[Boatanchors] SSB Generation - Phasing VS Filter Opinion Sought

[Whitebear1122]

Hi Bill, Many thanks for your insight into Phasing vs Crystal SSB generation.  As you’ve seen on the thread, the others feel the same way you do about the high quality audio from the phasing method.  The others also mention the HT-37 vs HT-32 in comparison.  

At this stage of my learning I was leaning towards the mechanical filter generated SSB but all you guys have motivated me to look closely at the phasing method now.  

I find it interesting that all the respondents speak fondly of phasing SSB and that recommendation intrigues me.  

Agreed, I would stay away from the 70 year old B&W phasing networks.  I saw a pair up on Ebay last week and passed on them after KG7TR told me the suppression was only going to 30 dB or so.  I need better than that.  

Many thanks!  73, Scott WA9WFA

> On Jul 19, 2019, at 7:16 AM, Bill Cotter <n4lg at qx.net> wrote:
> 
> Scott,
> 
> I am primarily a CW/AM OP with limited experience in SSB, so take this opinion with that in mind.
> 
> I can tell you from some previous QSO's that there is a dramatic difference in fidelity and presence to the voice of operators using a Hallicrafters HT-32 (crystal filter) and a HT 37 (phasing method), with the latter more pure and pleasing. Of course, this is not a blind test on my part, but for the same mic, the HT-37 sound better to me. On the otherhand, the HT-32 is MUCH better looking, HI!
> 
> If I were building a phasing-type exciter, I would shy away from the 50-60 year old B&W phasing-modules, and construct my own from precision-matched parts. The phasing network is the most critical element to get right, and perhaps the most fun to design and construct. The audio transformers might be a bit difficult to find, but a junker HT-37, CE-20A, SB-10 or some other donor set might be a good source of parts.
> 
> 73 Bill N4LG