[Hallicrafters] SX-100 (and SX-96) microphonics

[Ken Kaplan]

I'm a little late catching up on emails. FWIW I have an SX-100 Mk 2 that 
works great. I can't detect any microphonics on any bands. It is quite 
stable after a brief warm-up. I did go thru the chassis replacing all of 
the black beauties. They ranged from moderately to very leaky on my 
Sprague TO-6A cap tester. The receiver seemed to work ok before the 
replacements but its performance after replacements was noticeably 
better. AVC action was much improved as was apparent sensitivity and 
audio quality.

So, if you have a microphonic (or otherwise misbehaving) SX-100, it's 
not something inherent in its design. It needs to be fixed.

73 Ken kb7rgg

On 11/20/2011 4:51 PM, Chris Kepus wrote:
> I suppose broaching this subject is like beating the 1000th dead horse!!!
> (apologies to PETA).
>
> But,...  since I have a nice SX-100 that mostly goes unused except as a
> remotely mounted monitor because of them dang Microphonics thingies, I have
> to ask, does anyone have a SX-100 that's not microphonic?  If the answer is
> yes, please share whatever you did to cure it.
>
> What's a bit odd to me is that my S-76, which is one of favs, is not
> microphonic.  Is it, a the song suggests, just "physical"?
>
> Listening mode back on.
>
> 73 and tnx,
> Chris
> W7JPG
>
>> From Mike's message..............
> "The biggest issue I recall with the SX-96 (which I used as a nain receiver
> for years) is microphonics, especially on 15 and 10 meters.  If someone
> knocked on the front door at my house, it could be heard in the speaker.
> The next biggest was that if my foot hit the table, the receiver was likely
> to lose the frequency of the signal.
>
> You learned breath control when using one.  That skill comes in handy if
> you're a swimmer, or a singer."  YES!!!! LOL!!!
>