Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19613 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2001 18:16:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO warrior-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 25 Apr 2001 18:16:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 10154 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2001 18:16:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior with SMTP; 25 Apr 2001 18:16:05 -0000 X-Priority: 3 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14sTfc-00018V-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 19:05:44 +0100 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from posti.mesta.net ([195.197.53.227] helo=kauha.saunalahti.fi) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14sTfb-00018P-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 19:05:43 +0100 Received: from pmk2 (DXXVI.tdyn.saunalahti.fi [195.197.80.26]) by kauha.saunalahti.fi (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id f3PI5U316390 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:05:30 +0300 (EEST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 From: "Paul Keinanen" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Pre-amps. Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:06:02 +0300 Message-ID: References: <001501c0cce5$fde69ca0$4527893e@g3aqc> <3.0.1.16.20010425094349.309747e8@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> In-reply-to: <3.0.1.16.20010425094349.309747e8@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 09:43:49, Rik Strobbe wrote: >Hello Laurie, > >In most circumstances SNR will be determined by the 'band noise' (QRM - >QRN), so the noise figure of a pre-amp won't matter too much (anything >below 10dB should be fine). But, unless you have a very small antenna in >combination with a very 'deaf' receiver a pre-amp won't be of any use, it >will just crick-up the S-meter reading but will not improve readability of >a signal. > >I did some tests woith pre-amps and found out that most simple designs have >a too poor IM behaviour and make things worse instead of better. If I would >design one I would primarily aim at a high IM rejection and don't worry too >much about noise figure or gain. >If you want to use one of the monolithic amps from Mini-Circuits I would go >for something better than a MAR-6, that one has the worst IM behaviour of all. >To compare : > >type gain (dB) noise fig. (dB) 3rd order IP (dBm) >MAR-6 20 3 +15 >MAR-8 33 3 +27 >MAR-4 8 4 +26 >MAR-3 13 6 +23 >ERA-1 12 7 +26 >ERA-2 16 6 +27 >ERA-3 22 5 +23 > >Personnaly I wouldn't recommend the ERA-8 as it tends to be unstable in non >resistive loads, but I would go for a ERA-2. Mini-Circuits does not seem to publish noise figures for low frequencies (below 100 MHz). However, in general, it is not a good idea to use microwave transistors for very low frequencies, since the corner frequency for the 1/f noise can be quite high. In normal transistors, the corner frequency for 1/f noise is in the lower audio frequencies, but watch out for 1/f noise in VLF and LF frequencies when using microwave transistors. Paul OH3LWR