[Boatanchors] Please Respond For Historical Data

[Barrie Smith]

This is strange!

Last evening I was in the process of replying to this query when my computer
did what is does best:  Lock up.

This evening I see this post and it's just about the same as mine was last
evening.

There will be a couple of additions down the list.

> Well, silly me - I responded only to Duane and didn't share with the list
(usually I
> make the opposite mistake). Here are my thoughts:
>
> "Duane Fischer, W8DBF" wrote:
>
>
> > 1. What do you consider to be the best vacuum tube general coverage
receiver?
>
> R-390
>
> > Why?
>
> General coverage, extremely sensitive when properly aligned, rock-solid
stable,
> decent audio compared to the economized 'A' model, built like the
proverbial brick
> shithouse
>
> > 2. What do you consider to be the vacuum tube receiver with the best
audio
> > reproduction?
>
> SX-28(*) (Mine's an A)   So is mine!  Don't forget the SX-88!
>
> > Why?
>
> Push/Pull 6V6 audio can't be beat, broad bandpass position for excellent
fidelity
>
> > 3. What do you consider to be the best vacuum tube receiver for both AM
and FM
> > listening?
>
> SX-62(*) (Mine's a B)   So is mine!
>
> > Why?
>
> Same audio chain as SX-28(*) plus low and hi VHF FM bands, also has the
*best* dial
> face and illumination
>
> > 4. Which vacuum tube receiver have you enjoyed listening to the most
since first
> > becoming interested in radio?
>
> All three above plus SP-600 since they all fill different needs, probably
the
> SX-28(*) the most overall but it's difficult to say.
>
> > Why?
>
> SX-28(*) has great audio, excellent feel to the flywheel tuning, great
appearance
> and shape, just looks and feels like a real radio despite not being as
'hot' as some
>
> other models. RA-17 is also an enjoyable experience once you get the hang
of tuning
> it.
>
> > 5. What is the best vacuum tube receiver built for Ham band only
coverage?
>
> 75A-4
>
> > Why?
>
> Extremely stable, removable/changable mechanical filters for eliminating
noise and
> interference, built to the highest standards, vernier tuning option
(standard on
> later models), accurate calibration when aligned, relatively good physical
> appearance.
> *note SX-115 is a very close second but lacks 160 mtrs otherwise it would
be top
> dog.
>
> > 6. What is the best sounding Ham band only vacuum tube receiver?
>
> SX-115!  > > Why?
>
> Lacks 160 but makes SSB sound almost as good as AM, an important
consideration since
>
> SSB makes up a good portion of signals on the ham bands. Sounds decent on
AM as
> well.
>
> > 7. What company bilt the greatest number of good performing vacuum tube
general
> > coverage receivers?
>
> Collins, hands down. Hallicrafters and National made many more, but of
varying
> levels of quality and performance. Their high ends sets were great, but
many others
> were marginal to poor. Collins made fewer receivers, but all were built to
the same
> standard where excellent performance was the norm, not an option.
>
> > 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?
>
> R-390/R-390A
>
> > Why?
>
> All reasons mentioned above plus low noise floor. Not as easy or pleasing
to use as
> some, but gives you the ability to do far more than with any other
comparable
> receiver of the period with far better results. More usable features and
better
> performance than any other.
>
> > 9. Using the same criteria as in the previous question, which receiver
had the
> > best audio quality?
>
> Any of the Hallicrafters mentioned: SX-28(*), SX-62(*), probably SX-42 and
others
> with the same audio chain. The RCA AR-88-inspired line has decent single
ended audio
>
> as well, but not quite as nice.
>
> > Why?
>
> Those push/pull 6V6s are just the best sound into a decent speaker. Plenty
of wide,
> high fidelity audio.
>
> > 10. If you could have any receiver ever manufactured, which one would
you choose
> > and why?
>
> Would depend on the use and need: for overall enjoyment and sound, the
SX-28(*). For
>
> more serious listening and reasonably good audio an R-390.
>
> Boomer,  KA1KAQ

Thanks, Boomer!

Barrie, W7ALW
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boatanchors mailing list
> Boatanchors@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
>