[ARC5] ARC-5 Audio Comparison, Stock vs. "CQ-VooDoo"

[D C _Mac_ Macdonald]

I guess I need to have new software to view/listen to those files.
They won't open here.
 
* * * * * * * * * * * 
* 73 - Mac, K2GKK/5 * 
* (Since 30 Nov 53) * 
* k2gkk at hotmail.com * 
* Oklahoma City, OK * 
* USAF & FAA (Ret.) * 
* * * * * * * * * * * 
 
 
 
 

> From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com
> To: arc5 at mailman.qth.net
> Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 07:45:37 -0500
> Subject: [ARC5] ARC-5 Audio Comparison, Stock vs. "CQ-VooDoo"
> 
> 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