Envelope-to: dave@picks.force9.co.uk
Delivery-date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:28:35 +0100
Received: by pih-mxcore11.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Do7WM-0005sx-TA
for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:28:35 +0100
Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20])
by pih-mxcore11.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Do7WM-0005sW-Oo
for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:28:34 +0100
Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14)
id 1Do7Vp-00076U-8V
for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:28:01 +0100
Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net)
by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14)
id 1Do7Vo-00076L-S7
for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:28:00 +0100
Received: from mta204-rme.xtra.co.nz ([210.86.15.147])
by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.51)
id 1Do7Wv-0000nz-0w
for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:29:11 +0100
Received: from mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz ([210.86.15.240])
by mta204-rme.xtra.co.nz with ESMTP
id <20050630222741.EVDR23939.mta204-rme.xtra.co.nz@mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz>
for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>;
Fri, 1 Jul 2005 10:27:41 +1200
Received: from bob2l2u6k2n1g3 ([210.86.94.100]) by mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz
with SMTP
id <20050630222741.BHNN4411.mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz@bob2l2u6k2n1g3>
for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>;
Fri, 1 Jul 2005 10:27:41 +1200
Message-ID: <002201c57dc2$f73302d0$e801a8c0@bob2l2u6k2n1g3>
From: "Vernall" <vernall@xtra.co.nz>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <31811550.1120168498528.JavaMail.www@wwinf3203>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 10:23:16 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Subject: Re: Re: LF: 756 PRO III on LF?
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
X-PN-SpamFiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00)
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Steve and others,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To add to the reports of Icom receiving
characteristics, my ''756 Pro2 shows the increasing noise on the
bandscope below about 200 kHz but it is not obvious in the receiver channel
(the bandscope is a separate fixed gain receiver and visual display, the
receiver path has AGC and filter selection, etc, but both use the same
conversion oscillator that does the main tuning and thus gives tracking of the
bandscope). Some account would need to be taken of a droop
in response at lower frequencies of the front end RF transformers, and I
understand this is less in the Pro3 than the Pro2. It would need some
SINAD tests to show if there is a increasing "phase noise" penalty with tuning
lower on LF.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>My receiver of choice for LF is a TS-850, and
while it too has some droop with RF response across LF, the external
QRN is still the dominant noise source.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>73, Bob ZL2CA</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>