[R-390] Best approach for SSB mod on R-390A

[Cecil Acuff]

Hi Don,

I guess many of us are just not as demanding...and I approached this from 
the perspective that it is the best of what is commercially available at the 
moment.  There's no question that a better box is within the realm of design 
but nobody has stepped forward with one that they are willing to build or 
kit for the receiver enthusiast.  Even most AM Sync detectors included in 
commercially available receivers are lacking in performance.  The Drake R8B 
being one of the best...but it's not in production.  The Icom R-75 is a good 
radio but the AM Sync detector is flawed right out of the gate...and with 
mods barely approaches the Drake.  That said using most of these radio's for 
IF/Detector/Audio sections for the R-390 series comes with the limitations 
contained in the radio selected.   They all cost as much or more, new or 
used than the SE-3.  But that said they are all better performers at AM Sync 
detection and SSB then the R-390 alone...or even with the simple mods like 
the two diode deal and or AGC mods.

At least that's my oppinion...

Hope you all had a Merry Christmas and the next week off..HA!

Cecil...
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "2002tii" <bmw2002tii at nerdshack.com>
To: <r-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 10:51 PM
Subject: Re: [R-390] Best approach for SSB mod on R-390A


> Regarding my comments about the SE-3, Cecil wrote:
>
>>that is not at all the experience I have seen nor heard from a local
>>that used one for a very long time.
>
> All the ones I've seen perform similarly.  Some folks may have
> tighter temperature control in their shacks than I do, so the lack of
> temperature compensation may not be a practical problem for some
> users.  However, the need for manual guidance (intolerable in a PLL
> demodulator, IMO) is no secret -- it is described on the
> manufacturer's web site.
>
> I've designed and built more than a few different PLL detectors over
> the last 30 years, and the worst of the bunch performed a lot
> better.  There are also commercial designs that perform well.  I
> think the folks who sing the SE-3s praises do so simply because they
> haven't used a PLL detector that works as one could (and
> should).  Horse-drawn buggies must seem really fast to someone who
> hasn't ever seen a car.  If an SE-3 fills someone's needs, fine -- 
> but it is far from the best that can be done, and the price is
> outlandish (IMO) in light of this shortfall.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Don
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> R-390 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:R-390 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>