[Hallicrafters] Re: Hallicrafters boat anchors as Dx machines

Mon Apr 19 13:25:56 EDT 2004

There is no 'one' radio or 'one' antenna that does it all. Just wishful
dreaming. 	

If you want to listen to AM modes, the Collins R-390a is hard to equal. If you
like MW BCB the HQ 600 series is hard to beat. If you like Ham bands the
Hallicrafters SX-115 or SX-117 is terrific. If you like SSB the Icom 756 Pro is
hard to beat. Some receivers are better than others, some do perform better in
certain frequency spectrums. However, most people cannot afford a dozen
antennas, make those monoband to avoid compromises, and half a dozen expensive
receivers. Truly it is not necessary for the vast majority of listners. The best
DX'ers I know use a single set and combination of antennas. As my father used to
say, "You don't need fancy rifles, just somebody who knows how to shoot one
doing the shooting!"	

If you want to buy half a dozen receivers, that is your personal choice. I have
learned from forty years of listening that one 'good' receiver is all I need. I
have over one hundred countries confirmed on short-wave, and I am only a casual
listener, not a DX hound! I have forty states verified on MW. I have over 145
countries confirmed on the Ham bands. Modest, yes. But all done with one
receiver and one transceiver, but a series of monoband antennas, no tuner and an
amplifier for the Ham bands.	

It is your money, spend it any way you wish. I stand on my belief that a 'good'
receiver set up the right way, with good antennas, is all the average listener
will ever truly need. Some people just like to change receivers for fun, and
there is nothing wrong with that. What you enjoy, do it. My point was, and is,
it is an option and not a requirement.	

Happy listening.	

DBF	

----------
From: Bill Krause <bkrause at sos.net>
To: 
Cc: HALLICRAFTERS <hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Hallicrafters] Re: Hallicrafters boat anchors as Dx machines
Date: Monday, April 19, 2004 3:19 AM

Duane,
          I really think we are actually both right on this. Certainly 
there is an element of chance about it, being in the right place at the 
right time, and under the right conditions. However I do think equipment 
does make a difference. I think some radios do perform better under some 
circumstance than other and it a littler like the golfer choosing the 
right club and unquestionably some radios are simply better than other 
radios. Also what neither of has mentioned is using our brain to 
understand what we are looking for and under what conditions and where 
we are likely to find it. Just my two cents worth.

                                                       Bill Krause

Duane Fischer, W8DBF wrote:

>Bill, 	
>	
>Having followed your various posts, I am under the impression that you are
>thinking of DX in the wrong context. 	
>	
>You can hear DX on any radio and any antenna. It is often more a case of being
>in the right place at the right time than of 'DX' equipment.	
>	
>It is also very dependent upon operator skill, in a word "patience".				
>	
>Studying propagation forecasts and listening in a given frequency spectrum when
>a path to said area is suspected to be operative.	
>	
>The SX-42 is a fine machine and you can certainly hear DX on it. It has
terrific
>audio when using the intended R-42 speaker. This is also true of the SX-62.	
>	
>The SX-100 is a great general coverage receiver, and arguable the best one that
>Hallicrafters built. Good sensitivity and selectivity. 	
>	
>I personally like the SX-117 with its triple conversion and outstanding
>selectivity. However, it is a Ham band, not general coverage, receiver! It so
>happens that my favorite SW ban dis 31 meters. The SX-117 is crystal controlled
>and has a crystal for WWV, 9.5-10.0 Mhz The 31 meter band! This RX can split a
>hair and will pull weak stations out of the noise with remarkable ease and
>outstanding clarity. 	
>	
>Bill, I know what you are trying to do, but there is no magic answer. There is
>no one receiver or antenna that is better for DX than another, within reason of
>course. Any good receiver will work just fine for what you want to do. All of
>the receivers you have named have good sensitivity and selectivity. Beyond
that,
>a decent longwire antenna and/or multiple band dipole, RX only antenna tuner,
>and lots and lots of patience are the recipe of choice.  	
>	
>Some people prefer to listen with headphones Vs  a speaker, as the headphones
>block out noise from your immediate environment and allow you to better hear a
>weak signal. Some people can tolerate them, others can not.	
>	
>If you do not have a copy, buy Chuck Dachis "Radios By Hallicrafters" Bill.
>Money well spent!	
>	
>Duane Fischer, W8DBF	
>
>
>	
>
>
>----------
>From: Bill Krause <bkrause at sos.net>
>To: HALLICRAFTERS <hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net>
>Subject: [Hallicrafters] Hallicrafters boat anchors as Dx machines
>Date: Sunday, April 11, 2004 3:08 AM
>
>I think it may have been established by Phil and others that the SX-71 
>may be superior to the SX 62 as a DX machine where as the SX 62 maybe 
>works for the SWL. How do the SX 42 and SX 100 fit into things as DX 
>machines, particularly sas comparred to the SX-71
>
>                                                       Bill Krause
>
>_______________________________________________
>List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF **for assistance**
>dfischer at usol.com
>----
>Hallicrafters Collectors International: http://www.w9wze.org
>----
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hallicrafters
>
>  
>

_______________________________________________
List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF **for assistance**
dfischer at usol.com
----
Hallicrafters Collectors International: http://www.w9wze.org
----
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hallicrafters