From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jul  4 06:00:04 2005
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (Brian Carling)
Date: Mon Jul  4 06:10:20 2005
Subject: [HBR] RE: HBR-16 / Eddystone Dial Calibration?
Message-ID: <42C908A4.4020805@cfl.rr.com>

"One must consider however, that back in '64 and such... as a Novice, we 
were xtal controlled, and if using some of the OLDER Texas xtals, or 
grinding your own on a piece of glass with some Bon Ami... you needed to 
know where the BOTTOM of YOUR band was... thus the calibrator. 7.100 was 
the bottom (I think - can't recall if it was 7.150 or 7.100 now). These 
daze [sic], we have receivers/transceivers that are more exactly on 
freq. than those earlier frequency STANDARDS were."

Folks, if anyone would like some of them, I have calibrator crystals for 
7000, 7100, 7200 and 7300 kHz.
They are in FT243 holders. Write me off the list if you can use some of 
these.

Also, I am looking for an Eddystone dial.

Brian, AF4K



From windy10605 at juno.com  Tue Jul 19 10:52:51 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Tue Jul 19 11:07:10 2005
Subject: [HBR] Another HBR
Message-ID: <20050719.095252.304.3.windy10605@juno.com>

Hi Roger, 
You are FIRST one to discover and tell me the picture as reversed. I've
flipped it around ...the "Motorola" does look more realistic. 
Sure, if you find the pictures, I'll be glad to post them. These HBRs
radios are everywhere and were generally not parted out later. Great to
know that you still have yours. I took the liberty to copy the guys on
the HBR Reflector, they always take interest in "another one found". 
My address is good in QRZ. 
73 Kees K5BCQ
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------
rgalbraith@ramcoinc.com> 
To: <k5bcq@arrl.net> 
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 13:44:22 -0400 
Subject: Photo #177 Chuck Klawitters HBR Photo #1 

Kees, 
You've brobably been told this 1000+ times, but the photo in the subject
line is reversed. While the writing on the radio front panel is pretty
much unreadable due to blurryness, the Motorola emblem on the speaker is
a dead give away. 
I built an HBR-16 in the early '60s and think I can find some pictures.
If so, I will get them to you either via internet or snailmail. I still
have the HBR, but it is pretty dusty and I think it has several shorted
tubes. I built it on a larger chassis as I was inexperienced and thought
I needed a little extra room. I used ceramic sockets for the coils and
some of the tubes, and it really worked quite nicely for many years.
Selectivity for SSB was super and the only real drawback was having to
change those coils. It could be a very 'shocking' experience if you
didn't turn off the power before switching bands. 
Tnx much, 
Roger Galbraith
From davidjw at cinci.rr.com  Wed Jul 27 06:03:38 2005
From: davidjw at cinci.rr.com (David J Windisch)
Date: Wed Jul 27 06:02:44 2005
Subject: [HBR] HBR-15 on ebay recently
Message-ID: <001001c59292$760b9c00$dc278545@david7fhk3scab>

Hi, all concerned:

Does anyone know the history on this one?   The seller did not.

73, Dave, N3HE
From daileyservices at qwest.net  Wed Jul 27 12:31:50 2005
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Wed Jul 27 12:35:12 2005
Subject: [HBR] HBR-15 on ebay recently
References: <001001c59292$760b9c00$dc278545@david7fhk3scab>
Message-ID: <005d01c592c8$b15b6ac0$6602a8c0@dailey>

History of what?

------------------------

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David J Windisch" <davidjw@cinci.rr.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:03 AM
Subject: [HBR] HBR-15 on ebay recently


> Hi, all concerned:
>
> Does anyone know the history on this one?   The seller did not.
>
> 73, Dave, N3HE
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>

From davidjw at cinci.rr.com  Wed Jul 27 18:10:01 2005
From: davidjw at cinci.rr.com (David J Windisch)
Date: Wed Jul 27 18:09:28 2005
Subject: [HBR] HBR-15 on ebay recently
References: <001001c59292$760b9c00$dc278545@david7fhk3scab>
	<005d01c592c8$b15b6ac0$6602a8c0@dailey>
Message-ID: <002401c592f7$ef1734a0$dc278545@david7fhk3scab>

Oops, sri, forgot ebay item: 5789147283
73, Dave, N3HE

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "TC Dailey" <daileyservices@qwest.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:31 PM
Subject: Re: [HBR] HBR-15 on ebay recently


> History of what?
> 
SNIP
From windy10605 at juno.com  Wed Jul 27 19:44:26 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Wed Jul 27 19:45:16 2005
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <20050727.184427.2360.15.windy10605@juno.com>

I just came across a great little document on restoration. If you want a
copy send me a note. It says that it's OK to distribute in it's entirety.

73 Kees K5BCQ

THE RESTORATION OF VALVED HIGH FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVERS

by: Chris Parry BSc, G8JFJ ? Chris Parry, 2005. This issue: 23rd July
2005
From cfb at due.com  Wed Jul 27 20:39:29 2005
From: cfb at due.com (Charles Bacon)
Date: Wed Jul 27 20:39:06 2005
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info
In-Reply-To: <20050727.184427.2360.15.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <20050728003904.57872859C18@mailman.qth.net>

I would like a copy. Sounds great! Is this available electronically or via
snail mail?

Charles Francis Bacon
LinkedIn Profile: www.linkedin.com/e/fpf/548917

-----Original Message-----
From: hbr-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:hbr-bounces@mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of windy10605@juno.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:44 PM
To: hbr@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info

I just came across a great little document on restoration. If you want a
copy send me a note. It says that it's OK to distribute in it's entirety.

73 Kees K5BCQ

THE RESTORATION OF VALVED HIGH FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVERS

by: Chris Parry BSc, G8JFJ C Chris Parry, 2005. This issue: 23rd July
2005
************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ there is also a
mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
 

Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr



From windy10605 at juno.com  Wed Jul 27 21:34:58 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Wed Jul 27 21:36:17 2005
Subject: Fw: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <20050727.203458.1864.4.windy10605@juno.com>

It's a 100 page Word document which I will distribute via email once I
get a list of names together. You can print it or file it as you wish. I
also have the 80 or so page RSGB Receiver document by G2DAF as a Word
document for those interested. They are both on my CD but occupy too much
space on the web site. They are both great pieces of info to have if you
are working on quality tube receivers. 

Right now, a friend of mine and I are working to improve the Drake 2B
receiver. Triple conversion without the typical string of IF stages. If
you can find one cheap, buy it. I've always thought the 2B was a great
example of a commercial tube type HF receiver of the early 60s timeframe
which is physically compact, sensitive (0.5uV or better), selective (good
permeability tuned passband), simple slide switches, multiple Hi-Z AVC
points, copper plate chassis (there are no "bad grounds" to tube
sockets), screws vs rivets, low power (less than 40W), "low" voltage
(less than 180VDC) and uniquely efficient design (have you seen the
outstanding use of vertical terminal strips ? super simple graticule
adjustment, etc). It also offers the distinct "ease of use" advantage of
bandswitching and crystal converters. Still an excellent design in this
day and age. Maybe some of you have some input on improving that design ?


73 Kees K5BCQ
From windy10605 at juno.com  Wed Jul 27 21:40:58 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Wed Jul 27 21:40:53 2005
Subject: [HBR] Membership
Message-ID: <20050727.204059.1864.5.windy10605@juno.com>

Just for you information the HBR group (sometimes a little quiet)
consistes of 138 members so far ....that's a lot of HBR and other
Homebrew Receiver interest.

73 Kees K5BCQ
From future212 at comcast.net  Wed Jul 27 21:47:38 2005
From: future212 at comcast.net (DW Holtman)
Date: Wed Jul 27 21:47:16 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
References: <20050727.203458.1864.4.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <000801c59316$55cc1990$61c3b643@dw2q2am1a08eq5>

Kees,

I would be very interested in both documents if you can find the time to 
E-Mail; them to me.

Thank you for your time and trouble.

Thanks & 73's
DW Holtman
WB7SSN

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 7:34 PM
Subject: Fw: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info


> It's a 100 page Word document which I will distribute via email once I
> get a list of names together. You can print it or file it as you wish. I
> also have the 80 or so page RSGB Receiver document by G2DAF as a Word
> document for those interested. They are both on my CD but occupy too much
> space on the web site. They are both great pieces of info to have if you
> are working on quality tube receivers.
>
> Right now, a friend of mine and I are working to improve the Drake 2B
> receiver. Triple conversion without the typical string of IF stages. If
> you can find one cheap, buy it. I've always thought the 2B was a great
> example of a commercial tube type HF receiver of the early 60s timeframe
> which is physically compact, sensitive (0.5uV or better), selective (good
> permeability tuned passband), simple slide switches, multiple Hi-Z AVC
> points, copper plate chassis (there are no "bad grounds" to tube
> sockets), screws vs rivets, low power (less than 40W), "low" voltage
> (less than 180VDC) and uniquely efficient design (have you seen the
> outstanding use of vertical terminal strips ? super simple graticule
> adjustment, etc). It also offers the distinct "ease of use" advantage of
> bandswitching and crystal converters. Still an excellent design in this
> day and age. Maybe some of you have some input on improving that design ?
>
>
> 73 Kees K5BCQ
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via 
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
> 


From future212 at comcast.net  Wed Jul 27 21:53:50 2005
From: future212 at comcast.net (DW Holtman)
Date: Wed Jul 27 21:53:30 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
References: <20050727.203458.1864.4.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <001f01c59317$33954a80$61c3b643@dw2q2am1a08eq5>

Kees,

I have had several 2-B over the years. I really don't think you are going to 
make much improvment in such things as Receiver sensivity, noise floor, 
selectivity ( without adding crystal filters). If I was going to try to 
improve on a 2-b, I might build a digital VFO using DDS technology. You 
would have a very nice 1.5 to 30 MHZ  shortwave receiver. For what it is 
worth.

Best,
DW Holtman



----- Original Message ----- 
From: <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 7:34 PM
Subject: Fw: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info


> It's a 100 page Word document which I will distribute via email once I
> get a list of names together. You can print it or file it as you wish. I
> also have the 80 or so page RSGB Receiver document by G2DAF as a Word
> document for those interested. They are both on my CD but occupy too much
> space on the web site. They are both great pieces of info to have if you
> are working on quality tube receivers.
>
> Right now, a friend of mine and I are working to improve the Drake 2B
> receiver. Triple conversion without the typical string of IF stages. If
> you can find one cheap, buy it. I've always thought the 2B was a great
> example of a commercial tube type HF receiver of the early 60s timeframe
> which is physically compact, sensitive (0.5uV or better), selective (good
> permeability tuned passband), simple slide switches, multiple Hi-Z AVC
> points, copper plate chassis (there are no "bad grounds" to tube
> sockets), screws vs rivets, low power (less than 40W), "low" voltage
> (less than 180VDC) and uniquely efficient design (have you seen the
> outstanding use of vertical terminal strips ? super simple graticule
> adjustment, etc). It also offers the distinct "ease of use" advantage of
> bandswitching and crystal converters. Still an excellent design in this
> day and age. Maybe some of you have some input on improving that design ?
>
>
> 73 Kees K5BCQ
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via 
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
> 


From windy10605 at juno.com  Wed Jul 27 22:29:13 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Wed Jul 27 22:29:52 2005
Subject: Fw: Re: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <20050727.212914.1864.6.windy10605@juno.com>

Thanks for the first input.
  
I have noticed that there are very few mods available for the 2B which
may be an indication of how well it was designed. 

So far we've come up with the following:

1) get the 2BQ "Q" multiplier feature to go with the radio
2) replace the four .01mfd paper caps on general principle. Replace the 
    electrolytics too. Check "the usual suspects".
3) replace the 1mfd AVC paper cap with a 1.5mfd Mylar
4) replace the .005 mfd audio coupling cap with a .01mfd Mylar
5) replace the 6U8 with a 6EA8
6) replace the 6BF6 with a 6AV6 (make sure the leakage is EXTREMELY low)
7) since the AVC is Hi-Z you must use a 10Meg+ impedance meter and you 
    will still be 10-15% off on your bias voltage measurements. A 1000Meg
    input Fluke is OK. 
8) there is something not right about the audio feedback circuit design
9) would like to see more ceramic switches and higher "Q" coils in the
frontend
10) noise limiter can stand more improvement
11) BNC antenna connector 
12) carefull look at dual use tubes for interference
13) separate BFO function from Product Detector function in 6BE6 ?
14) find better RF amp tube than a 6BZ6
15) look into use of pullen mixers
16) add a second .005mfd cap across the BFO divider into the 6BF6 cathode
      to increase the BFO signal level.

73 Kees K5BCQ


--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "DW Holtman" <future212@comcast.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:53:50 -0600
Subject: Re: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <001f01c59317$33954a80$61c3b643@dw2q2am1a08eq5>
References: <20050727.203458.1864.4.windy10605@juno.com>

Kees,

I have had several 2-B over the years. I really don't think you are going
to 
make much improvment in such things as Receiver sensivity, noise floor, 
selectivity ( without adding crystal filters). If I was going to try to 
improve on a 2-b, I might build a digital VFO using DDS technology. You 
would have a very nice 1.5 to 30 MHZ  shortwave receiver. For what it is 
worth.

Best,
DW Holtman



----- Original Message ----- 
From: <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 7:34 PM
Subject: Fw: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info


> It's a 100 page Word document which I will distribute via email once I
> get a list of names together. You can print it or file it as you wish.
I
> also have the 80 or so page RSGB Receiver document by G2DAF as a Word
> document for those interested. They are both on my CD but occupy too
much
> space on the web site. They are both great pieces of info to have if
you
> are working on quality tube receivers.
>
> Right now, a friend of mine and I are working to improve the Drake 2B
> receiver. Triple conversion without the typical string of IF stages. If
> you can find one cheap, buy it. I've always thought the 2B was a great
> example of a commercial tube type HF receiver of the early 60s
timeframe
> which is physically compact, sensitive (0.5uV or better), selective
(good
> permeability tuned passband), simple slide switches, multiple Hi-Z AVC
> points, copper plate chassis (there are no "bad grounds" to tube
> sockets), screws vs rivets, low power (less than 40W), "low" voltage
> (less than 180VDC) and uniquely efficient design (have you seen the
> outstanding use of vertical terminal strips ? super simple graticule
> adjustment, etc). It also offers the distinct "ease of use" advantage
of
> bandswitching and crystal converters. Still an excellent design in this
> day and age. Maybe some of you have some input on improving that design
?
>
>
> 73 Kees K5BCQ
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via 
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
> 


************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From future212 at comcast.net  Wed Jul 27 22:58:16 2005
From: future212 at comcast.net (DW Holtman)
Date: Wed Jul 27 22:57:57 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
References: <20050727.212914.1864.6.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <001301c59320$33c45ab0$61c3b643@dw2q2am1a08eq5>

Kees,

So you are basicly talking about home brewing a 2-B. That is some serious 
mods. Major re-work. My hat is off to you. I would be VERY interested in how 
it comes out. If you document, please make it available. I have a schematic 
of one around somewhere. I would like to see what you are doing, and know 
how it comes out.

Best,
DW Holtman


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:29 PM
Subject: Fw: Re: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info


> Thanks for the first input.
>
> I have noticed that there are very few mods available for the 2B which
> may be an indication of how well it was designed.
>
> So far we've come up with the following:
>
> 1) get the 2BQ "Q" multiplier feature to go with the radio
> 2) replace the four .01mfd paper caps on general principle. Replace the
>    electrolytics too. Check "the usual suspects".
> 3) replace the 1mfd AVC paper cap with a 1.5mfd Mylar
> 4) replace the .005 mfd audio coupling cap with a .01mfd Mylar
> 5) replace the 6U8 with a 6EA8
> 6) replace the 6BF6 with a 6AV6 (make sure the leakage is EXTREMELY low)
> 7) since the AVC is Hi-Z you must use a 10Meg+ impedance meter and you
>    will still be 10-15% off on your bias voltage measurements. A 1000Meg
>    input Fluke is OK.
> 8) there is something not right about the audio feedback circuit design
> 9) would like to see more ceramic switches and higher "Q" coils in the
> frontend
> 10) noise limiter can stand more improvement
> 11) BNC antenna connector
> 12) carefull look at dual use tubes for interference
> 13) separate BFO function from Product Detector function in 6BE6 ?
> 14) find better RF amp tube than a 6BZ6
> 15) look into use of pullen mixers
> 16) add a second .005mfd cap across the BFO divider into the 6BF6 cathode
>      to increase the BFO signal level.
>
> 73 Kees K5BCQ
>
>
> --------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "DW Holtman" <future212@comcast.net>
> To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
> Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:53:50 -0600
> Subject: Re: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
> Message-ID: <001f01c59317$33954a80$61c3b643@dw2q2am1a08eq5>
> References: <20050727.203458.1864.4.windy10605@juno.com>
>
> Kees,
>
> I have had several 2-B over the years. I really don't think you are going
> to
> make much improvment in such things as Receiver sensivity, noise floor,
> selectivity ( without adding crystal filters). If I was going to try to
> improve on a 2-b, I might build a digital VFO using DDS technology. You
> would have a very nice 1.5 to 30 MHZ  shortwave receiver. For what it is
> worth.
>
> Best,
> DW Holtman
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <windy10605@juno.com>
> To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 7:34 PM
> Subject: Fw: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
>
>
>> It's a 100 page Word document which I will distribute via email once I
>> get a list of names together. You can print it or file it as you wish.
> I
>> also have the 80 or so page RSGB Receiver document by G2DAF as a Word
>> document for those interested. They are both on my CD but occupy too
> much
>> space on the web site. They are both great pieces of info to have if
> you
>> are working on quality tube receivers.
>>
>> Right now, a friend of mine and I are working to improve the Drake 2B
>> receiver. Triple conversion without the typical string of IF stages. If
>> you can find one cheap, buy it. I've always thought the 2B was a great
>> example of a commercial tube type HF receiver of the early 60s
> timeframe
>> which is physically compact, sensitive (0.5uV or better), selective
> (good
>> permeability tuned passband), simple slide switches, multiple Hi-Z AVC
>> points, copper plate chassis (there are no "bad grounds" to tube
>> sockets), screws vs rivets, low power (less than 40W), "low" voltage
>> (less than 180VDC) and uniquely efficient design (have you seen the
>> outstanding use of vertical terminal strips ? super simple graticule
>> adjustment, etc). It also offers the distinct "ease of use" advantage
> of
>> bandswitching and crystal converters. Still an excellent design in this
>> day and age. Maybe some of you have some input on improving that design
> ?
>>
>>
>> 73 Kees K5BCQ
>> ************************************
>> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>>
>>
>> Retrieve reflector archived data via
>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>>
>>
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via 
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
> 


From k4oah at mindspring.com  Wed Jul 27 23:24:02 2005
From: k4oah at mindspring.com (Garey Barrell)
Date: Wed Jul 27 23:23:32 2005
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info
In-Reply-To: <20050727.184427.2360.15.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20050727.184427.2360.15.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <42E84FD2.8020206@mindspring.com>

Kees -

Please add me to your list!

73, Garey - K4OAH
Atlanta

Drake C-Line Service Manual
<http://www.k4oah.com> 



windy10605@juno.com wrote:

>I just came across a great little document on restoration. If you want a
>copy send me a note. It says that it's OK to distribute in it's entirety.
>
>73 Kees K5BCQ
>
>THE RESTORATION OF VALVED HIGH FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVERS
>
>by: Chris Parry BSc, G8JFJ ? Chris Parry, 2005. This issue: 23rd July
>2005
>************************************
>
>  
>
From hamano-hyotaro at jqa.jp  Thu Jul 28 00:23:23 2005
From: hamano-hyotaro at jqa.jp (Hyotaro HAMANO)
Date: Thu Jul 28 00:26:53 2005
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info
References: <20050727.184427.2360.15.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <00e701c5932c$c20e7a60$5d0b10ac@NX2K071>

Dear Kees,

I am appreciated if you send me both documents by G8JFJ and G2DAF.
Thank you in advance.

Sincerely,
Hyotaro HAMANO
e-mail: hamano-hyotaro@jqa.jp

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <windy10605@juno.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:44 AM
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info


I just came across a great little document on restoration. If you want a
copy send me a note. It says that it's OK to distribute in it's entirety.

73 Kees K5BCQ

THE RESTORATION OF VALVED HIGH FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVERS

by: Chris Parry BSc, G8JFJ ? Chris Parry, 2005. This issue: 23rd July
2005
************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr


From ianmwilson at earthlink.net  Thu Jul 28 04:24:23 2005
From: ianmwilson at earthlink.net (Ian Wilson)
Date: Thu Jul 28 04:24:29 2005
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info
In-Reply-To: <20050727.184427.2360.15.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <001a01c5934d$c88918c0$6902a8c0@TrabucoIan>


Please count me in.

73, ian K3IMW




From bill.fondren at sbcglobal.net  Thu Jul 28 05:34:17 2005
From: bill.fondren at sbcglobal.net (Bill Fondren)
Date: Thu Jul 28 05:33:55 2005
Subject: [HBR] Re-Restoration info
Message-ID: <20050728093417.85091.qmail@web80805.mail.yahoo.com>

I would also like a copy of the 2 restoration articles     
 
thanks
Bill Fondren   K5PML   
From davidjw at cinci.rr.com  Thu Jul 28 05:38:39 2005
From: davidjw at cinci.rr.com (David J Windisch)
Date: Thu Jul 28 05:38:10 2005
Subject: [HBR] restoration etc
Message-ID: <000701c59358$24f57b80$dc278545@david7fhk3scab>

is available here 

http://www.vk2bv.org/radio/restoration-book-050723.pdf

or I can email you a copy offlist.

73, Dave, N3HE


From k4oah at mindspring.com  Thu Jul 28 09:19:41 2005
From: k4oah at mindspring.com (Garey Barrell)
Date: Thu Jul 28 09:19:17 2005
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info
In-Reply-To: <20050727.184427.2360.15.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20050727.184427.2360.15.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <42E8DB6D.1040005@mindspring.com>

Kees -

I thought I saw a message saying that both these articles are on your HBR CD.  I have 
version 1.0 and can't find either one!  ARE they on  1.0?  If not please keep me on 
your distribution list.

73, Garey - K4OAH
Atlanta

Drake C-Line Service Manual
<http://www.k4oah.com>



windy10605@juno.com wrote:

>I just came across a great little document on restoration. If you want a
>copy send me a note. It says that it's OK to distribute in it's entirety.
>
>73 Kees K5BCQ
>
>THE RESTORATION OF VALVED HIGH FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVERS
>
>by: Chris Parry BSc, G8JFJ ? Chris Parry, 2005. This issue: 23rd July
>2005
>************************************
>
>  
>

From jimamos at cisco.com  Thu Jul 28 09:39:24 2005
From: jimamos at cisco.com (James Amos (jimamos))
Date: Thu Jul 28 09:39:21 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <F1B57D925CE24D48B3E21E28A57F006F62BD55@xmb-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com>

Kees,

I would like a copy of both documents.  

Also, you may have convinced me to go down and turn on my Drake 2B
(Instead of my R4-C or R390A)

Regards,
Jim Amos N8CAH

-----Original Message-----
From: hbr-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:hbr-bounces@mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of windy10605@juno.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 9:35 PM
To: hbr@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Fw: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info

It's a 100 page Word document which I will distribute via email once I
get a list of names together. You can print it or file it as you wish. I
also have the 80 or so page RSGB Receiver document by G2DAF as a Word
document for those interested. They are both on my CD but occupy too
much space on the web site. They are both great pieces of info to have
if you are working on quality tube receivers. 

Right now, a friend of mine and I are working to improve the Drake 2B
receiver. Triple conversion without the typical string of IF stages. If
you can find one cheap, buy it. I've always thought the 2B was a great
example of a commercial tube type HF receiver of the early 60s timeframe
which is physically compact, sensitive (0.5uV or better), selective
(good permeability tuned passband), simple slide switches, multiple Hi-Z
AVC points, copper plate chassis (there are no "bad grounds" to tube
sockets), screws vs rivets, low power (less than 40W), "low" voltage
(less than 180VDC) and uniquely efficient design (have you seen the
outstanding use of vertical terminal strips ? super simple graticule
adjustment, etc). It also offers the distinct "ease of use" advantage of
bandswitching and crystal converters. Still an excellent design in this
day and age. Maybe some of you have some input on improving that design
?


73 Kees K5BCQ
************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ there is also a
mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
 

Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From windy10605 at juno.com  Thu Jul 28 09:47:01 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Thu Jul 28 09:59:42 2005
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <20050728.085735.2056.0.windy10605@juno.com>

Garey,

It's a "growing CD" and is now up to 535MB for V2.0

73 Kees K5BCQ
From windy10605 at juno.com  Thu Jul 28 10:01:05 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Thu Jul 28 10:16:26 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <20050728.091437.2056.2.windy10605@juno.com>

OK, Jim !!  It's a design worth studying in my opinion.

73 Kees K5BCQ


--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "James Amos (jimamos)" <jimamos@cisco.com>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:39:24 -0400
Subject: RE: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID:
<F1B57D925CE24D48B3E21E28A57F006F62BD55@xmb-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com>

Kees,

I would like a copy of both documents.  

Also, you may have convinced me to go down and turn on my Drake 2B
(Instead of my R4-C or R390A)

Regards,
Jim Amos N8CAH

-----Original Message-----
From: hbr-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:hbr-bounces@mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of windy10605@juno.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 9:35 PM
To: hbr@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Fw: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info

It's a 100 page Word document which I will distribute via email once I
get a list of names together. You can print it or file it as you wish. I
also have the 80 or so page RSGB Receiver document by G2DAF as a Word
document for those interested. They are both on my CD but occupy too
much space on the web site. They are both great pieces of info to have
if you are working on quality tube receivers. 

Right now, a friend of mine and I are working to improve the Drake 2B
receiver. Triple conversion without the typical string of IF stages. If
you can find one cheap, buy it. I've always thought the 2B was a great
example of a commercial tube type HF receiver of the early 60s timeframe
which is physically compact, sensitive (0.5uV or better), selective
(good permeability tuned passband), simple slide switches, multiple Hi-Z
AVC points, copper plate chassis (there are no "bad grounds" to tube
sockets), screws vs rivets, low power (less than 40W), "low" voltage
(less than 180VDC) and uniquely efficient design (have you seen the
outstanding use of vertical terminal strips ? super simple graticule
adjustment, etc). It also offers the distinct "ease of use" advantage of
bandswitching and crystal converters. Still an excellent design in this
day and age. Maybe some of you have some input on improving that design
?


73 Kees K5BCQ
************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ there is also a
mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From daileyservices at qwest.net  Thu Jul 28 16:08:24 2005
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:11:59 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
References: <20050728.091437.2056.2.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <005201c593b0$1c678280$6602a8c0@dailey>

My mentor in Electronics Technician "A" school at Treasure Island (SFRAN),
California, who gave me my Novice test, had a branny-new Drake 2-B (1962)...
It was, and continues to be one of the finest receivers EVER made, and
nothing ever seems to go wrong with them, either.  Alas, they seem to
command premium prices, too.... darn it.

Tom
WA?EAJ
Denver

From windy10605 at juno.com  Thu Jul 28 16:20:33 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:20:56 2005
Subject: Fw: Re: RE: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <20050728.152034.2056.6.windy10605@juno.com>

Do like I did, buy a relatively "high demand" non-working receiver (in my
case a Hallicrafters SX-122) for $100 or less, fix it up, tune it up, and
sell it ......then use the proceeds to buy TWO Drake 2B and 2BQ
combinations.

73 Kees K5BCQ
 
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "TC Dailey" <daileyservices@qwest.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 14:08:24 -0600
Subject: Re: RE: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <005201c593b0$1c678280$6602a8c0@dailey>
References: <20050728.091437.2056.2.windy10605@juno.com>

My mentor in Electronics Technician "A" school at Treasure Island
(SFRAN),
California, who gave me my Novice test, had a branny-new Drake 2-B
(1962)...
It was, and continues to be one of the finest receivers EVER made, and
nothing ever seems to go wrong with them, either.  Alas, they seem to
command premium prices, too.... darn it.

Tom
WA?EAJ
Denver

************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From daileyservices at qwest.net  Thu Jul 28 16:44:00 2005
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:48:06 2005
Subject: [HBR] APC caps & 5-pin coil forms
References: <20050727.204059.1864.5.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <00f101c593b5$1ca890e0$6602a8c0@dailey>

Although it's not a HB receiver, it kinda' looks like one - I just picked up
a "working" Halliscratcher SX-16... WITH the matching speaker..... for 30
bux.  It should give an interesting counterpoint to my restored SX-62A (also
with that HUGE matching speaker w/die-cast metal reflex port).  I still love
my HBR-11 the best, though.  Anybody ever make coils for 30m, 17m, or 12m?
I've been thinking of tinkering with some for 30m, but if the headache work
has already been done, it'd be nice.  Also, I'm sure most of you know, but
for those who don't...

Hammarlund Type "APC" capacitors:

25, 35, 50, 75, 100, 140 mmfd (prices $8 - $12, depending on size) -

--------------

Coil Forms (5-pin)     p/n CF-5     $7.40 each

Available from:  OCEAN STATE ELECS.  www.oselectronics.com

Tom Dailey
WA?EAJ
Denver

From roomberg at ptd.net  Thu Jul 28 16:53:08 2005
From: roomberg at ptd.net (rob)
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:52:06 2005
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver 
Message-ID: <42E945B4.10101@ptd.net>

What is the best receiver for listening to HF SSB and morse code (CW) ?
Is direct conversion better than superhet?
Is tube better than transistor?
Is discrete component beter than IC packages that have complete mixers 
and PLL all packed up real neat on a single cheap?
Is SMD better or worse for building receivers?

What I really want to know is what is the absolute   best way to build a 
SWL receiver for 7 mhz to do ham radio morse code at  7.000 to 7.050 mhz .

A brand new SWL radio can cost over $500 .
I don't really want DC to daylight.... all modes... I just want to know 
about morse code reception.
What is the best way to listen to morsecode on 7.040mhz?
I have had Kenwoods, Icoms, HEATH, MFJ and  rockmites, knightsmites and 
small wonder labs DSW40 rigs
so what I want to know is what is supposed to be the best receiver you 
can use for 7 mhz and if you build it, what parts...SMD, IC...or 
tubes... should be best for pulling weak signals out of the air.


Rob

From gswynar at durham.net  Thu Jul 28 17:02:55 2005
From: gswynar at durham.net (Ed Swynar)
Date: Thu Jul 28 17:02:53 2005
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver 
References: <42E945B4.10101@ptd.net>
Message-ID: <003001c593b7$bcf0c0c0$5f305a45@CompaqS5000>

Hi Rob,

For my $$$, the BEST buy on the market is the Heathkit SB-301 --- preferably
with all three IF filters...

It's stable, sensitive, has 1-KHz resolution, and is easy to work on. Best
of all, they're CHEAP!

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ





----- Original Message -----
From: "rob" <roomberg@ptd.net>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 3:53 PM
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver


> What is the best receiver for listening to HF SSB and morse code (CW) ?
> Is direct conversion better than superhet?
> Is tube better than transistor?
> Is discrete component beter than IC packages that have complete mixers
> and PLL all packed up real neat on a single cheap?
> Is SMD better or worse for building receivers?
>
> What I really want to know is what is the absolute   best way to build a
> SWL receiver for 7 mhz to do ham radio morse code at  7.000 to 7.050 mhz .
>
> A brand new SWL radio can cost over $500 .
> I don't really want DC to daylight.... all modes... I just want to know
> about morse code reception.
> What is the best way to listen to morsecode on 7.040mhz?
> I have had Kenwoods, Icoms, HEATH, MFJ and  rockmites, knightsmites and
> small wonder labs DSW40 rigs
> so what I want to know is what is supposed to be the best receiver you
> can use for 7 mhz and if you build it, what parts...SMD, IC...or
> tubes... should be best for pulling weak signals out of the air.
>
>
> Rob
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>


From daileyservices at qwest.net  Thu Jul 28 17:12:14 2005
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Thu Jul 28 17:15:51 2005
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver 
References: <42E945B4.10101@ptd.net>
Message-ID: <017101c593b9$0787cba0$6602a8c0@dailey>

That, good sir, is a huge question... but as you've stumbled across THE
receiver site for great minds, and talented hands, we would humbly suggest
one of "ours".  Take a look at the webpage, and look at all the pictures -
it's fun, and although it may look a daunting task,.... trust me, most all
of us who have one of these critters, built it ourselves, and back WHEN that
happend, I darned sure wasn't very talented.

I cannot describe the joy you'll feel, when you light up your OWN HBR
receiver, knowing that you made the holes YOURSELF, attached all the bits
and pieces, YOURSELF, wound the coils YOURSELF, and created a thing of
beauty, that NOBODY can say... "Awww, I had one a'them once..."

Tubes generate NO internal noise, as ALL "PN" junctions do, thus tubes ARE
quieter in the noise-floor department.

...and it just gets better from there.

Tom - WA?EAJ

From bear57 at telus.net  Thu Jul 28 17:31:39 2005
From: bear57 at telus.net (Lorne Barber)
Date: Thu Jul 28 17:31:23 2005
Subject: [HBR] APC caps & 5-pin coil forms
References: <20050727.204059.1864.5.windy10605@juno.com>
	<00f101c593b5$1ca890e0$6602a8c0@dailey>
Message-ID: <050101c593bb$bdc30810$d6ebb742@acera2gjrt6tf9>

Tom and the rest of the reflector.
I have picked up some APC's at the water place at a reasonable price. They 
come up from time to time.
Also I  know there was a member of the Glowbugs reflector selling coils at 
approx 1/3 that amount. These are(were) good,used items but perfectly 
useable for our purposes. I managed to get enough for "one last HBR 
project".
Info only.
73
Lorne VE7BOX

> Hammarlund Type "APC" capacitors:
>
> 25, 35, 50, 75, 100, 140 mmfd (prices $8 - $12, depending on size) -
>
> --------------
>
> Coil Forms (5-pin)     p/n CF-5     $7.40 each
>
> Available from:  OCEAN STATE ELECS.  www.oselectronics.com
>
> Tom Dailey
> WA?EAJ
> Denver


From johnmb at nc.rr.com  Fri Jul 29 18:08:19 2005
From: johnmb at nc.rr.com (john)
Date: Thu Jul 28 18:06:23 2005
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver
In-Reply-To: <003001c593b7$bcf0c0c0$5f305a45@CompaqS5000>
References: <42E945B4.10101@ptd.net>
	<003001c593b7$bcf0c0c0$5f305a45@CompaqS5000>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050729180650.02031918@pop-server.nc.rr.com>

I'll second this suggestion.
Easily fixable, tons of part (and help ) available, and darned good rigs 
that can be had in the 100-200 range. Complete stations can be found for 
under $300.

John K5MO

At 05:02 PM 7/28/2005, you wrote:
>Hi Rob,
>
>For my $$$, the BEST buy on the market is the Heathkit SB-301 --- preferably
>with all three IF filters...
>
>It's stable, sensitive, has 1-KHz resolution, and is easy to work on. Best
>of all, they're CHEAP!
>
>~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "rob" <roomberg@ptd.net>
>To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 3:53 PM
>Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver
>
>
> > What is the best receiver for listening to HF SSB and morse code (CW) ?
> > Is direct conversion better than superhet?
> > Is tube better than transistor?
> > Is discrete component beter than IC packages that have complete mixers
> > and PLL all packed up real neat on a single cheap?
> > Is SMD better or worse for building receivers?
> >
> > What I really want to know is what is the absolute   best way to build a
> > SWL receiver for 7 mhz to do ham radio morse code at  7.000 to 7.050 mhz .
> >
> > A brand new SWL radio can cost over $500 .
> > I don't really want DC to daylight.... all modes... I just want to know
> > about morse code reception.
> > What is the best way to listen to morsecode on 7.040mhz?
> > I have had Kenwoods, Icoms, HEATH, MFJ and  rockmites, knightsmites and
> > small wonder labs DSW40 rigs
> > so what I want to know is what is supposed to be the best receiver you
> > can use for 7 mhz and if you build it, what parts...SMD, IC...or
> > tubes... should be best for pulling weak signals out of the air.
> >
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > ************************************
> > Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> > construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> > there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
> >
> >
> > Retrieve reflector archived data via
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> >
>
>
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via 
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date: 7/28/2005



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date: 7/28/2005

From johnmb at nc.rr.com  Fri Jul 29 18:14:01 2005
From: johnmb at nc.rr.com (john)
Date: Thu Jul 28 18:12:01 2005
Subject: [HBR] APC caps & 5-pin coil forms
In-Reply-To: <00f101c593b5$1ca890e0$6602a8c0@dailey>
References: <20050727.204059.1864.5.windy10605@juno.com>
	<00f101c593b5$1ca890e0$6602a8c0@dailey>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050729181239.02035640@pop-server.nc.rr.com>


Shameless plug, but I offer 5 pin forms (NOS Meissner units) that are wound 
for various frequencies, for $3 each. They're vintage bakelite and can take 
quite a bit of heat (an issue with the OSE versions, which I believe, are 
styrene).

John K5MO


At 04:44 PM 7/28/2005, you wrote:
>Although it's not a HB receiver, it kinda' looks like one - I just picked up
>a "working" Halliscratcher SX-16... WITH the matching speaker..... for 30
>bux.  It should give an interesting counterpoint to my restored SX-62A (also
>with that HUGE matching speaker w/die-cast metal reflex port).  I still love
>my HBR-11 the best, though.  Anybody ever make coils for 30m, 17m, or 12m?
>I've been thinking of tinkering with some for 30m, but if the headache work
>has already been done, it'd be nice.  Also, I'm sure most of you know, but
>for those who don't...
>
>Hammarlund Type "APC" capacitors:
>
>25, 35, 50, 75, 100, 140 mmfd (prices $8 - $12, depending on size) -
>
>--------------
>
>Coil Forms (5-pin)     p/n CF-5     $7.40 each
>
>Available from:  OCEAN STATE ELECS.  www.oselectronics.com
>
>Tom Dailey
>WA?EAJ
>Denver
>
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via 
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date: 7/28/2005



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date: 7/28/2005

From k4oah at mindspring.com  Thu Jul 28 18:36:40 2005
From: k4oah at mindspring.com (Garey Barrell)
Date: Thu Jul 28 18:36:23 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
In-Reply-To: <005201c593b0$1c678280$6602a8c0@dailey>
References: <20050728.091437.2056.2.windy10605@juno.com>
	<005201c593b0$1c678280$6602a8c0@dailey>
Message-ID: <42E95DF8.5000907@mindspring.com>

The 2-B is definitely a "milestone" in the development of Ham 
receivers.  I'm  reminded of the demo we used to showcase the stability 
of the Drake 2-B receiver when it came out.  Since it was less than 10% 
of the "volume" of the current receivers, and didn't have a die-cast 
front panel or weigh 50+ pounds, potential buyers were skeptical of it's 
"stability", especially since just about every ad for the last 20 years 
had touted "solid as a rock construction for superior stability", etc.

So we would tune in a nice CW signal, then reach over and lift up the 
front of this little receiver with a couple of fingers, noting how the 
CW note didn't change.  As they were agreeing, (having been used to 
Hallicrafter's receivers where you couldn't walk across the floor in the 
same room without the "boing" effect,) we'd let go and let the receiver 
bang back down onto the desk.  When there was only a slight "boing" or 
none at all, and the CW note was exactly where it had been when we 
started, the jaws dropped.  Some would immediately grab the tuning knob 
to see if it would move, or even if it was "really" the receiver we were 
listening to on the speaker.  Many just bought it on the spot!

73, Garey - K4OAH
Atlanta

Drake C-Line Service Manual
<http://www.k4oah.com> 



TC Dailey wrote:

>My mentor in Electronics Technician "A" school at Treasure Island (SFRAN),
>California, who gave me my Novice test, had a branny-new Drake 2-B (1962)...
>It was, and continues to be one of the finest receivers EVER made, and
>nothing ever seems to go wrong with them, either.  Alas, they seem to
>command premium prices, too.... darn it.
>
>Tom
>WA?EAJ
>Denver
>  
>
From johnmb at nc.rr.com  Thu Jul 28 20:37:39 2005
From: johnmb at nc.rr.com (john)
Date: Thu Jul 28 20:33:40 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
In-Reply-To: <42E95DF8.5000907@mindspring.com>
References: <20050728.091437.2056.2.windy10605@juno.com>
	<005201c593b0$1c678280$6602a8c0@dailey>
	<42E95DF8.5000907@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050728203658.01fb7048@pop-server.nc.rr.com>


Drake gear is the thinking mans Collins!

John K5MO (ducking)


At 06:36 PM 7/28/2005, Garey Barrell wrote:
>The 2-B is definitely a "milestone" in the development of Ham 
>receivers.  I'm  reminded of the demo we used to showcase the stability of 
>the Drake 2-B receiver when it came out.  Since it was less than 10% of 
>the "volume" of the current receivers, and didn't have a die-cast front 
>panel or weigh 50+ pounds, potential buyers were skeptical of it's 
>"stability", especially since just about every ad for the last 20 years 
>had touted "solid as a rock construction for superior stability", etc.
>
>So we would tune in a nice CW signal, then reach over and lift up the 
>front of this little receiver with a couple of fingers, noting how the CW 
>note didn't change.  As they were agreeing, (having been used to 
>Hallicrafter's receivers where you couldn't walk across the floor in the 
>same room without the "boing" effect,) we'd let go and let the receiver 
>bang back down onto the desk.  When there was only a slight "boing" or 
>none at all, and the CW note was exactly where it had been when we 
>started, the jaws dropped.  Some would immediately grab the tuning knob to 
>see if it would move, or even if it was "really" the receiver we were 
>listening to on the speaker.  Many just bought it on the spot!
>
>73, Garey - K4OAH
>Atlanta
>
>Drake C-Line Service Manual
><http://www.k4oah.com>
>
>
>TC Dailey wrote:
>
>>My mentor in Electronics Technician "A" school at Treasure Island (SFRAN),
>>California, who gave me my Novice test, had a branny-new Drake 2-B (1962)...
>>It was, and continues to be one of the finest receivers EVER made, and
>>nothing ever seems to go wrong with them, either.  Alas, they seem to
>>command premium prices, too.... darn it.
>>
>>Tom
>>WA?EAJ
>>Denver
>>
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ there is also a 
>mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via 
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date: 7/28/2005



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date: 7/28/2005

From N2EY at aol.com  Thu Jul 28 22:16:52 2005
From: N2EY at aol.com (N2EY@aol.com)
Date: Thu Jul 28 22:16:44 2005
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver 
Message-ID: <d.4923b874.301aeb94@aol.com>

In a message dated 7/28/05 4:52:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, roomberg@ptd.net 
writes:


> What is the best receiver for listening to HF SSB and morse code (CW) ?
> Is direct conversion better than superhet?
> Is tube better than transistor?
> Is discrete component beter than IC packages that have complete mixers 
> and PLL all packed up real neat on a single cheap?
> Is SMD better or worse for building receivers?
> 
> What I really want to know is what is the absolute   best way to build a 
> SWL receiver for 7 mhz to do ham radio morse code at  7.000 to 7.050 mhz .
> 
> A brand new SWL radio can cost over $500 .
> I don't really want DC to daylight.... all modes... I just want to know 
> about morse code reception.
> What is the best way to listen to morsecode on 7.040mhz?
> I have had Kenwoods, Icoms, HEATH, MFJ and  rockmites, knightsmites and 
> small wonder labs DSW40 rigs
> so what I want to know is what is supposed to be the best receiver you 
> can use for 7 mhz and if you build it, what parts...SMD, IC...or 
> tubes... should be best for pulling weak signals out of the air.
> 

A lot of questions - but before they can be answered, you need to
define what is meant by "best".

In the area of performance measures, there's sensitivity, selectivity,
dynamic range, drift, dial accuracy, tuning rate, spurious responses
and AGC characteristics, to name just a few.

Then there's cost, size, power consumption, maintainability, ease of
repair and maintenance, and other characteristics.

Every design and technology is a compromise - a trade-off. Maximizing
some things results in reductions in others. What's "best" depends on
what tradeoffs *you* prefer.

For example, it is possible to build very sensitive receivers - 0.1 microvolt 
or better for 10 dB signal-to-noise ratio. But such sensitivity is usually 
attained at the cost of dynamic range. And on 7 MHz, with most antennas, that 
much sensitivity is wasted
because the background noise picked up by the antenna is much greater than 
0.1
microvolt.  

One way to answer the questions is to look at the receivers you've used, and 
list
what was wrong with them - where they fell short of the ideal.

73 de Jim, N2EY
From bob at atl.org  Thu Jul 28 22:58:35 2005
From: bob at atl.org (Bob AH7I)
Date: Thu Jul 28 23:00:08 2005
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver 
In-Reply-To: <d.4923b874.301aeb94@aol.com>
References: <d.4923b874.301aeb94@aol.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507282246030.6916@arthur.atl.org>



IMO the best HF receiver for the money, if you already have a computer, is
a quadrature mixer based direct conversion utilizing a CMOS solid state
switch matrix and driven by as stable (in terms of frequency and jitter) a
source as you can find. Put an good passive tuned RF filter in front of
this and a good passive bandpass filter behind it. Add your gain, if
required, after the bandpass filter. Lots of feedback to make it as linear
as you can with the caveat of watching the contributed noise.Follow with a
good (low jitter, enough bits, 2 channel A/D converter. There are some
excellent 24bit 96kHz sound cards in the $200 to $300 range that will do
th trick. Then do the rest in software. Linrad is good and free.

The switch matrix adds no noise and is extremely linear. The passive
filters add no noise, not much loss, and by amplifying after the filters
you have less stuff to mix as a result of any non-linearities in your
amplifier. Lots of bits and low jitter make for minimal noise introduction
in going to digital and once there you don't have to worry abotu noise any
more.

More antenna means more signal at the beginning and less noise(distortion)
adding amplification later.

I'm not a radio engineer or EE, but it just makes sense that minimizing
noise will make a better receiver.

-Bob
From future212 at comcast.net  Thu Jul 28 23:00:32 2005
From: future212 at comcast.net (DW Holtman)
Date: Thu Jul 28 23:00:28 2005
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver 
References: <42E945B4.10101@ptd.net>
Message-ID: <000f01c593e9$afa81b20$61c3b643@dw2q2am1a08eq5>

This might seem like blasphemy on the HBR furum, but here goes. If you are 
looking for a fairly simple very high performance receiver that is optimized 
for one band. Take a look at Direct conversioon phasing receivers. There is 
a ton of info on the net. Google KKB7, Rick Cambell. His design, rivals the 
best Receivers available today, without all of the bells and whistles. I 
have built a couple of them a while back and they really do work. The 
opposite sideband supression is better than virtually all of the comercial 
receivers that you can buy

73's
DW Holtman
WB7SSN

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "rob" <roomberg@ptd.net>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 2:53 PM
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver


> What is the best receiver for listening to HF SSB and morse code (CW) ?
> Is direct conversion better than superhet?
> Is tube better than transistor?
> Is discrete component beter than IC packages that have complete mixers and 
> PLL all packed up real neat on a single cheap?
> Is SMD better or worse for building receivers?
>
> What I really want to know is what is the absolute   best way to build a 
> SWL receiver for 7 mhz to do ham radio morse code at  7.000 to 7.050 mhz .
>
> A brand new SWL radio can cost over $500 .
> I don't really want DC to daylight.... all modes... I just want to know 
> about morse code reception.
> What is the best way to listen to morsecode on 7.040mhz?
> I have had Kenwoods, Icoms, HEATH, MFJ and  rockmites, knightsmites and 
> small wonder labs DSW40 rigs
> so what I want to know is what is supposed to be the best receiver you can 
> use for 7 mhz and if you build it, what parts...SMD, IC...or tubes... 
> should be best for pulling weak signals out of the air.
>
>
> Rob
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ there is also a 
> mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via 
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
> 


From roomberg at ptd.net  Fri Jul 29 03:06:23 2005
From: roomberg at ptd.net (rob)
Date: Fri Jul 29 03:05:36 2005
Subject: [HBR] THE BEST receiver 
Message-ID: <42E9D56F.2000406@ptd.net>

Ok folks,
Thanks for the information.
I was not looking for a specific rig as much as I was looking for a 
specific technology.
The reason for asking YOU guys, the members of this list was that you 
all have one reason or another
to want to build HBR rigs and many of you are technicians with radio 
background.


I am not comparing rigs as BEST because it has ALL bands or all modes.
Money is not an issue.

I specificly am interested in learning what is the best  40 meter CW  
circuit to pull weak
signals out of the noise using a modest 40 meter dipole antenna.

I live in the mountains .... at the bottom of a canyon... so I want to 
know how to do better than what I
have now.... which is storebought... KENWOOD TS570... which does not 
impress me at all.


One response I got said :

Tubes generate NO internal noise, as ALL "PN" junctions do, thus tubes ARE
quieter in the noise-floor department.

So that would encourage me to lean toward tube circuits.

Then this advice confused me a bit:
He said that the Drake will bring signals out of the mud that the best DSP would not.
Is the Drake 2b a superhet or what?
I want to know what kind of circuit is the best.. not a rig model to buy.
Then in the YOU WANT NEW he said something but I don't know what at all.
Sorry it went over my head.... but I did not find anything in that section that said anything that I could buy
from mouser. 
Can this be specified as parts numbers for me to get?
 If it costs $500 for something.... can you say what?

========================================================================================================
You want old...

For CW My hands down favorite is Drake 2B 2BQ combo.
Good RF preselector.
Stable.
Q-mult(regeneration at 50KC IF) will bring signals out of the mud that the
best DSP would be hard pressed to deal with.
Look hard, they still turn up for < $100

For SSB on ham bands. Hallicrafters SX-117 with product detector blows
away 75A4. Probably spend $150 after a lot of looking

You want new?

Good RF preselector.
Stable LO, buy one of those analog devices based kits.
switching mixer (4 or 8 pole SPST solid state switch)
24 bit 96kHz sound card
linrad software (it's free, search linrad with google)
Set you back about $500 if you already have the computer.
You can watch moonbounce CW with linrad and a modest antenna-front end.

73
-Bob
AH7I
=================================================================================================================
Every design and technology is a compromise - a trade-off. Maximizing
some things results in reductions in others. What's "best" depends on
what tradeoffs *you* prefer.

For example, it is possible to build very sensitive receivers - 0.1 microvolt 
or better for 10 dB signal-to-noise ratio. But such sensitivity is usually 
attained at the cost of dynamic range. And on 7 MHz, with most antennas, that 
much sensitivity is wasted
because the background noise picked up by the antenna is much greater than 
0.1
microvolt.  
AH7I
=================================================================================================================
Take a look at Direct conversioon phasing receivers. There is 
a ton of info on the net. Google KKB7


From davidjw at cinci.rr.com  Fri Jul 29 06:10:24 2005
From: davidjw at cinci.rr.com (David J Windisch)
Date: Fri Jul 29 06:09:51 2005
Subject: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
References: <42E9D56F.2000406@ptd.net>
Message-ID: <001801c59425$bc9fb090$dc278545@david7fhk3scab>

Okay, Rob:

For openers, avoid shortcuts.

You need to find out whether the signals you want to hear, get to your 
canyon-bottom.  You know, like in fishing, or hunting, or sniping.  What 
ever.

Get a receive multicoupler.  Put bunches of antenna-candidates on one side, 
and receiver-candidates on the other.

Get on  some DX-spotting sites, and look for spots from your area.  Listen, 
and find out what gets to your canyon-bottom.

Impressive and specific technologies will probably become evident, as your 
listening experience grows.

Hth.  73,  Dave, N3HE


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "rob" <roomberg@ptd.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 3:06 AM
Subject: [HBR] THE BEST receiver


> Ok folks,
> Thanks for the information.
> I was not looking for a specific rig as much as I was looking for a 
> specific technology.
SNIP
> I am not comparing rigs as BEST because it has ALL bands or all modes.
> Money is not an issue.
>
SNIP
> I live in the mountains .... at the bottom of a canyon... so I want to 
> know how to do better than what I
> have now.... which is storebought... KENWOOD TS570... which does not 
> impress me at all.
>
SNIP 

From bob at atl.org  Fri Jul 29 06:37:20 2005
From: bob at atl.org (Bob AH7I)
Date: Fri Jul 29 06:38:55 2005
Subject: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
In-Reply-To: <001801c59425$bc9fb090$dc278545@david7fhk3scab>
References: <42E9D56F.2000406@ptd.net>
	<001801c59425$bc9fb090$dc278545@david7fhk3scab>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507290616500.15862@arthur.atl.org>

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, David J Windisch wrote:

> Okay, Rob:
>
> For openers, avoid shortcuts.
>
> You need to find out whether the signals you want to hear, get to your
> canyon-bottom.  You know, like in fishing, or hunting, or sniping.  What
> ever.
>

Yep. Rob, there you go. You need signals before a receiver is going to
help.  Our place in Honolulu is up a valley. 40m sucks. 40CW is my
favorite band.  What to do? I take the rig to the beach, set up the
vertical, and I can hear the world. Your valley may be a problem in
hearing and getting a signal out as too. If it's not there, no RX in the
world will help and if they don't get in, they ain't gonna get out.

You really don't need much RX on 40CW unless you're trying to dig out a
really weak station through noise from equiatorial thunderstorms or there
is a hugw xontest in progress and you're still trying for the weak guys.
Most of the time anything I can hear on my best CW RX I can also hear on
the old 1930's National SW-3 regenerative RX. I'm talking about 40m here.

What are you using for an antenna? You won't hear much DX with it, but you
should hear a lot more signals with an antenna that favors signals from
high angles. Something set for best low angle, a DX antenna, may well be
pretty deaf there in your valley.

My Atlanta place is much better for 40DX than the valley in Hawaii. In
Atlanta I am on a ridge. Some of the highest land around. I have a
vertical plane loop antenna and can work guys in Japan that I can't even
hear from the Hawaii valley. Have worked China, Afghanistan, Australia,
India, South Africa, all over the world from the Atlanta place on 40CW
with 50W out and the loop. The only better DX locations I've lived have
been in the South Pacific and on the beach. Heck, I worked Africa on 160
CW from the middle of the South Pacific with less than 30W to a full size
vertical in the middle of a salt marsh on a small atoll.

Dave's right. Find some signals and then worry about a better RX...

73,
-Bob
From N2EY at aol.com  Fri Jul 29 07:42:22 2005
From: N2EY at aol.com (N2EY@aol.com)
Date: Fri Jul 29 07:42:16 2005
Subject: [HBR] THE BEST receiver 
Message-ID: <15c.5540cc5d.301b701e@aol.com>

In a message dated 7/29/05 3:06:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, roomberg@ptd.net 
writes:

> I was not looking for a specific rig as much as I was looking for a 
> specific technology.

There isn't one. There's no magic bullet that's lots better than all the 
rest.

> 
> 
> I am not comparing rigs as BEST because it has ALL bands or all modes.
> Money is not an issue.
> 
> I specificly am interested in learning what is the best  40 meter CW  
> circuit to pull weak
> signals out of the noise using a modest 40 meter dipole antenna.

Again - there isn't one. "Best" covers a lot of ground, such as "what sort of 
noise?"

> 
> I live in the mountains .... at the bottom of a canyon... so I want to 
> know how to do better than what I
> have now.... which is storebought... KENWOOD TS570... which does not 
> impress me at all.
> 

Here's a very simple test:

Tune the receiver to a quiet spot on the band - one with no signals. 

Turn the AGC off.

Adjust the selectivity to what you normally use for CW reception.

Turn the gain up so the background noise is a loud roar in the speaker.

Now disconnect the antenna from the receiver.

Did the roar go down, or disappear? If so, then your receiver has all the
gain and sensitivity that can be used in your location with that antenna.

No receiver can pick out what the antenna doesn't pick up. 

> 
> One response I got said :
> 
> Tubes generate NO internal noise, as ALL "PN" junctions do, thus tubes ARE
> quieter in the noise-floor department.
> 

That is simply not true. Tubes make internal noise, same as semiconductors.
How much noise a particular design makes is determined by many factors, and
one cannot usually make blanket statements about one technology being quieter 
than another.
> 
> 
> Then this advice confused me a bit:
> He said that the Drake will bring signals out of the mud that the best DSP 
> would not.

Sometimes. Not all the time, 

> Is the Drake 2b a superhet or what?

It's a triple conversion superhet from 40+ years ago. That's not important, 
however. The Drake 2-B is a very good receiver, but not the absolute best, IMO. 


It's important to differentiate between "best for the money" or "best I have 
used" and "absolute best there is".


> I want to know what kind of circuit is the best.. not a rig model to buy.

There isn't one. 

> 
> =================================================================================================================
> Every design and technology is a compromise - a trade-off. Maximizing
> some things results in reductions in others. What's "best" depends on
> what tradeoffs *you* prefer.
> 
> For example, it is possible to build very sensitive receivers - 0.1 
> microvolt 
> or better for 10 dB signal-to-noise ratio. But such sensitivity is usually 
> attained at the cost of dynamic range. And on 7 MHz, with most antennas, 
> that 
> much sensitivity is wasted
> because the background noise picked up by the antenna is much greater than 
> 0.1
> microvolt.  
> 

I wrote the above. 

Perform the simple test I mentioned above. If the noise goes down 
significantly or disappears, your receiver has all the sensitivity that can be used at 
that location with the specific antenna.

73 de Jim, N2EY
From windy10605 at juno.com  Fri Jul 29 09:36:32 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Fri Jul 29 09:48:42 2005
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver
Message-ID: <20050729.084640.1708.1.windy10605@juno.com>

I have to agree with Bob on "today's best receiver". Gerald Youngblood,
from Flex Radio lives right down the street and many of the local guys
have spent much time at the Denny's figuring out solutions. We also have
Dan Taloe coming to the QRP session at Austin Summerfest next week
in addition to the usual Flex Radio presentation. The military is also
very interested because you don't require several radios, just one and
change the software. He's way behind on production. And the "biggie", you
have FREE software development from a worldwide software expertise pool
(because of the Internet). Talk about FRU "Full/FREE Resource
Utilization".  

But I sure to like the radios that light up. On another subject, I
finally got my B&K 747 tube checker working again after it fell onto the
floor. This is a solid state (kinda funny) mutual transconductance tube
tester. Now, I was figuring mechanical impact, mechanical problem and
went over it looking for something broken time and time again. I
remembered it was "ON" when it fell .......took out the FET. Apparently
something electrical happened on impact which the FET didn't like.

73 Kees K5BCQ


--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bob AH7I <bob@atl.org>
To: hbr@mailman.qth.net
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:58:35 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507282246030.6916@arthur.atl.org>
References: <d.4923b874.301aeb94@aol.com>



IMO the best HF receiver for the money, if you already have a computer,
is
a quadrature mixer based direct conversion utilizing a CMOS solid state
switch matrix and driven by as stable (in terms of frequency and jitter)
a
source as you can find. Put an good passive tuned RF filter in front of
this and a good passive bandpass filter behind it. Add your gain, if
required, after the bandpass filter. Lots of feedback to make it as
linear
as you can with the caveat of watching the contributed noise.Follow with
a
good (low jitter, enough bits, 2 channel A/D converter. There are some
excellent 24bit 96kHz sound cards in the $200 to $300 range that will do
th trick. Then do the rest in software. Linrad is good and free.

The switch matrix adds no noise and is extremely linear. The passive
filters add no noise, not much loss, and by amplifying after the filters
you have less stuff to mix as a result of any non-linearities in your
amplifier. Lots of bits and low jitter make for minimal noise
introduction
in going to digital and once there you don't have to worry abotu noise
any
more.

More antenna means more signal at the beginning and less
noise(distortion)
adding amplification later.

I'm not a radio engineer or EE, but it just makes sense that minimizing
noise will make a better receiver.

-Bob
************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From windy10605 at juno.com  Fri Jul 29 09:43:10 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Fri Jul 29 09:48:42 2005
Subject: Fw: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
Message-ID: <20050729.084640.1708.2.windy10605@juno.com>

>I live in the mountains .... at the bottom of a canyon...  

Rob, there is your biggest problem. I would focus on the antenna system
as high as possible. If it's not too far, even ladder line strung for
very long distances works OK.

73 Kees K5BCQ
From ianmwilson at earthlink.net  Fri Jul 29 10:25:51 2005
From: ianmwilson at earthlink.net (Ian Wilson)
Date: Fri Jul 29 10:26:18 2005
Subject: [HBR] THE BEST receiver 
In-Reply-To: <42E9D56F.2000406@ptd.net>
Message-ID: <001001c59449$738ed0b0$6902a8c0@TrabucoIan>

Tubes, like all other physical parts, generate thermal noise.
Additionally, multigrid tubes like pentagrids generate 'partition' noise
(caused by the random division of the electron flow between candidate
targets).

73, ian K3IMW

> 
> Tubes generate NO internal noise, as ALL "PN" junctions do, thus tubes
ARE
> quieter in the noise-floor department.
> 


From windy10605 at juno.com  Fri Jul 29 11:08:31 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Fri Jul 29 11:12:21 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
Message-ID: <20050729.101025.1708.6.windy10605@juno.com>

Yep, that brings up another point ....mixers. I've seen many articles on
how much better Pullen mixers are from a noise standpoint. I think this
is basically because it's made up from 2 triodes which would make it more
quiet ....HOWEVER, the gain you see is much less than that of a
Pentode/Pentagrid and by the time you add another stage to equal the
gain, the total noise introduced may be back to the same level ??

73 Kees K5BCQ

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson@earthlink.net>
To: "'HBR Receiver List'" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:25:51 -0700
Subject: RE: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
Message-ID: <001001c59449$738ed0b0$6902a8c0@trabucoian>

Tubes, like all other physical parts, generate thermal noise.
Additionally, multigrid tubes like pentagrids generate 'partition' noise
(caused by the random division of the electron flow between candidate
targets).

73, ian K3IMW

> 
> Tubes generate NO internal noise, as ALL "PN" junctions do, thus tubes
ARE
> quieter in the noise-floor department.
> 


************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From bob at atl.org  Fri Jul 29 11:21:05 2005
From: bob at atl.org (Bob AH7I)
Date: Fri Jul 29 11:23:05 2005
Subject: Fw: RE: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
In-Reply-To: <20050729.101025.1708.6.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20050729.101025.1708.6.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507291114480.24785@arthur.atl.org>


Pullen is good because of linearity.
Low distortion noise.
On 40m you really don't need much gain because of background noise.

Any CW signal copiable on the fanciest commercial RX out there, I can copy
on my National SW-3. Provided the band isn't too crowded with signals.
These days, unless there is a contest, that's the way it usually is.

Heck, I can copy most stuff on an el-cheap-o NE602 based single IC
RX from ramsey at $9.95 hamfest special price.

RX are kind of like cars or motorbikes. All will do the job of getting you
around if operating as they should. The rest is all optimization and fine
tuning for specific performance...

73,
-bob


On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 windy10605@juno.com wrote:

> Yep, that brings up another point ....mixers. I've seen many articles on
> how much better Pullen mixers are from a noise standpoint. I think this
> is basically because it's made up from 2 triodes which would make it more
> quiet ....HOWEVER, the gain you see is much less than that of a
> Pentode/Pentagrid and by the time you add another stage to equal the
> gain, the total noise introduced may be back to the same level ??
>
> 73 Kees K5BCQ
>
> --------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson@earthlink.net>
> To: "'HBR Receiver List'" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
> Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:25:51 -0700
> Subject: RE: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
> Message-ID: <001001c59449$738ed0b0$6902a8c0@trabucoian>
>
> Tubes, like all other physical parts, generate thermal noise.
> Additionally, multigrid tubes like pentagrids generate 'partition' noise
> (caused by the random division of the electron flow between candidate
> targets).
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
>
> >
> > Tubes generate NO internal noise, as ALL "PN" junctions do, thus tubes
> ARE
> > quieter in the noise-floor department.
> >
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
From daileyservices at qwest.net  Fri Jul 29 11:56:54 2005
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Fri Jul 29 12:00:38 2005
Subject: [HBR] what is the BEST receiver 
References: <42E945B4.10101@ptd.net>
	<000f01c593e9$afa81b20$61c3b643@dw2q2am1a08eq5>
Message-ID: <007201c59456$2456e520$6602a8c0@dailey>

I have to agree with DW... I recall my original Heathkit HW-7; that sucker
heard stuff my "big radios" couldn't even detect.  Matter-of-fact, it was
frustrating, as you could hear folks, that you couldn't possibly work.
Without the protection cap. across the FET, it was even MORE astounding.

Tom - WA?EAJ


> This might seem like blasphemy on the HBR furum, but here goes. If you are
> looking for a fairly simple very high performance receiver that is
optimized
> for one band. Take a look at Direct conversioon phasing receivers.
> 73's
> DW Holtman
> WB7SSN

From windy10605 at juno.com  Fri Jul 29 19:39:48 2005
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Fri Jul 29 19:42:40 2005
Subject: Fw: Re: Fw: RE: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
Message-ID: <20050729.183948.1708.20.windy10605@juno.com>

Yes, but the computer defined radios (not computer controlled) can go so
much further by analyzing the noise and just removing some/most of that,
allowing you to hear signals which, to the human ear, are buried in the
noise level. It's the computer analysis and correction of the signal
content that can't be duplicated with analog hardware. We had some guys
at the last club meeting talking about new HP analyzers ($60K++ ....
I don't think anyone ran out to buy one) With the high speed computer
analysis you can actually see the "signatures" of different brands of
radio equipment and different brands of microphones. Like the rifling on
a slug. Amazing capabilities, not real compact for our use, though and
it's still evolving. The cool thing is that you don't have a dead end
radio ....just load new signal algorithm software and place a lot of
attention on the tuned frontend to the high quality sound card used. 

73 Kees K5BCQ 


--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bob AH7I <bob@atl.org>
To: HBR Receiver List <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:21:05 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Fw: RE: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507291114480.24785@arthur.atl.org>
References: <20050729.101025.1708.6.windy10605@juno.com>


Pullen is good because of linearity.
Low distortion noise.
On 40m you really don't need much gain because of background noise.

Any CW signal copiable on the fanciest commercial RX out there, I can
copy
on my National SW-3. Provided the band isn't too crowded with signals.
These days, unless there is a contest, that's the way it usually is.

Heck, I can copy most stuff on an el-cheap-o NE602 based single IC
RX from ramsey at $9.95 hamfest special price.

RX are kind of like cars or motorbikes. All will do the job of getting
you
around if operating as they should. The rest is all optimization and fine
tuning for specific performance...

73,
-bob


On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 windy10605@juno.com wrote:

> Yep, that brings up another point ....mixers. I've seen many articles
on
> how much better Pullen mixers are from a noise standpoint. I think this
> is basically because it's made up from 2 triodes which would make it
more
> quiet ....HOWEVER, the gain you see is much less than that of a
> Pentode/Pentagrid and by the time you add another stage to equal the
> gain, the total noise introduced may be back to the same level ??
>
> 73 Kees K5BCQ
>
> --------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson@earthlink.net>
> To: "'HBR Receiver List'" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
> Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:25:51 -0700
> Subject: RE: [HBR] THE BEST receiver
> Message-ID: <001001c59449$738ed0b0$6902a8c0@trabucoian>
>
> Tubes, like all other physical parts, generate thermal noise.
> Additionally, multigrid tubes like pentagrids generate 'partition'
noise
> (caused by the random division of the electron flow between candidate
> targets).
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
>
> >
> > Tubes generate NO internal noise, as ALL "PN" junctions do, thus
tubes
> ARE
> > quieter in the noise-floor department.
> >
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From mjanis at ptd.net  Fri Jul 29 19:49:40 2005
From: mjanis at ptd.net (Michael Janis)
Date: Fri Jul 29 19:49:04 2005
Subject: [HBR] IF STRIPS
Message-ID: <CMEPLNHIIHGJCEHPONANKEFGCCAA.mjanis@ptd.net>

Hi Tom
Did you ever send out those IF strips you had. We spoke about it a few
months ago.
Mike
KE3OQ


From daileyservices at qwest.net  Sat Jul 30 01:54:06 2005
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Sat Jul 30 01:57:57 2005
Subject: [HBR] IF STRIPS
References: <CMEPLNHIIHGJCEHPONANKEFGCCAA.mjanis@ptd.net>
Message-ID: <007601c594cb$19674f40$6602a8c0@dailey>

No, I didn't... mea culpa

But... I didn't sell 'em to anybody else, either.

There are 2 on a module... I'm not sure of the difference, but obviously,
one is an input, the other an output, so thats actually a good thing.  I
don't know what the tube was, in between the cans, but who cares.  I'll keep
a few, but will sell the rest to you... lemme' figure out how many I have
out there.  Originally, these were part of an electronics course, and you
could build stuff with the various modules.

So... you're in Nazer., PA, huh?

Tom

From roomberg at ptd.net  Sat Jul 30 16:16:34 2005
From: roomberg at ptd.net (rob)
Date: Sat Jul 30 16:16:24 2005
Subject: [HBR] direct conversion phasing the same as binaural
Message-ID: <42EBE022.3000508@ptd.net>

Speaking of computer defined radios.......
do you home brew a receiver or is computer defined radios strictly done 
with a storebought receiver?

If anyone has ever played with PSK31 and listened to the receiving 
signals that were real weak, you
can barely detect there is something out there with your ear, yet a 
solid train of text goes streaming
by on the screen. I can see how the sound card digital signal processing 
can make a great detection
filter.
Is there any receiver projects that use the PC as a DSP filter and 
produce AUDBILE output on the PC speakers
that you get to hear for yourself, not just make a visual display to 
detect weak signals.
I recall EME software that showed detecting weak signals. I want to hear 
my radio , not see it.... my vision is impaired.

Someone suggested direct conversion phasing RX.
Is there an actual rig kit that can be bought that has that technology 
and is that the same thing as
doing the binaural audio project where you take a mono input and get 
stereo output that has greater
CW clarity?
Has anyone actually tried this binaural project?
www.arsqrp.com/ars/pages/back_issues/2001_text/0501_text/street.html

From N2EY at aol.com  Sun Jul 31 07:39:52 2005
From: N2EY at aol.com (N2EY@aol.com)
Date: Sun Jul 31 07:40:03 2005
Subject: Fw: Fw: RE: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <29.783c37c2.301e1288@aol.com>

In a message dated 7/27/05 9:36:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
windy10605@juno.com writes:


> It's a 100 page Word document which I will distribute via email once I
> get a list of names together. You can print it or file it as you wish. I
> also have the 80 or so page RSGB Receiver document by G2DAF as a Word
> document for those interested. 

If I'm not too late, I'd love to have these!

73 de Jim, N2EY
From Ejparagi at aol.com  Sun Jul 31 23:13:46 2005
From: Ejparagi at aol.com (Ejparagi@aol.com)
Date: Sun Jul 31 23:14:04 2005
Subject: [HBR] Restoration info
Message-ID: <45.2d3c4254.301eed6a@aol.com>

Kees,

I would like to have both the "Restoration of Valved HF Communications 
Receivers and the 80 page G2DAF Receiver Article if you can send them to me.  

I have V1.0 of your HBR Receiver data.  I noticed in one of your recent 
e-mails that both receiver articles I just mentioned are in V2.0.  How much is that 
CD going for?

Ed
WB9RMA

PS-  I won't see your response until Friday.
