[ARC5] Novice receivers.

[Richard Knoppow]

    My first receiver was an S-38B, I may still have it but can't find 
it. It was surprizing on a decent antenna.  When we moved out to Los 
Angeles, about 1950, 10 meters was a an unprecedented peak. The S-38 
could hear signals from all over on a 40 meter folded dipole.  I could 
read SSB with care but the lack of an RF gain control made more 
difference than lack of selectivity or stability.
     The odd Hallicrafters arrangement for the BFO in this receiver is 
to make the IF stage regenerative just at the point of oscillation. That 
also makes it more selective. A resistor is switched in to reduce the IF 
gain when the switch is set to CW, which helps because the regeneration 
also increases the gain of the IF stage. A clever idea that sort of 
works. The original S-38 had a real BFO and the extera tube also had a 
diode in it so there was also a noise limiter.  The design change saved 
a tube and some components but lost the noise limiter and ability to 
shift the BFO frequency, the latter of not much value considering the 
broad response.
     I have a suspicion BTW that Hallicrafters rushed new designs into 
production too quickly to refine them properly.   If I am right it would 
explain the plethora of variations of models as ideas for either 
reducing production cost or improving performance came up. Hallicrafters 
was not the only company to make changes during production but perhaps 
made more than usual.

On 11/16/2015 10:26 AM, Kenneth G. Gordon wrote:
> On 16 Nov 2015 at 10:16, D C _Mac_ Macdonald wrote:
>
>> My first receiver (and transmitter) was the Walter Ashe $49.50 Novice
>> Station with 6SN7GT regen receiver.  Worked a lot better than the S-38 I
>> borrowed when the 6SN7GT went dead and I couldn't afford a replacement
>> tube.
> My first "good" receiver was a Hallicrafters S-41G which a plumber
> sub-contractor for my step-father's construction company found in his
> basement after he moved into the house. At least the BFO in that thing
> worked....
>
> I bought an S-41G somewhat recently, mainly just to see how it worked when
> compared with my more modern rigs. I almost can't figure out how we ever
> used those things to make as many contacts as we did. Yet I even worked
> DX
> on 20 meters using the S-41G back then. The entire 20 meter band is not
> quite 3/16" wide on the dial. Calibration was literally non-existent.
>
> I suppose the extremely poor selectivity of those sorts of receivers is
> the primary reason I preferred to operate CW, and still do. The AM
> portions of the bands were simply one huge collection of heterodynes. I
> couldn't stand to listen to that crap for more than a few minutes.
>
>> My ears aren't as good as they once were, but newbies still can't figure
>> out how I can pick signals out during Field Day!
> Yes. I have had the same experience. My "wet filter" has a bandwidth of 50
> Hz. It works just fine, thank you, even after all these years. I find
> narrow bandwidths in modern receivers disconcerting: I can't tell what
> else is going on on the band, and it bothers me. Besides, I also don't
> like the sound of a restricted bandwidth. There are times, of course, when
> very narrow (400Hz or so) bandwidths are useful...
>
>> There's still nothing that compares with trying to copy either ICW or
>> voice signals under crowded conditions to improve operator skill.
> Indeed, yes.
>
> I think Glen's idea of requiring new hams to spend at least 2 years using
> wide bandwidth and unstable receivers is excellent, although impossible to
> implement. Sadly.
>
> Ken W7EKB
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>

-- 
Richard Knoppow
1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com
WB6KBL