[Boatanchors] Please Respond For Historical Data

[Carl Huether]

Based on what I have, here goes

> 1. What do you consider to be the best vacuum tube general coverage
receiver?
> Why?

R390A. Selectivity, sensitivity thruout the range. Mine happens to be an all
Collins model with just a few mods.

> 2. What do you consider to be the vacuum tube receiver with the best audio
> reproduction? Why?

SX88 followed by HRO60 & NC183D. Attention to details in the design,
conservative ratings and ability to drive good speakers.
I worked on the NC400 while at National and remember it was excellent also.

> 3. What do you consider to be the best vacuum tube receiver for both AM
and FM
> listening? Why?

Nothing "traditional" comes to mind for acceptable FM performance on that
band today. My folks had a Stromberg Carlson AM/SW/FM console thst sounded
great but that was 40 years ago.

> 4. Which vacuum tube receiver have you enjoyed listening to the most since
first
> becoming interested in radio? Why?

I could say the regen I built from a Popular Mechanics article in 54. But
today I mostly rely on a 51J4 Ive had for 22 years as it is set up in the
shop and is on daily.


> 5. What is the best vacuum tube receiver built for Ham band only coverage?
Why?

That could start a fight. I have both a highly modified 75A4 and R4C which
produce some superb numbers on instruments. Ive used various 75Sx models at
contest stations and preferred the modified R4C/T4XC in that application.
Never did like the 200 kc coverage either.


> 6. What is the best sounding Ham band only vacuum tube receiver? Why?

For what mode?  My A4 has 800/2.1/6 filters plus a 2nd set at 500/2.1/jumper
so its a great digger for anything. However Ive modified the audio and AGC
to favor SSB altho its more than adequate on 75M AM.   For AM the NC-300/303
was nice in its day. Ive not owned the earlier Collins models.


> 7. What company bilt the greatest number of good performing vacuum tube
general
> coverage receivers?

Id say National and Hammarlund.  I have SP200/400 plus HQ120/129/140X's and
the HQ's always suprised me with good performance at reasonable cost. Ive
never been impressed with Hallicrafters except for a select few.

> 8. Defining the term 'vintage' to be a receiver that is at least
twenty-five
> years old, or built prior to 1978, which one is the best overall
performing
> general coverage receiver? Why?

Since you didnt say vacuum tube, the HRO-500/LF10 because of its VLF
coverage, stability, ease of use, numerous back panel ins and outs.. That
combo resides in the living room driving a Heath tube amp.

> 9. Using the same criteria as in the previous question, which receiver had
the
> best audio quality? Why?

Redundant question? The HRO -500 has marginal built-in audio but it has the
rear panel output to drive something excellent. The R390A is too big to move
around plus the wife kicked it out of the living room. Havent turned it on
in years.


> 10. If you could have any receiver ever manufactured, which one would you
choose
> and why?

Going by the numbers, possibly the military Rhode & Schwartz mentioned in
the current QEX. But if it ever broke Id be in the same boat as with my
wifes Volvo.


>
> Duane Fischer, W8DBF
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boatanchors mailing list
> Boatanchors@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
>