Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Choosing a Legal Limit Amp  (Read 17809 times)
KA7NIQ
Member

Posts: 255


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #60 on: May 21, 2013, 02:57:16 PM »

Trust me Steve is not Zinke. Steve is proud of his call and has been a ham for too long to go chasing windmills.
I totally agree!
Besides, I know Steve as much more of an
Antenna Elmer type, then an Amplifier IMD type of guy.
Logged
W5JON
Member

Posts: 163




Ignore
« Reply #61 on: May 21, 2013, 04:45:18 PM »

Trust me Steve is not Zinke. Steve is proud of his call and has been a ham for too long to go chasing windmills.
I totally agree!
Besides, I know Steve as much more of an Antenna Elmer type, then an Amplifier IMD type of guy.


I have known Steve, WB2WIK for 45 years, and I can assure you he is not Zenki.  However I have read that Zenki is N2NEP. 

However that being said, AD9DX is exactly correct when he wrote to "Mr. NO CALLSIGN Zenki : "The amps discussed meet or exceed FCC requirements. If you want companies to do better, petition the FCC to change their standards".  Zenki has beaten his multi- year one man IMD campaign to death.

73,

John

Logged
W6UV
Member

Posts: 538




Ignore
« Reply #62 on: May 21, 2013, 05:48:09 PM »


However I have read that Zenki is N2NEP. 

Nah, Zenki is really Kurt N Sterba's evil twin.
Logged
ZENKI
Member

Posts: 924




Ignore
« Reply #63 on: May 23, 2013, 01:42:41 AM »

IMD is not the only issue, but hey the impact of any  amplifier with bad IMD performance affects all ham operators. Do you want the ham bands to sound like the CB band thats full of splatter?

The importance of the IMD issue is also this. There is little point in buying a state of the art transceiver with high performance when a bad IMD amplifier makes performance numbers largely irrelevant. Do  hams actually understand this
point or are we just brain dead CB operators who cant understand this simple point.

While I might be  ranting and raving continuously on this issue, its a point in radio physics thats important  for maintaining  the excellent weak signal performance of the ham bands. Look at the ham bands in suburban areas
its almost  a  waste of time using HF in many suburban locations because of noise pollution. What leg do hams have to stand on when they cant even keep their own act clean? So we going to turn the bands into splattered filled bands full of IMD and splatter from poor amplifiers such as CB amplifiers  that cause excessive  splatter.  We have a duty of care to pass on  to the next generation of hams a set of standards that  define how we enjoyed the ham bands in the past, operating on bands free of QRM caused from operators and other man made sources..

Anyhow hams who argue against IMD performance I am sorry to say are dummies and simply dont get  it.. They rush out bragging about their wonderful transceivers with sky high receiver numbers and cant even understand
that these radios are useless unless transmitters are clean. Its even more importance on the VHF bands. But hey   I can understand when people dont have the brains to understand a simple issue like IMD and splatter and carry  on like dumb CB'ers with all knobs to the right splattering everyone with  bad equipment choices. A not very ham friendly spirit that preserves the excellent resource called the HF bands in a pristine condition free of crud. Hams who cause excessive  splatter due to poor operating practices and  poor equipment choices are no better than a dumb CB'er who gives no thought to what they are doing nor care too understand the impact of what they doing.

So  you can throw all the mud in my direction, I dont mind. At the end of the its only  you who looks bad because you so ignorantly  dont fully  understand  the importance of the issue. There are a great  number of hams who have technical expertise who understand this issue and say nothing. Its only the loud mouth know nothings who make the same old lame attacks about no callsign or other trivial  rubbish. Why dont  you address the issue of IMD and  show us your genius and explain why amplifiers with poor IMD  has no impact on hams and the ham bands. I would be interested in your arguments.  I am sure so would many hams would also be interested in another view rather prattling on about nothing. Nobody else can produce a counter argument as to why a crap IMD CB amplifier  or any crap amplifier for that matter is good for the ham bands. The floor is yours SIR! 

When the ITU considers these standards necessary for professional HF users, I cant take comfort that I am on the right side of the argument. How confident are you in your argument against the best possible IMD standards?


Nobody mentions how important  the issue of spectral cleanliness of amplifiers. Tubes and solid state amplifiers with poor IMD performance should really be placed at the bottom of your list.

You cant rely on the ARRL reviews to tell  you how clean the amp is. The ARRL simply ignores the issues and does not care if the AMP Is dirty. Every piece of crap spewing out IMD garbage is OK by them if they review it.
 An example is  the review of the Acom 1500 amp in this months QST. -27db 3rd order  and -49db 9th order. Rather unspectacular figures yet they say nothing about such amplifiers. A 8877 as comparison has superior IMD performance. The current batch of solid state amplifiers are also rather poor performers but the ARRL just keeps on reviewing like everything is well. Hear no evil see no Evil!

If I was shopping for a decent tube or solid state amp I would by the model that produces the cleanest signal. Clean means no tetrode amplifiers, poorly designed solid state and CB amplifiers. Manufacturers like Tokyo High Power and other are stuffing industrial RF fets into their amplifier designs. These FETS are not linear RF devices meant for linear SSB service. The outcome is a dirty amplifier designs  that have poor IMD performance that is  no better than a crap CB amplifier.






My god this is the same topic you have posted in at least two different threads this morning. Why not try writing a letter to your senator.  The amps discussed meet or exceed FCC requirements. If you want companies to do better, petition the FCC to change their standards. 


AD9DX,
Thank you , thank you, I also have become very tired of Mr. (I have no callsign), (one tune) Zenki.  To him IMD is the ONLY thing that matters, and his one man campaign of criticizing almost every amplifier made today for IMD is getting real old. Zenki, you have made your point HUNDREDS of times, give it a rest. 

John  W5JON  -  V47JA 
[/quote]
Logged
W5JON
Member

Posts: 163




Ignore
« Reply #64 on: May 23, 2013, 08:42:03 AM »

Zenki,

The point that I, and others have tried to make, and one that you continuously choose to ignor is, PETITION THE FCC.

For years you have been on this anonymous rant on IMD, but have chosen to not to PETITION THE FCC, to change the IMD standard.  When an amp discussed on Eham meets or exceeds FCC requirements. If you want companies to do better, PETITION THE FCC to change their standards, to meet what YOU perceive a "acceptable".

On almost every amplifier topic, here comes Zenki with a comment, on how this, or that amplifier does not meet YOUR IMD requirements.  You have made your point HUNDREDS of times. We get the message, IMD is bad, and only you realize that, so PETITION THE FCC to change their standards. That is how a "Standards" CHANGE WORKS, not years of ranting on Eham.

Sorry, but I just realized, the FCC does not accept anonymous petitions.
......
John W5JON     






Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!