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

[Kenneth G. Gordon]

On 21 Oct 2012 at 7:45, David Stinson wrote:

> 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!

Well, David, I wouldn't necessarily call it "scientific" but it sure beats the heck 
out of all the anecdotal yapping, and furthermore, proves MY point too!

To reiterate: "match the damned impedances and leave the radio alone."

As Carl says, seeing the CQ article would certainly be valuable.

If you can list the article title, year, and etc., I may have it here, or have it 
available from another source.

That would save you having to perform all that mumbo-jumbo to protect your 
scanner. ;-)

 Kenneth G. Gordon W7EKB

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."--- John   Wayne