| NI5O |
Rating:      |
2012-02-02 | |
| Great little receiving antenna... |
Time Owned: 3 to 6 months. |
| I have been using the Pixel RF-1B antenna for over four months now. It is my primary receiving antenna for 30 to 160 Meters. Mine is mounted vertically with the base about 10 feet above ground level. As others have noted, this antenna pulls signals out of the noise due its low noise nature. It hears substantial better than my transmitting antennas and on average it seems to improve signals by 4 to 6 db. above the average noise level (though the absolute S meter readings are less). It also can be connected to your transceiver to power down the pre-amp and ground the antenna during transmitting. It is well worth the price, especially if you are situated on a smaller urban lot where large HF antennas are prohibited. I have heard many stations on 160, 80 and 40 meters that were not audible with my vertical antennas. Kevin - NI5O |
|
| KH6DC |
Rating:      |
2012-01-28 | |
| Excellent Receiving Antenna |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
| I was on the verge of purchasing a Wellbrook but been putting it off. My friend dropped off the Pixel RF Pro-1B. I said oh well, and left it in the garage and was even contemplating putting it up. In trying to work the latest DXpeditions is Eastern Kiribati, Nauru, Pitcairn and Malpelo Islands, I couldn't hear any of them. I managed to make a contact with E. Kiribati with my exisitng antennas - SteppIR BigIR vertical and G5RV up about 20 ft but they were light compared to last year's E. Kiribati DXpedition. My Elecraft K3 adjusting DSP and filters couldn't pull them out. Frustrated with all the noise around my shack, I put up the Pixel up 20 ft and rotated the loop for the greatest signal towards the south-southeast and wow, I managed to work the rest of the DXpeditions, no problem. I highly recommend the Pixel if you got Plasma TV QRM like me, it's worth every penny. You won't be dissapointed with the Pixel. |
|
| AA7AS |
Rating:      |
2012-01-28 | |
| Wonderful |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
Consistently outperforms my 20 meter inverted vee and several random length longwire antennas; I get comparable signal levels, with a much lower noise floor.
I use it with my SDR-IQ, and as a receive-only antenna on my Yaesu FT-2000 (it's just pointless to use the inverted vee with the loop available... it *destroys* the vee on receive.) But I do use the vee to transmit.
I mounted it on a trailer and then moved it around until I found the best spot -- now I just park the trailer there.
Here's a pic of my RF-PRO installation:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fyngyrz/6773021173/
I pull that trailer out into the country too, and enjoy a zero-QRM environment by running the SDR in my vehicle.
I can't say enough good things about this product. My experience with Pixel Tech has been good also -- they answer questions very readily, and were of considerable assistance to me. I had no technical issues, everything worked as advertised, but I did have questions and they were very patient with me.
I find that the SDR-IQ and the RF-PRO loop make an almost perfect SWL pair.
I did find that mounting the antenna near the house, or near metal, degraded its performance... just as the manufacturer said it would.
|
|
| K7TAA |
Rating:      |
2012-01-24 | |
| Excellent small antenna |
Time Owned: 3 to 6 months. |
Pixel Technologies RF Pro-1B Loop Antenna
I’ve been using an RF Pro-1B for about 3 months. It is mounted in the front yard about 40 feet from the house, in Anchorage, AK. It appears to be an excellent small receiving antenna, and I’m using it mainly with a QS1R receiver, which can take advantage of the broadband nature by showing the whole HF spectrum at once.
I discovered that the man-made broadband noise on some frequencies was greatly reduced by using common mode choke baluns at each end of the 100’ RG-6 quad shielded coax. Balun Designs made a Model 1110, dual core, 75 ohm version with F connectors. Also, I used an F connector female-female fixture at each end of the outside coax section to ground the shield. The loop/amplifier and voltage injection box use a type F connector. This seems like a good idea, since good quality RG-6 quad shielded coax has better shielding specifications than even LMR coax. Since the ground is frozen here, and I can’t easily bury the cable, I wanted the best shielding possible. There are a couple very strong AM broadcast stations near here.
I’ve been waiting to make more accurate measurements of the signal to noise ratio compared with other antennas until I got the man made broadband and spurious signal noise as low as reasonably possible on the loop. I did notice that the loop broadband noise pickup was lower on some bands than a 6.5’ vertical active antenna in the same location.
Even though I haven’t recorded careful measurements yet, it is fair to say that the RF Pro-1B can hear almost every signal on most bands heard by a 300’ horizontal loop about 30’ high. That goes for both NVIS and DX. Of course, completely different types of antennas receive signals differently, so direct comparisons are useful only up to a point.
Thank you.
Charles Preston
KL7OA |
|
| WA2SQQ |
Rating:     |
2012-01-10 | |
| Definitely a keeper! |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
I’ve been taught to believe that if something appears too good to be true, it probably is. Thank God there are occasionally exceptions to this rule! Living just 1 mile from a 50kw broadcast station works against having low noise levels on 160m. Living on a relatively small lot presents another set of antenna challenges. Realizing that the DX was there I started experimenting with loop antennas and the preamps required to amplify the low signals. I got good results from a coaxial loop, but quickly discovered numerous images of the local AM broadcast stations probably caused by the preamp. Yet, I was able to hear many stations (and make the contacts) that were inaudible on my sloper. A better loop was the answer I was looking for. Google introduced me to the Pixel Technologies loop. While the cost was a bit steep, the positive feedback was encouraging, and their 30-day return policy was too good to resist.
I received it just 3 days after placing the order. There was almost no assembly and I already had the coax in place. The construction was excellent and it was up and running in 15 minutes. During the day 160 is pretty dead so I tried it on the broadcast band. I was able to copy stations as far away as Baltimore that would otherwise be inaudible. The antenna did exhibit sharp nulls as I would expect. That evening I tried it on 160. With my sloper the noise level was S7 – S8. The Pixel Technology loop brought that down to S2 – S3. I still had about 6 AM BCB images, but they were ~ 3 - 6db above the noise level. I installed the ICE filter I already had that attenuates the BCB by 60-80db and all but one image was gone!
On the first evening I was able to copy 9 stations using the loop that would not have been audible with my sloper. One of these was a “V31” that I was also able to work! A few nights afterward I was listening to some AM’ers on 1.885 and would occasionally hear some CW in the background. The CW was actually a fishing buoy off the coast of Rhode Island – my sloper showed no trace of the signal. And while the loop looses much of its directivity at night as the sky wave sets in, I was able to null out some annoying QRM from a neighbors plasma TV.
During daylight hours I’ve used it on 17m when my local noise level was S5 – S6. The loop brought it down to S2 and disclosed about a dozen stations on my Flex 5000’s pan adapter. This antenna is a keeper, especially if you live in an environment where you’ve got lots of man-made noise. Yes, it’s not cheap but it does work as good as their web sites says!
|
|
| K8ALM |
Rating:      |
2011-12-22 | |
| Definetly improves SNR |
Time Owned: 3 to 6 months. |
| I've been using the RF PRO-1B for a few months now and it definetly improves SNR for me on 160, 80 and 40 meters and reduces or eliminates a lot of the manmade noise. I have the loop mounted right above my beam. I have no other receiving antenna to compare it to besides my transmit antenna but it brings the noise floor down from S7-8 to S0-1. Received signal strength is also reduced but all I do is turn up the AF gain and the signal is usually R5. It frequently makes the difference between a QSO and no QSO. I have never used a EWE, pennant, etc. because of space limitations but it should be pretty easy for most folks to find a place to mount the loop. Very well contructed and comes with a mount that most hams should be able to utilize. I have used a Wellbrook loop as well but had issues with BCI overload so this one did not work out for me. No BCI overload with the Pixel RF PRO-1B. |
|
| K2MK |
Rating:      |
2011-08-15 | |
| A Reasonable Solution in a Very Compact Size |
Time Owned: 0 to 3 months. |
This is a follow-up review. Originally my RF PRO-1 Loop Antenna seemed deficient on 160 meters. I e mailed comparative results to Doug Talley of Pixel Tech who immediately suggested that he send me a replacement antenna totally at his expense including pre-paid return shipping. This is exceptional customer service and it solved my 160 meter problem.
Who wouldn’t want a separate receive antenna that is only 38 inches in diameter. My primary antennas on 160 through 30 meters are a SteppIR BigIR vertical and a very low to the ground full size 160 meter dipole. I have a hex beam for 20 through 10 meters and did not intend to use the Loop on those bands. Typical wire receive antennas for the low bands are usually large. The RF PRO-1 Loop is very small and can be deployed very easily and quickly. Will it replace a Beverage or K9AY? Probably not but it is certainly worth consideration.
The antenna seemed a little pricey at first but when you look at the parts you begin to realize that it is fairly priced. It also includes a well designed device to power off the antenna when transmitting. When the antenna first arrives don’t be tempted to immediately hook it up indoors. I did and it picked up all sorts of house generated noise. Once outside it starts to behave as you had hoped. I mounted mine around 7 feet above ground on a 1” section of steel conduit and about 50 feet from the back of my house. I rotate it with an AR-35 rotator. Mounting is straightforward, however, it is supplied with two metric U bolts and you will need a 10mm open end wrench to tighten the nut on the U bolt that supports the amplifier. It’s a tight fit and a socket wrench or an adjustable wrench may not do the job.
My review is based on skip reception on 160 through 30 meters. I point this out because there is a huge difference between using the antenna for DX and using it for local stuff. Read the literature carefully. Skip reception is pretty much omni directional. In correspondence with Doug Talley it was suggested that for skip signals you are better off choosing a direction that minimizes local noise sources rather than rotating the antenna towards the transmitting station. This can be done by ear or by using a Panadapter.
Using my Elecraft P3 Panadapter as a measuring device I measured a 15-20db decrease in the noise floor on 160, 80, and 40 meters using the Loop compared to my primary antennas. The improvement on 30 meters was a bit less. Comparisons with your antennas will be different. Measurements were made in the evening during mid August and could certainly vary at other times of the day and year. This is a substantial reduction and can reduce listening fatigue during contests.
But the bigger question is how well does the Loop hear signals. Generally the signal of interest is easier to copy using the Loop. In many case I measured gain increases with the Loop of up to 5db. In other words, if a signal was 10 db above the noise floor with my primary antenna, it was measured to be 15db above the noise floor with the Loop. I found this gain fairly repeatable on 160 and 80 meters and a bit lower on 40 and 30 meters. But conditions are fickle and there were some signals which showed lower gain or no gain with the Loop. In those cases it was still generally true that the signals were easier to copy with the Loop probably because of the lower noise level. But as with any receive antenna it helps to be able to switch back and forth as there may be cases where the primary antenna provides more solid copy than the receive antenna.
The K3 has a few different noise abatement features that can be used independently with the primary antenna and the receive antenna. Using them adds a level of complexity to any comparison. It will take some time to determine how these features affect the performance comparison and were not tried for this review.
Am I pleased with the Pixel Tech RF PRO-1 Loop Antenna? Yes.
Would I recommend this antenna? Yes.
Will your mileage vary? Yes.
|
|
| N3UJJ |
Rating:      |
2011-06-23 | |
| High Quality, Outstanding Support |
Time Owned: 6 to 12 months. |
| I spent a lot of time trying to decide between the Pixel Technologies Magnetic Loop and the Wellbrook Magnetic Loop. It was a tough call as both antennas a good antennas (both have good reviews). As I have a substantial station, one feature that I didn't see on the Wellbrook antennas was an Internal Transmit/Receive Switch that disconnects Antenna and Preamp (and SDR-IQ) when I transmit on my other antennas. it out performs just about all of my other antennas across all frequencies (it equals my 40 and 20 meter cage dipole antennas on 40 and 20). But one feature that is as important is support, after using the antenna for several months I had a problem, Pixel Technologies tech support responded within hours, and shipped me several parts (worth over $250.00) and included a return shipment label. I was back on the air in a couple of days. This company really cares !!!!. But proof is in the pudding (so to speak) , if you want to hear how it works, REAL TIME, you can listen to my on-line software defined radio (SDR-IQ, using Simon Brown's SDR-CONSOLE). Visit http://n3ujj.com/Online_Software_Defined_Radio.html, and listen to the antenna yourself. |
|
| KE7GSK |
Rating:      |
2011-06-10 | |
| Not Hearing Same Result |
Time Owned: 6 to 12 months. |
Normally I would agree with the below listed reviewer as he is well regarded, thorough and very qualified but using the Perseus and QS1R SDR's with the Pixel and Wellbrook ALA1530S+ antennas I'm not hearing the same results.
I almost exclusively stay on the Ham bands. The Pixel is better suited for the Ham operator for the reasons listed in the first Pixel review below.
Overall I believe both antennas are 5, one not being superior to the other. |
|
| 4NRADIO |
Rating:    |
2011-05-16 | |
| Satisfactory, but may not be the best choice |
Time Owned: 6 to 12 months. |
For the last few months I've been doing some methodical comparing of the signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio of many stations as heard through the Pixel Technologies RF PRO-1A and Wellbrook Communications ALA1530 active loop antennas. Using the spectrum analyzer qualities of the Perseus SDR receiver I've been able to be very objective on which loop antenna gives the best reception on all the LW, MW, and HF bands.
I've written a detailed review of the two loops which contains S/N charts for all bands, plus a selection of "A-B" comparison MP3 recordings and the original MS Excel spreadsheet file of raw S/N data available for download.
I've sent the review to some DX hobby web sites for possible publication, but Wellbrook has chosen to make the PDF file available now for download from their site:
http://www.wellbrook.uk.com/reviews/ALA1530-vs-RFPRO-1AReview.pdf
I hope you find the comparison review useful. It was very interesting and refreshing to use a receiver like Perseus as a S/N measuring tool rather than just making observations subjectively "by ear".
KE7MAV
|
|