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

[Jay Coward]

When I was a kid we named a litter of kittens Oooh Eeee, Oooh Ah Ah, Ting Tang,Walla Walla, and Bing Bang ! Thanks for the memories Dave.
Jay KE6PPF



-----Original Message-----
From: mac <w7qho at aol.com>
To: ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sun, Oct 21, 2012 10:26 am
Subject: Re: [ARC5] ARC-5 Audio Comparison, Stock vs. "CQ-VooDoo"



osh,  Dave does have a sense of humor...  :^)
Dennis D.  W7QHO
lendale, CA
*******************
n Oct 21, 2012, at 5:45 AM, 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!

 73 DE Dave AB5S



 ______________________________________________________________
 ARC5 mailing list
 Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
 Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net

 This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
 Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
RC5 mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html