monstrous as they may be at times, one still has the limitation of processing the signal on a cheap little AM-only receiver.

Thanks - Kevin S
Bainbridge Island, WA


Re: ULR DX...NEW STATION ....more Summer DX!!

Kirk <kirk74601@...>
 

Heya Rob,
Congratulations on the new station! We're thinking of you today, and hope your recovery goes well AND is filled w/ some good DX.
73,
Kirk Allen
Ponca City, OK

Radio Used..........SONY SRF-T615 ULR Barefoot

ULR LOG Totals are now......837 Stations Heard

73.....ROB VA3SW

Robert S. Ross
London, Ontario CANADA
*******************************************************************


Re: A new PL-310 - did not like mine.

Michael Evans - Mike MBR <michaelrae65@...>
 

Hi Rick. Bit late for a reply as only just joined, I sent my PL-380 back, for one thing no external antenna socket, guys said get a 300 which has one, mine had a slow DSP it just would not catch up plus a whine, LW only had two station there should have been 7 min during the day, MW BC band was not that sensitive, in the end I got a Degen de 1103 gret on all bands, friend put in 80 khz filters for VHF CCIR band now a very hot radio. Mike MBR UK.

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, Rick Robinson <w4dst@...> wrote:

No one took me up on my offer to buy their PL-310. Not even an
outrageous offer. That is about as good an endorsement as can be had if
no one on a list this big wants to sell theirs. This morning I bought a
black '310 from Joyce at anon-co. I bought my PL-380 from Joyce and
have very pleased with both the service and the radio.

Now the anxious waiting begins.

Rick W4DST


OIRT Band on shoot out radios.

Michael Evans - Mike MBR <michaelrae65@...>
 

Hi. Having read the shoot outs and thinking "Um - Kchibo D96L for me" I noted it has the OIRT band 65-74 MHz which I am interested in.
Now in the USA the spacing is 200 KHz for the CCIR band {I am not living there} in the UK Europe 100 KHz spacing and for the OIRT band 30 khz is this switching auto for each VHF band or is it depending on the DSP doing the job of centring to a tuned frequency, hope you see where I am coming from here as I am not very tech but know about spacings. Mike MBR UK.


Re: FM Log 8.10.10

wa8lcz
 

hi tony,

12 new ones today!!! unbelievable. very nice.
did you put up a tower ???

byron

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, Antonios Kekalos <akekalos@...> wrote:

All times EDT, RX Insignia NS-HD01

0647, 100.3, WGRY, Grayling MI,60K (dupe)
0651, 102.5, WIOG, Bay City MI, 86K, 47mi/76km (dupe)
0656, 102.7, WMOM, Pentwater MI, 6K, 76mi/122km (dupe)
0657, 103.9, WCMW, Harbor Springs, 12K, 60mi/98km, RDS
0705, 106.5, WVFM, Kalamazoo MI, 33K, 169mi/273km



--
Tony, N4RNI
Traverse City, MI
EN74dq
FISTS #14949, SWLR-RN072, WA8050SWL

Not every conspiracy is a theory-AMC's Rubicon


Re: Grundig G6

jaypolicow@snet.net <jaypolicow@...>
 

You have to separate noise floors in the radios you compare with the noise level in your environment. The only really accurate comparisons of radio sensitivity are done where the ambient RF noise level (RFI) is low enough to reveal the inherent signal to noise ratio difference of the rreceivers under test. If there is local RFI the tests ae skewed and not very meaningful.

Also local noise usually manifests itself as a buzz, not a pure hiss such as when listening to a very weak AM signal in a very quiet RF environment.

Jay Allen

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, Scott Macatee <scottmac112@...> wrote:

On 8/9/2010 5:04 AM, ferrite61 wrote:
I've had power outages here in the last few years, and when the grid goes down, a great majority of that hiss dissapears. The E100/PL200 are quiet with some hiss. Even the WRX911 quieted down considerably. The G6 still had internal artifacts. The G5 is deathly silent... I would say clean signal. My PL310 and R911 have not had such a test. I find it valuable to "noise floor" readings.

Paul S. in CT


--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "jaypolicow@"<jaypolicow@> wrote:
Paul S,

As one Connecticutian to another I agree with your assessment that the PL-200/Eton E100 is a little gem. Mine matches my PL310 on MW but without the occasional spurious tones and noises of every DSP radio I've tried so far...when a weak signal is tuned on the PL-200 it always has pure hiss behind it, never any odd noises.

Jay Allen

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "ferrite61"<dxrx@> wrote:
Yes but I can do that on any of my 3 ULR's, including the el-cheapo R-911. Its APITA on it but doable. (Re: my old comments on the R-911's 'station locking'. The WRX-911 didn't grab as strongly, and was a bit better tuning station to station.) Nonetheless, I find the PL-200 and PL-310 at least as good as the G6... at a lesser price. One lives and learns... I really don't need a PL-210, but I'm very interested in how it compares with its predecessor the E-100 or PL-200. ie: is quality slipping in favor of memory? Is the tuning knob an improvement over the 310's unusual variable-velocity speed-tuning? Any degradation of the ferrite rod quality? etc. I am concerned that if one missed out on the E100/PL200, should I (or anyone else here) consider or recommend the PL-210 as substitute. Off hand, and at first glance I would, as the DSP radios aren't noticably better (but with due respect, they're less expensive).

IMHO one will pretty much have to pry my PL-200 from dead cold fingers. The PL-310 can beat it on the low AM-BCB out of the box, but has issues with the soft-mute, and the 380 was ferrite-bar compromised... quality IS slipping as time marches on. Convenience seems to be winning, dumbing-down the receivers from enthusiast to consumer. /MHO

Paul S. in CT


--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com,<dmccorm@> wrote:
I hate to tell you this guys, but my G6 Buzz edition beats my G8 in the AM and shortwave band barefoot. Even after alignment of the stock G8 loopstick for the BCB. I listen to WGN and WBBM regularly on my G6. I took it camping in the UP of MI and had a blast with it.

73's, Dave K9DV

---- Rick Robinson<w4dst@> wrote:
Thanks to Tony and Keith for the info regarding the G6. My Sony 2010 is
not much on the air band unless you are at an airport. Including the
air band in radios must've been included to give an airline traveler
something to pass time while waiting on a flight to arrive.

I've been very pleased with my G8 and PL-380 and the G6 sounds like it
would be a disappointment compared to the other 2.

Rick W4DST
Well, that looks like a consensus there, folks. Is the mini 400 any
better? I could snag one from Amazon right now for $30. Or which of
these brands is better: Tecsun or Degen, and is either better than
Grundig/Eton? I'm not much into SWL, but if it performs better than my
G8 in that respect, I might give it a whirl. I'm mainly concerned with
MW and FM (especially), because longwave is useless down here, and it
takes a special radio to pick up the OCCASIONAL tropospheric episode we
get. Thanks to all!

Scott
Hobbs, NM


Re: High-Q LW loop for the PL-380

bbwrwy
 

Peter:

Thank you for posting the photo of your loop. I enjoyed seeing the Selena 212 receiver in the background, but it will never qualify as an ultralight radio. I own several of the Soviet era receivers and ultralight they aren't. My favorite is an Ocean 214 which weigh 4.6 kilograms (10.14 pounds) with six D cells. The export version was the Selena B215. Sadly, I've never been able to get the 214 to work properly. But it's a fantastic conversation piece. And, it might not blow away in a tornado.

Good DX.

Richard.

Richard Allen
36°22'51"N, 97°26'35"W


FM Log 8.10.10

Antonios Kekalos <akekalos@...>
 

All times EDT, RX Insignia NS-HD01

0647, 100.3, WGRY, Grayling MI,60K (dupe)
0651, 102.5, WIOG, Bay City MI, 86K, 47mi/76km (dupe)
0656, 102.7, WMOM, Pentwater MI, 6K, 76mi/122km (dupe)
0657, 103.9, WCMW, Harbor Springs, 12K, 60mi/98km, RDS
0705, 106.5, WVFM, Kalamazoo MI, 33K, 169mi/273km



--
Tony, N4RNI
Traverse City, MI
EN74dq
FISTS #14949, SWLR-RN072, WA8050SWL

Not every conspiracy is a theory-AMC's Rubicon




Re: Curious minds want to know ... why no SSB?

dhsatyadhana <satya@...>
 

Hi Neil:

Thanks for your question! I'll put in my two cents.

In general, one of the attractions of Ultralights is that one can take a small consumer-grade, AM-only receiver (as opposed to one built with a DX hobbyist in mind) and still pull in an incredible amount of DX. With the limitation of AM-only, additional skill and luck is required, which is part of the fun and challenge. With SSB or synch, one has the ability to inject/augment the carrier (which enhances the ability to hear a weak or fading station), and more importantly to select an individual sideband, which is a tremendous advantage in tough DX situations. SSB also allows the detection of split-frequency heterodynes, another big advantage when listening for trans-oceanic signals. If one did not want this artificial handicap, then one would use a communications receiver, but for me part of the fun and challenge is to see what can be received using minimal equipment, analogous to crystal set builders who voluntarily place even bigger obstacles in front of themselves. The ULR definitions were crafted with this general principle in mind.

Some receivers now have DSP filtering, but are still exclusively AM receivers without the ability to isolate an individual sideband. As with all AM radios, they can favor one sideband to some degree, but it falls well short of what a synch or SSB-equipped receiver can do. For example, synch and SSB on my Sony 7600GR, even with its ho-hum filtering, make it a better DX rig IMHO than the Tecsun PL-380. Truth be told, the DSP filters on the newer radios don't have particularly good skirt selectivity, compared to even cheap filters found in analog sets, much less the DSP filters on a Perseus SDR: as such, the consumer-grade DSP filtering is something of a trade-off. Also, since DSP is the apparent wave of the future for even cheap consumer-grade receivers, disqualifying DSP sets would eventually rule out buying any new Ultralights(!).

If a small radio had an RF gain control or a pre-amp, being able to boost or cut the RF signal wouldn't, in my experience, provide the same sort of advantage as SSB or synch, and would not be a disqualifier. I am not aware of these controls being in a small, under-$100 set - my guess is that it would cost too much to implement - so it may not ever be an issue. As you say, large external antennas do indeed offer a big advantage, which is why we differentiate between "barefoot" class and "unlimited" class for reception records and contests. Putting new filters and ferrites into off-the-shelf receivers also propels one into the unlimited class. Even with these augmentations, as monstrous as they may be at times, one still has the limitation of processing the signal on a cheap little AM-only receiver.

For me, who like others had lost a degree of enthusiasm for DXing with a communications receiver, Ultralight DXing offered (and continues to offer) a much-appreciated shot in the DX arm for interest and enthusiasm.

Thanks - Kevin S
Bainbridge Island, WA

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "neilkj6fba" <neil.bell@...> wrote:

The definition of "Ultralight" radios seemingly excludes radios with SSB
or sync capabilities since they would have an unfair advantage.
However, radios with DSP are readily accepted. Does not a DSP radio
have an advantage of over radios? How about small sized radios with RF
gain controls or pre-amps? What makes synchronous detection so
disqualifying?

Does not a LARGE external antenna give an advantage over a "barefoot"
radio? Is a radio using a 6 foot square directional loop still
"consumer grade?" Sure doesn't fit in my pocket!

I can certainly understand the goal of keep low cost as a factor in
ranking a radio as ultralight and also the importance of size. But
aren't both of these factors stretched substantially when large antennas
are used to create "records of achievement" or internal modifications
far beyond the ability of consumers?

I realize that there are criteria for the awards program that divide
into Barefoot and Unlimited.


Re: Curious minds want to know ... why no SSB?

Mike Mayer <mwmayer@...>
 

That may be old information. I don’t see the G5 on their web site. Maybe they already sold them all? I suppose individual stores may still have stock.

 

==========================================================
Mike Mayer
mwmayer@...


From: ultralightdx@... [mailto:ultralightdx@...] On Behalf Of dmccorm@...
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 12:24 PM
To: ultralightdx@...
Subject: Re: [ultralightdx] Curious minds want to know ... why no SSB?

 

 

On that subject yet, OT. I just read that the G5 is being put on clearance at RadioShack's that have them. Just FYI. It's a great rig in the DE/KA 110x series of radios IMHO.

---- neilkj6fba <neil.bell@...> wrote:
> The definition of "Ultralight" radios seemingly excludes radios with SSB
> or sync capabilities since they would have an unfair advantage.
> However, radios with DSP are readily accepted. Does not a DSP radio
> have an advantage of over radios? How about small sized radios with RF
> gain controls or pre-amps? What makes synchronous detection so
> disqualifying?
>
> Does not a LARGE external antenna give an advantage over a "barefoot"
> radio? Is a radio using a 6 foot square directional loop still
> "consumer grade?" Sure doesn't fit in my pocket!
>
> I can certainly understand the goal of keep low cost as a factor in
> ranking a radio as ultralight and also the importance of size. But
> aren't both of these factors stretched substantially when large antennas
> are used to create "records of achievement" or internal modifications
> far beyond the ability of consumers?
>
> I realize that there are criteria for the awards program that divide
> into Barefoot and Unlimited.
>
>


Re: Curious minds want to know ... why no SSB?

dmccorm@...
 

On that subject yet, OT. I just read that the G5 is being put on clearance at RadioShack's that have them. Just FYI. It's a great rig in the DE/KA 110x series of radios IMHO.

---- neilkj6fba <neil.bell@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

The definition of "Ultralight" radios seemingly excludes radios with SSB
or sync capabilities since they would have an unfair advantage.
However, radios with DSP are readily accepted. Does not a DSP radio
have an advantage of over radios? How about small sized radios with RF
gain controls or pre-amps? What makes synchronous detection so
disqualifying?

Does not a LARGE external antenna give an advantage over a "barefoot"
radio? Is a radio using a 6 foot square directional loop still
"consumer grade?" Sure doesn't fit in my pocket!

I can certainly understand the goal of keep low cost as a factor in
ranking a radio as ultralight and also the importance of size. But
aren't both of these factors stretched substantially when large antennas
are used to create "records of achievement" or internal modifications
far beyond the ability of consumers?

I realize that there are criteria for the awards program that divide
into Barefoot and Unlimited.


Curious minds want to know ... why no SSB?

neilkj6fba <neil.bell@...>
 

The definition of "Ultralight" radios seemingly excludes radios with SSB
or sync capabilities since they would have an unfair advantage.
However, radios with DSP are readily accepted. Does not a DSP radio
have an advantage of over radios? How about small sized radios with RF
gain controls or pre-amps? What makes synchronous detection so
disqualifying?

Does not a LARGE external antenna give an advantage over a "barefoot"
radio? Is a radio using a 6 foot square directional loop still
"consumer grade?" Sure doesn't fit in my pocket!

I can certainly understand the goal of keep low cost as a factor in
ranking a radio as ultralight and also the importance of size. But
aren't both of these factors stretched substantially when large antennas
are used to create "records of achievement" or internal modifications
far beyond the ability of consumers?

I realize that there are criteria for the awards program that divide
into Barefoot and Unlimited.


Re: Curious minds want to know ... why no SSB?

Gary DeBock
 

Hi Neil, Kevin and Others,
 
Kevin's detailed explanation concerning the unsuitability of SSB in "consumer-grade" Ultralight radios is quite profound, and reflects the original thinking of John Bryant in setting up the ULR group classification system in early 2008. John solicited ideas from the leaders of the movement at that time (including Kevin, who by the way is the originator of the "Ultralight Radio" moniker), and we all agreed that SSB capability would create an unfair advantage in chasing DX on pocket radios (although at that time, nothing like the G6 existed).
 
DSP capability was discussed by the Definitions Committee (plus John and me) when the first PL-300WT models came out, and we reached a quick consensus that this was a positive change for ULR's, and something that would not create an unfair advantage. The fact that many barefoot ULR DXers continue to prefer traditional models like the SRF-T615 and the E100 confirms that thinking. We had a DSP-related discussion about the multiple filters (which were not originally allowed), and decided to allow them. 
 
As for large external antennas, Neil, the "barefoot" award class rules these out, and would be the perfect competitive forum for those ULR-DXers not enthused with tinkering, monster loops, and similar fanaticism. The "unlimited" ULR award class was essentially set up by two incurable antenna fanatics-- John B. and me. We took great pleasure in trying to outdo each other, and really didn't care how big the antennas became (as long as we were rolling in the TP's at Grayland). Seriously, though, the ULR "Unlimited Class" has really been a boon for antenna experimentation of all types, and if you assess the current AM-DXing community for centers of technical enthusiasm and innovation, you will find that our booming ULR group is right at the top of the list. The combination of relatively cheap receivers and supremely innovative DXers has created this unique situation, a definite tribute to John, Kevin and the other founding fathers.
 
73, Gary DeBock (in Puyallup, WA)  
 
 

In a message dated 8/10/2010 10:53:18 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, satya@... writes:
 

Hi Neil:

Thanks for your question! I'll put in my two cents.

In general, one of the attractions of Ultralights is that one can take a small consumer-grade, AM-only receiver (as opposed to one built with a DX hobbyist in mind) and still pull in an incredible amount of DX. With the limitation of AM-only, additional skill and luck is required, which is part of the fun and challenge. With SSB or synch, one has the ability to inject/augment the carrier (which enhances the ability to hear a weak or fading station), and more importantly to select an individual sideband, which is a tremendous advantage in tough DX situations. SSB also allows the detection of split-frequency heterodynes, another big advantage when listening for trans-oceanic signals. If one did not want this artificial handicap, then one would use a communications receiver, but for me part of the fun and challenge is to see what can be received using minimal equipment, analogous to crystal set builders who voluntarily place even bigger obstacles in front of themselves. The U LR definitions were crafted with this general principle in mind.

Some receivers now have DSP filtering, but are still exclusively AM receivers without the ability to isolate an individual sideband. As with all AM radios, they can favor one sideband to some degree, but it falls well short of what a synch or SSB-equipped receiver can do. For example, synch and SSB on my Sony 7600GR, even with its ho-hum filtering, make it a better DX rig IMHO than the Tecsun PL-380. Truth be told, the DSP filters on the newer radios don't have particularly good skirt selectivity, compared to even cheap filters found in analog sets, much less the DSP filters on a Perseus SDR: as such, the consumer-grade DSP filtering is something of a trade-off. Also, since DSP is the apparent wave of the future for even cheap consumer-grade receivers, disqualifying DSP sets would eventually rule out buying any new Ultralights(!).

If a small radio had an RF gain control or a pre-amp, being able to boost or cut the RF signal wouldn't, in my experience, provide the same sort of advantage as SSB or synch, and would not be a disqualifier. I am not aware of these controls being in a small, under-$100 set - my guess is that it would cost too much to implement - so it may not ever be an issue. As you say, large external antennas do indeed offer a big advantage, which is why we differentiate between "barefoot" class and "unlimited" class for reception records and contests. Putting new filters and ferrites into off-the-shelf receivers also propels one into the unlimited class. Even with these augmentations, as monstrous as they may be at times, one still has the limitation of processing the signal on a cheap little AM-only receiver.

For me, who like others had lost a degree of enthusiasm for DXing with a communications receiver, Ultralight DXing offered (and continues to offer) a much-appreciated shot in the DX arm for interest and enthusiasm.

Thanks - Kevin S
Bainbridge Island, WA

--- In ultralightdx@..., "neilkj6fba" wrote:
>
> The definition of "Ultralight" radios seemingly excludes radios with SSB
> or sync capabilities since they would have an unfair advantage.
> However, radios with DSP are readily accepted. Does not a DSP radio
> have an advantage of over radios? How about small sized radios with RF
> gain controls or pre-amps? What makes synchronous detection so
> disqualifying?
>
> Does not a LARGE external antenna give an advantage over a "barefoot"
> radio? Is a radio using a 6 foot square directional loop still
> "consumer grade?" Sure doesn't fit in my pocket!
>
> I can certainly understand the goal of keep low cost as a factor in
> ranking a radio as ultralight and also the importance of size. But
> aren't both of these factors stretched substantially when large antennas
> are used to create "records of achievement" or internal modifications
> far beyond the ability of consumers?
>
> I realize that there are criteria for the awards program that divide
> into Barefoot and Unlimited.
>


Re: Tropo Logs- August 8-9

MarkWA1ION
 

Spreadsheet may have been going by "old" WBMX on 98.5, which is now WBZ-FM. It transmits from Needham Heights (a bit south of Route 9, and just off Routes 128/I-95), about 10 miles west-southwest of downtown Boston. 98.5 also had previous lives as WROR (now on 105.7) and WRKO-FM (one of the first places to hear FM stereo top 40 around here in 1966).

104.1 was previously famed rocker WBCN and had been on the top of "the Pru" since the early '70s (or before) when it had moved there from the nearby "old" John Hancock building.

107.9 ("Kiss 108") has also transmitted from the Prudential Tower since the '70s when it was a leader in disco music.

Mark Connelly, WA1ION
Billerica, MA + South Yarmouth, MA

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, John Cereghin <jcereghin@...> wrote:

Thanks, Mark. I was using Gerald Westerberg's FM spreadsheets for the
distances to WXKS and WBMX,

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:19 AM, MarkWA1ION <MarkWA1ION@...> wrote:



Good logs John. Going the opposite direction, FM tropo from southern NJ and
Delmarva is received quite often on Cape Cod this time of year, especially
in humid / foggy conditions.

Re

<<
107.9 WXKS Medford MA 316 miles-new
104.1 WBMX Boston MA 305 miles
I believe both of these stations' transmitters are co-located on the top of
the Prudential Tower in Boston so the distances should be the same. Medford
is only 3 or 4 miles north of Boston anyway so there could not be an 11 mile
difference in distance even if going by studio instead of transmitter sites.

Mark Connelly, WA1ION


--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com <ultralightdx%40yahoogroups.com>, John
Cereghin <jcereghin@> wrote:

First really decent tropo event here in Delaware in a while, all
logged on a PL-310 ultralight barefoot:

August 8
96.9 WFAJ Nassawadox VA- new
88.7 WEER East Hampton NY 226 miles- new
107.9 WXKS Medford MA 316 miles-new
92.3 WPRO Providence RI 277 miles- new
94.1 WHJY Providence RI 283 miles- new
96.1 WROX Exmore VA 142 miles- new
96.3 WEII Dennis MA 331 miles

August 9
99.1 WPLM Plymouth MA 316 miles
100.9 WHTI Lakeside VA
104.1 WBMX Boston MA 305 miles
105.7 WAYZ Hagerstown MD 106 miles
107.9 WNCT Greenville NC 275 miles
89.9 WPER Culpeper VA 126 miles- new
89.7 WDVR Delaware Twp NJ 90 miles- new
99.1 WPLR New Haven CT 204 miles


--
John Cereghin WDX3IAO KB3LYP
Smyrna, Delaware
My radio page www.pilgrimway.org/dx
The Ultralight Scoreboard www.pilgrimway.org/ulradio



--
John Cereghin WDX3IAO KB3LYP
Smyrna, Delaware
My radio page www.pilgrimway.org/dx
The Ultralight Scoreboard www.pilgrimway.org/ulradio


FM Log 8.9.10

Antonios Kekalos <akekalos@...>
 

All times EDT, RX Insignia NS-HD01 and Grundig G8

0710, 98.9, WKLT, Kalkaska MI, 32K, 27mi/43km, NS-HD01
0717, 99.3, WROE, Neenah-Menasha WI, 13K, 147mi, NS-HD01
0719, 101.5, WMTE, Manistee MI, 6K, 48mi/77km, "Your Classic Hits Station Kool 101.5", NS-HD01
0727, 106.3, WKLA, Ludington MI, 4.9K, 66mi/107km, "The Lakeshores Hit Music Station KLA", NS-HD01
0750, 91.9, WGCP, Cadillac MI, 2.1K, 35mi/56km, G8
0802, 91.9, WHDI, Sister Bay WI, 3.4K, 78mi/126km, "Wisconsin Public Radio", G8
0824, 106.3, WMXG, Stephenson MI, Upper Peninsula, 50K, 111mi/179km, G8


--
Tony, N4RNI
Traverse City, MI
EN74dq
FISTS #14949, SWLR-RN072, WA8050SWL

Not every conspiracy is a theory-AMC's Rubicon




Re: High-Q LW loop for the PL-380

slowfly55
 

Hello Gary

Thank you for your comment that is much appreciated.
I agree, that a 6' or even bigger loop would boost LW reception
wildly and I hope, that you'll find time to prove it.
My idea was to get maximum sensitivity with a small antenna.What is
very useful here in Europe with stations only 6 kHz apart (177,183)
is the small bandwith of the loop.
I put a photo of the loop into the photo section. In the background
you see my reference receiver Selena 212, that is definitely better on LW than my Sony ICF-2010.

73, Peter K. in Schaffhausen/Switzerland

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, D1028Gary@... wrote:

Hello Peter,

Thanks very much for sharing the details of Henry's compact LW loop with
us, and also the performance report on your new loop's LW sensitivity. The
experiment sounds very interesting, and Henry's loop does seem to provide a
serious boost in LW performance.

The 2000 uh coil LW 7.5" plug-in loopsticks (for the PL-360, PL-380 etc.)
were primarily designed to provide performance competitive with a stock
ICF-2010 on LW, and they do seem to exceed this sensitivity level on the LW
international broadcast band (153-279 kHz), and equal it on the lower NDB
frequencies (up to about 300 kHz).

Inductive coupling to large LW air core loops can certainly provide even
greater ULR performance on the LW band, and one of the designs tested here
was a 6.5' sided LW tuned passive PVC Loop with 22 turns of #18 wire (564'),
which tunes from 148- 374 kHz. It was described in the PVC Loop article
posted at _http://www.mediafire.com/?igw1zjwfzmw_
(http://www.mediafire.com/?igw1zjwfzmw) , and probably would run wild on the LW band (if I had the
time to DX with it :-)


73, Gary DeBock (in Puyallup, WA, USA)




In a message dated 8/9/2010 5:27:00 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
peter.keller@... writes:




Though fascinated by the ferrite stick transplants of Gary I have still
scruples to alter the outer appearance of my URLs and prefer the passive loop
approach.
On Henry's homepage _http://homepage.ntlworld.com/henry01_
(http://homepage.ntlworld.com/henry01) I fell on an small and simple loop antenna that is
more than a gadget.
Following his plan and calculations I constructed such a loop of
12" x 9" for LW. For a better Q I built it with foamboard 5mm instead of
corrugated cardboard and invested a roll of 60x005 litz wire for 55 turns
instead of copper wire.Now having sacrificed so much litz an
air variable tuning cap was mandatory.The result is a relatively small and
easy transportable LW antenna. If you are interested I can put a self
declaring photo in the photo section.
The performance boost of this "gadget" was far beyond my expectations.
The tuning of the loop is extremly sensitive (small bandwith), so that the
reduction drive of the cap is helpful. Average s/n gain is 15-20 db on the
PL 380.Here are some day measurements:

Barefoot with loop
162 kHz France Inter 15 01 barely audible 29 25
177 Deutschlandrad. 15 02 not aud. 20 18
207 Deutschlandfunk 15 13 38 25
234 RTL 15 00 barely aud. 28 25
270 Czechsk.Prag 15 00 not aud. 15 18

This PL-380 loop combination is now equal in performance to my
best LW receiver: no, it is not the Sony ICF-2010 it is the sowiet
Selena B212.

Peter K. in Schaffhausen/Switzerland


Re: Tropo Logs- August 8-9

bbwrwy
 

John:

Congratulations on your successful session. I monitorwd your activity on the Internet Sunday night.

With the typical August high temperatures and low humidity, tropospheric propagation has dried up here, but July was good month. Too bad the E-skip season was so short.

Best wishes for many more new stations this summer.

Richard.

Richard Allen
36°22'51"N / 97°26'35"W


Re: Tropo Logs- August 8-9

John Cereghin <jcereghin@...>
 

Thanks, Mark.  I was using Gerald Westerberg's FM spreadsheets for the distances to WXKS and WBMX,


On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:19 AM, MarkWA1ION <MarkWA1ION@...> wrote:
 

Good logs John. Going the opposite direction, FM tropo from southern NJ and Delmarva is received quite often on Cape Cod this time of year, especially in humid / foggy conditions.

Re


<<
107.9 WXKS Medford MA 316 miles-new
104.1 WBMX Boston MA 305 miles
>>

I believe both of these stations' transmitters are co-located on the top of the Prudential Tower in Boston so the distances should be the same. Medford is only 3 or 4 miles north of Boston anyway so there could not be an 11 mile difference in distance even if going by studio instead of transmitter sites.

Mark Connelly, WA1ION


--- In ultralightdx@..., John Cereghin wrote:
>
> First really decent tropo event here in Delaware in a while, all
> logged on a PL-310 ultralight barefoot:
>
> August 8
> 96.9 WFAJ Nassawadox VA- new
> 88.7 WEER East Hampton NY 226 miles- new
> 107.9 WXKS Medford MA 316 miles-new
> 92.3 WPRO Providence RI 277 miles- new
> 94.1 WHJY Providence RI 283 miles- new
> 96.1 WROX Exmore VA 142 miles- new
> 96.3 WEII Dennis MA 331 miles
>
> August 9
> 99.1 WPLM Plymouth MA 316 miles
> 100.9 WHTI Lakeside VA
> 104.1 WBMX Boston MA 305 miles
> 105.7 WAYZ Hagerstown MD 106 miles
> 107.9 WNCT Greenville NC 275 miles
> 89.9 WPER Culpeper VA 126 miles- new
> 89.7 WDVR Delaware Twp NJ 90 miles- new
> 99.1 WPLR New Haven CT 204 miles
>
>
> --
> John Cereghin WDX3IAO  KB3LYP
> Smyrna, Delaware
> My radio page www.pilgrimway.org/dx
> The Ultralight Scoreboard  www.pilgrimway.org/ulradio
>




--
John Cereghin WDX3IAO  KB3LYP
Smyrna, Delaware
My radio page www.pilgrimway.org/dx
The Ultralight Scoreboard  www.pilgrimway.org/ulradio


Re: New logs from Connecticut

terribly wet
 

Don't ask me how I missed that. Dumb me. I guess I never look up 1040.

I was thinking it was my receivers and maybe something to do with HD hsssssssssssssssssssss


So NYC ESPN 1050 'is' also on 1040.



WNJE AM 1040 kHz DA3 Daytime B B LIC FLEMINGTON NJ US BL-20080111AGM 15.0 kW 28130 NASSAU BROADCASTING II,LLC


WNJE AM 1040 kHz DA3 Nighttime B B LIC FLEMINGTON NJ US BL-20080111AGM 1.5 kW 28130 NASSAU BROADCASTING II, LLC


WNJE AM 1040 kHz DA3 Critical Hours B B LIC FLEMINGTON NJ US BL-20080111AGM 7.5 kW 28130 NASSAU BROADCASTING II, LLC

--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "ferrite61" <dxrx@...> wrote:

NO, its callsign is 1040 WNJE: its programming is // to WEPN 1050.

Paul S. in CT


--- In ultralightdx@yahoogroups.com, "terribly wet" <zz4@> wrote:

There actually is a station on 1040 WEPN ?