Return-Path: Received: (qmail 37349 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2004 19:27:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore01.plus.net) (192.168.71.1) by ptb-mailstore02.plus.net with SMTP; 17 Sep 2004 19:27:11 -0000 Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1C8OWZ-000Oi1-JN for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:36:04 +0100 Received: from [192.168.67.3] (helo=ptb-mxcore03.plus.net) by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1C8OWZ-000Ohy-GX for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:36:03 +0100 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1C8ONy-000Ccr-Hw for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:27:10 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1C8ONh-00014b-UU for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:26:53 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1C8ONh-00014S-JG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:26:53 +0100 Received: from pfepa.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.235]) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1C8ONc-0005tl-VB for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:26:53 +0100 Received: from preinstapdq0tf (0xc3d7e20d.hgnxr2.ras.tele.dk [195.215.226.13]) by pfepa.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 3CAA147FE3D for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 21:26:46 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <002701c49cec$4574e480$0de2d7c3@preinstapdq0tf> From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Niels_Rudberg_J=F8rgensen?= To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <6.1.0.6.2.20040916171458.02f86360@mail.casema.nl> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 21:26:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: domain of post.tele.dk designates 195.41.46.235 as permitted sender X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=no,RCVD_IN_SORBS=0.1 Subject: Re: LF: SL6440 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Craig" To: "LF-Group" Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 4:13 PM Subject: Re: LF: SL6440 > Dear LF Group, > > I have been considering purchasing the SRA-8 for the first mixer in > a new LF receiver I am designing. This is a passive DBM and is > fairly expensive. Would I be better off using an SL6440? > > 73 > Joe > Hello! I have succesfully used the SL6440 mixer in two LF receivers. First, this active mixer is, although being a bit noisier than a diode mixer (probably by maybe 3 dB) adequate for LF with respect to noise. Secondly, it it provides some gain (10 dB or so) instead of the 6-8 dB conversion loss of a passive diode mixer. Last, but not least, it is satisfied with an oscillator drive of about 1 mW. The SRA-8, which I assume is a type 2 or type 3 mixer, will require 13 or maybe 23 mW of oscillator drive. I think the signal handling capability of the SL6440 is comparable to that of a class 3 diode mixer. Depending on a current setting the third order intercept point will be better than 20 dBm. But even a good mixer as the SL6440 (by the way: wasn`t this device designed by G3RZP?) deserves a decent preceeding bandpass filter! 73 OZ8NJ Niels+