[HBR] Blog post about HBR receivers

[Kees & Sandy]

I would be very interested in Pullen Mixer results. I've heard it discussed and discussed but no data thus far.
73 Kees K5BCQ

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Peter Bertini <radioconnection at gmail.com>
To: HBR Receiver List <hbr at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [HBR] Blog post about HBR receivers
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:11:43 -0400

I subscribe to the belief that the HBRs were intended to be a work in
progress. For my own effort I'll be adding a few sets of the half-lattice
xtal filters (1682kHz) recovered from three HR-10 Heathkit donors for a
six-pole filter at the first IF.  I'm also considering a
6GM6 RFA,  6ES8 Pullen mixer, and 6EJ7s in the IF stages.  It would be
interesting to take the designs several years into the future, when still
retaining most of the mechanical details outlined in the original series.
My only hangup on getting started on a firm design was use of the second LO
harmonic for the first mixer on the higher hambands; I'm not sure if I'll
have good LO injection levels for the Pullen mixer,  or perhaps a balanced
mixer.

Pete
Pete

On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:03 PM, <LeeCraner at aol.com> wrote:

> Since my HBR-16 was one of the receivers featured in the article referenced
>  in the blog, I guess I should weigh in here.
>
> HBR's are dated, they are 50 year old designs.  But that is the point
> isn't it?  We subscribe to this reflector because we enjoy owning,
>  operating,
> restoring, dream of building, etc. something from the past.  And  when we
> operate those dated receivers, not only have the pride of construction
>  that
> was previously and correctly mentioned, we have a receiver that is still
> competitive to modern designs.  Sure my HBR-16 drifts a bit.  So do  all
> non
> synthesized receivers, tubed or solid state.  It hears just as well  as my
> Drake R-7A, and for casual listening, I prefer the wider audio of the  HBR.
>
> To be fair to the author of the blog, it would appear that he isn't just an
>  appliance operator; in another post he made on his site, he has
> constructed  at least one, albeit solid state, receiver.  But he misses the
> point on
> the  worth of the HBR design.  Ted Crosby's goal was to design a receiver
> that any Tom, Dick or Harry (his words) could duplicate with modest means
> and
> ability, and compete with the best commercial receivers of the  day.  He
> succeeded quite admirably, I would say.  And we who  subscribe to this
> reflector continue to enjoy his efforts.
>
> 73
> Lee WB6SSW
> ______________________________________________________________
> HBR mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:HBR at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
______________________________________________________________
HBR mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:HBR at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html