[ARC5] ARC5 Digest, Vol 105, Issue 121

[john]

I think someone's been in to the cooking sherry!

Thanks for the objective report Dave!
John  K5MO




At 09:54 AM 10/21/2012, you wrote:
>Send ARC5 mailing list submissions to
>         arc5 at mailman.qth.net
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         arc5-request at mailman.qth.net
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>         arc5-owner at mailman.qth.net
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of ARC5 digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>    1. ARC-5 Audio Comparison, Stock vs. "CQ-VooDoo" (David Stinson)
>    2. Re: ARC-5 Audio Comparison, Stock vs. "CQ-VooDoo" (David Stinson)
>    3. Surplus "conversion" articles (Mike Everette)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 07:45:37 -0500
>From: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: [ARC5] ARC-5 Audio Comparison, Stock vs. "CQ-VooDoo"
>To: "ARC-5 List" <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>Message-ID: <6489BBD1C81E47D09F383F871E2225F5 at CompaqSR5710F>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>         reply-type=original
>
>The thread got me very curious about this audio subject.
>So I decided to do a real test:
>Two ARC-5 receivers, side-by-side on the same antenna,
>receiving the same WWV 5 MC signal,
>the first with a completely "stock" audio output
>and the second with one of the more common
>"CQ-VooDoo" extra-tube hacks.
>(note: both files are 0.5 megs)
>
>The first clip is the "stock" receiver, outputting its
>clear, crisp and ample audio:
>
>http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/TheTest/WWV1.mp3
>
>The second is from the ARC-5 receiver
>that has had the "CQ-VooDoo" audio hack done.
>If you listen closely, the distortion and
>chaotic noises on the WWV signal created
>by this "VooDoo" hack are obvious:
>
>http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/TheTest/WWV3.mp3
>
>You can't beat a scientific experiment for proving a point!
>
>73 DE Dave AB5S
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 07:59:43 -0500
>From: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: Re: [ARC5] ARC-5 Audio Comparison, Stock vs. "CQ-VooDoo"
>To: "ARC-5 List" <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>Message-ID: <EB86075B75B44CBC92998E589EF612A0 at CompaqSR5710F>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>         reply-type=response
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Geoff" <geoffrey at jeremy.mv.com>
>
>
> > The comparison means nothing without a link to the CQ circuit.
>
>I'm looking for the article, Carl, but I have to keep it in a
>special "GreeGreeMan" hex box under the house
>with a black cat bone and red chicken feathers,
>else it will climb out at midnight and put JuJu
>on my good receivers.
>I'll scan it for you as soon as I can got see the Padre
>and get some Holy Water I can sprinkle on the scanner
>to protect it.   D.S.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 06:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Mike Everette <radiocompass at yahoo.com>
>Subject: [ARC5] Surplus "conversion" articles
>To: arc5 at mailman.qth.net
>Message-ID:
>         <1350827376.90908.YahooMailClassic at web120903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Thinking back over the surplus "conversion" literature, some of the best 
>thought-out and best-executed conversions were those by Roy Pafenberg 
>(sp?), W4WKM, who wrote mostly for 73 Magazine.
>
>Roy also authored a booklet called "Index to Surplus" which first appeared 
>around 1962-63, and then again in 1966 with an update/supplement.  This 
>booklet is a definitive list of the surplus articles up to the time of its 
>publication.
>
>If I had a decent scanner, I would upload my copy to BAMA... that is, if 
>Wayne Green or his ghost wouldn't hunt me down and take me out, for doing it.
>
>The articles in CQ (and there were several) that began with something like 
>"Sneak up on the equipment --- and REMOVE ALL WIRING!" were pretty 
>generally useless, but they are also listed in Roy's book.
>
>Did you know, the term "Boatanchor" stems from an article in CQ concerning 
>the No. 19 Mk. 2 Wireless Set?
>
>One thing I noticed about the literature... QST, and the ARRL, seemed to 
>ignore surplus as much as they could.  There were a flurry of articles in 
>1946-48 QST issues, then only a very few afterward.  I suppose this may 
>have been a concession to advertisers?  Yet, CQ and other publications 
>seemed not to suffer from advertiser boycotting on account of surplus.
>
>73
>
>Mike
>W4DSE
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>ARC5 mailing list
>ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>
>
>End of ARC5 Digest, Vol 105, Issue 121
>**************************************