[INRAD] filter comparison

[William E. Sabin]

My homebrew rcvr has an arrangement as you describe (see QRZ.COM) so that 
the selectivity is widened slightly in one position of the filter selection 
switch. This makes strong CW signals that are off by a few hundred Hz 
noticed that might otherwise not be noticed. This is useful in certain types 
of operations.

Bill W0IYH

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Saandy" <alexeban at bezeqint.net>
To: "'Zoli Pitman HA1AG'" <ha1ag at yahoo.com>; "'Anders Janis SM4RNA'" 
<sm4rna at telia.com>; "'Bill Tippett'" <btippett at alum.mit.edu>; 
<list at inrad.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: [INRAD] filter comparison


> ...definitely agreed with that.
> The only difference is the skirt selectivity- that's what we called it
> during the skirts' heydays.
> Even this is a little dependent on preference: I, for instance, am a 
> hunter,
> looking up and down the bands. In these conditions, signal come up 
> gradually
> as they approach the filter's passband, instead of popping up aout of the
> blue. You get some forewarning of their existence and it kind of 
> convenient.
> I can always use the VBT to clean up interference if something really
> interesting crops up if the band is crowded, the Inrad filter helps,
> otherwise I found not any earth shattering differences!
> Alex 4Z5KS
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zoli Pitman HA1AG [mailto:ha1ag at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 11:36 AM
> To: Anders Janis SM4RNA; Saandy; 'Bill Tippett'; list at inrad.net
> Subject: Re: [INRAD] filter comparison
>
> Hello Anders et al,
>
>> If you mean the Murata, you could buy the one that I
>> removed from a IC-746
>> and put in a INRAD 2,4 kHz in instead, but it seems that
>> I did not bother to
>> keep it. It seems like I put it just  just where it
>> belongs. In the garbage  bin.
>
> It's a bit too harsh statement IMO. The Muratas are not bad
> for their size and for their price. I replaced mine in the
> 2nd RX of my MP (with a INRAD 455/2000) and measured the
> params of both filters with proper matching (wound the
> transformers for both sides). I started to publish the
> findings on my web-site but have not finished it
> completely. It is still on my to-do list and will be done
> within a few weeks.
>
> Actually the INRADs are sharper on the side and it gives
> you a difference between 2 and 4 kHz from ur RX freq on
> both sides. It is just a fact of physics nothing else.
> Unless you use big antennas in a crowded RF environment
> you will hardly notice the difference. But this is my
> subjective opinion.
>
> 73, Zoli HA1AG
> www.hg6n.hu/ha1ag
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INRAD mailing list provided as a service by International Radio
> INRAD Web Site: http://www.qth.com/inrad
>
> To Submit Message to the List: list at inrad.net
> List Help:
> http://mail.inrad.net/mailman/listinfo/list_inrad.net
>