Return-Path: Received: (qmail 90184 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2004 00:02:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore02.plus.net) (192.168.71.3) by ptb-mailstore01.plus.net with SMTP; 17 Sep 2004 00:02:34 -0000 Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore02.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1C86Ff-0009Ji-KA for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:05:24 +0100 Received: from [192.168.67.3] (helo=ptb-mxcore03.plus.net) by ptb-spamcore02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1C86Ff-0009Jf-HX for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:05:23 +0100 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1C86Cw-000EjC-1A for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:02:34 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1C86BC-0007sq-MM for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:00:46 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1C86BC-0007sh-A7 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:00:46 +0100 Received: from imo-m25.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.6]) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1C86B8-0001YD-R3 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:00:46 +0100 Received: from G4gvw@aol.com by imo-m25.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.7.) id l.9e.14d8daa9 (4196) for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 20:00:31 -0400 (EDT) From: G4gvw@aol.com Message-ID: <9e.14d8daa9.2e7b831f@aol.com> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 20:00:31 EDT To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5003 X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: domain of aol.com designates 64.12.137.6 as permitted sender X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=no,HTML_20_30=0.474,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,NO_REAL_NAME=0.285,TW_GV=0.077 Subject: Re: LF: SL6440 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 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-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet SpamCORE (v3.00) Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit

Although I have not used the device, I am pleased that Dick is another who believes in selective filtering in rx front ends. This "modern" trend towards broadband/octave filters in the per-mixer stages of receivers I have always, instinctively, shied away from. It has always seemed logical to me that the ideal situation for any mixer device is that it is presented with the minimum number of signals with which to deal viz the local oscillator (low noise, stable, undistorted) and the wanted signal (ideally stripped of all unwanted "other noise" by selective filtering). Perhaps the ultimate aim is a rx in which true " single signal" processing is achieved from antenna to demodulated output in a single step (and yes! I have heard of DC receivers but yeucccch!)

g4gvw