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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Best ham transceiver for MW reception?  (Read 83768 times)
W1JKA
Member

Posts: 2087




Ignore
« Reply #45 on: February 26, 2015, 05:27:49 AM »

The IC-7200, I bought mine to replace my ageing FRG-7700 receiver and back up for my K1.
Logged
K0OD
Member

Posts: 2984




Ignore
« Reply #46 on: February 26, 2015, 10:52:47 AM »

Quote
Interesting subject. A quick run through the MW broadcast band at 2:30PM local netted me 61 good copy stations with my Yaesu FTDX9000 and a Hustler 5BTV. Located in southern Ontario. Gonna have to give it a shot with my 160M inverted L.

Let's all try it. Tune briskly from 530 to 1720 kHz at 2:30 PM local time. I have no idea what my receivers can hear on such a test but I'll bet it's more than 18 stations. Signals must be somewhat understandable to count. I may also fire up an old Zenith 5-tuber. Yes, I know, listeners out west are probably screwed.

Current scores:
Collins R-390A, high 160m dipole,  SC:         71 Stations
Icom R-9000, high 160m dipole, SC:             18 stations
Yaesu FTDX9000,  5BTV vertical, Ont:          61 stations


Just tuned the breadth of the BCB using my 23 year old Kenwood TS-850 ham transceiver, a radio that's respected for its MW/LW  listening capabilities. Time was just after high noon with snow falling outside causing some precip static:

Result:

Kenwood TS-850, DXE 43 foot vertical, MO QTH:     79 stations.

One major limit was the Kenwood's lack of AM selectivity so that several high power local stations were splattering over the channel above and below. Will try again later but with my Flex-5000 which has modern brick wall adjustable filters on AM.  I'm guessing that 2:30 PM will be slightly better than noon. The Flex also has better noise reduction than the old Kenwood.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2015, 11:00:38 AM by K0OD » Logged
VE3PRB
Member

Posts: 4




Ignore
« Reply #47 on: February 26, 2015, 11:55:11 AM »

OK, FTDX9000, 160 Inverted L, AM mode only, Southern Ontario.....drum roll please....
81 stations copied. I think maybe playing around with LSB and USB, width and shift I may have been able to drag a few more out from the strong adjacent channel splatter.
Logged
K0OD
Member

Posts: 2984




Ignore
« Reply #48 on: February 26, 2015, 01:20:33 PM »

Just tried the test again, this time at precisely 2:30 PM CST and using my Flex-5000 set to 5 kHz bandwidth. Results were nearly identical. Again, the major limitation was that splatter from local broadcasters made copy impossible 10 kHz up or down, and probably cost me hearing 5-10 more stations.

Then tried the Flex with my Palomar VLF converter which only goes up to about 1000 kHz. Heard about the same stations in its range.

Ran the test once again with the Kenwood TS-850 and picked up another two or three stations perhaps because it was getting closer to dark, especially on the east coast.

Confirms my feelings that most radios hear the AM BCB similarly. 
Logged
AD4U
Member

Posts: 2438




Ignore
« Reply #49 on: February 26, 2015, 03:55:35 PM »

I bought my ICOM IC 9000 receiver used on the military surplus market. It seems to work great on the SW bands and every where else except the AM BCB.  Maybe it has a problem on the AM BCB.

Dick AD4U
Logged
N9DG
Member

Posts: 365




Ignore
« Reply #50 on: February 26, 2015, 06:54:14 PM »

The other morning around 11AM I did a quick check with my OpenHPSDR Mercury DDC RX and found carriers on every 10 kHz channel plainly visible on the panadapter / waterfall display from the bottom of the AM BCB all the way to the top. Most of those visible carrier signals also had clearly visible side-bands - which means that it would have been easy to listen to each of them had I taken the time to actually do so. Basically with the Mercury, if you can see it, you can hear it. And many of the AM BCB signals had clearly visible IBOC content as well. IBOC on the display looks like broad "shoulders" outside of the normal audio content of the AM signal.

During this quick check of the band in the late morning, I also looked below the AM BCB. I could find I'm guessing a hundred+ NDB MCW beacon transmitters. And the DGPS signals in the 300 kHz region are plainly visible, and some are actually quite loud. Though on this particular run I didn't see or hear any of the 600M experimenters, I have routinely found 4-5 of them at a time during more optimal evening hours in the past.

And even further down at 60 kHz, I can see and hear the WWVB signal any time of the day I want. And then WAY down in the radio basement, the US navy signals around 24 kHz are clearly visible and audible most of the time as well. During optimal listening times in the evenings there are even more NDBs to be found, and the WWVB and Navy signals are even stronger.

And the antenna that I was using was just a 80 / 40 meter parallel dipole around 35 feet high. So not an LF optimal antenna at all. I've often pondered what I could hear if I actually put up an antenna optimized for those low frequencies. It just hasn't been a priority for me to pursue it.

The Mercury SDR RX is virtually identical to the OpenHPSDR Hermes RX. And the Hermes forms the basis for the various ANAN models. The Mercury and Hermes are hands down best receivers that I've ever used below 160M. The IC-765 I had did pretty decent down there, but the Mercury / Hermes SDRs are much better. Most of my other traditional radios can tune there, but they don't hear very much ever.

My advice to someone wanting to seriously play around exploring the frequencies below 160M, I would get an DDC (Direct Digital Conversion) SDR and skip the traditional amateur transceiver or general coverage RX completely. The spectrum display capabilities alone are reason enough, but the DDC SDR performance down there seals the deal.

However I wouldn't recommend trying to use a QSD type SDR design on those frequencies. They have a serious fundamental limitation in that they will happily respond to signals at 2X the desired frequency. So all the strong AM BCB signals will make it hard to see and hear things below the AM BCB without a lot of aggressive filtering. Direct sampling SDRs are not prone that the problem.
Logged
N9DG
Member

Posts: 365




Ignore
« Reply #51 on: February 26, 2015, 07:06:38 PM »

And forgot to mention. The RTL dongle SDR that I now have does very poorly below the AM BCB. And is not that good below 80M for that matter.

The one I have is the modified dongle where the HF and lower signals are being directly fed to the 8 bit A to D, no mixer involved. The other HF and lower capable RTL dongle based SDRs fed through a down converter (mixer) might do better. I don't really know for sure. However I did try my RTL dongle device with my 10 MHz IF Jackson Harbor LF converter and it was some better, but still not very good. The Jackson Harbor LF converter fed into a good RX actually does very well for signals below the AM BCB.

So some additional things to be aware of.
Logged
K0OD
Member

Posts: 2984




Ignore
« Reply #52 on: February 27, 2015, 04:19:37 AM »

I bought my ICOM IC 9000 receiver used on the military surplus market. It seems to work great on the SW bands and every where else except the AM BCB.  Maybe it has a problem on the AM BCB.

Dick AD4U

Dick, I'm thinking that's a possibility. Try the test with some more of your radios
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 [4]   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!