[AMRadio] Wanted: Receiver - New England


Greg bluebirdtele at embarqmail.com
Sun Feb 17 21:23:54 EST 2008


Oh Boy!
I get to beat up the HQ 100 again!
Where's the BFO in the HQ 100?
There isn"t any! you have to make the q multiplier oscillate to copy cw with 
this radio and ssb copy is not so hot
The HQ one ten has one and is a way better radio
The funny thing is they cost about the same to buy
Greg
KINSTON NC
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rodger Hough" <nfn07981 at naples.net>
To: "Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service" 
<amradio at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] Wanted: Receiver - New England


> There are a couple of Hammarlund receivers, the HQ-100 General  Coverage 
> and the Hammarlund HQ-110 that provide pretty good AM  performance on the 
> lower bands. They sound pretty good as is into a  decent, efficient 
> speaker and with the modifications included in this  article (costing all 
> of about 2 bucks), they sound even better. I  have both receivers and am 
> amazed at the nice sounds I receive from  the Florida AM Group.
>
> http://www.amwindow.org/tech/htm/hqaudiomods.htm
>
> The good news is, these receivers can often be found for less than  half 
> of your proposed budget.
>
> Rodger
> K1HH
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2008, at 7:58 PM, JT Croteau wrote:
>
>> I want to thank everyone who has responded so far, both on and off
>> list, to this thread.  Brett, N2DTS, said, a couple posts posts back,
>> that I need to take a better inventory of my priorities so let me try
>> and clarify what they are to me.
>>
>>> From what I've read, there are two categories of receivers;
>> "Battle-Fields" and Hi-Fidelity and it is very difficult to have your
>> cake and eat it to.  Unfortunately, I am trying to have a mixture of
>> both but leaning more towards Hi-Fi because it is the pure love of the
>> sound of AM that is driving me to setup this AM station.
>>
>> I am learning that there is no perfect receiver and it is very hard
>> for a newbie like me to pick one.  I wish I had the luxury to afford
>> to buy several different ones like some people but I can only afford
>> one receiver at the moment   A big problem for newbies is the fact
>> that EVERYONE has differing opinions for each model and it's often
>> hard to get two people to totally agree on the same model.  For
>> example, I'll ask for opinions on an ABC-123 and one person will
>> reply, "oh yeah, it's awesome on AM" while another will say "stay
>> away, it's only good for slopbucket signals".  If I could afford
>> multiple purchases, it'd be much easier to take a gamble and
>> experiment but I can't so it's very difficult to choose from just
>> looking at specs and "opinions".
>>
>> With this said:
>>
>>    AM 75M and 40M coverage is my primary interest at this time, I will
>> NEVER be using the radio to tune in slopbucket nor CWer.  SWL and 160M
>> coverage would be nice as well but it will be a couple years before I
>> have space for a 160M antenna.
>>
>>    Hi-Fidelity is near the top of my must haves but not if it's
>> results in a huge hit on receiver performance.  However, I definitely
>> don't want bottom of the barrel communications grade audio.  I've been
>> in some shacks where the audio fills the room and you can feel the
>> audio down to your bones.  I want to achieve this or as close as I can
>> get within my budget.
>>
>>     Looks, style, size, and weight don't really matter as it's what's
>> inside the box that counts to me.  Ideally the smaller the better and
>> if it fits in a standard 19" rack, all the better as I have plenty of
>> rack space.
>>
>>     Budget - Yeah, this will always be an issue for me.  But I can
>> realistically afford to spend a max. of $400 on a receiver so I may
>> not be able to get super Hi-Fi with this budget but I would think that
>> I should be able to still find something with very good fidelity.   If
>> I had the money to go all out, I'm the type of person who definitely
>> would so I am not trying to cheap out on this.  But I do want to get
>> something now rather than save an wait.. patience and me have never
>> gotten along.
>>
>> Since my first post a couple days ago, I've been reading a bit about
>> Hallicrafters SX-17's and SX-42's with their push-pull 6V6's and how
>> they can really make some very nice audio - a couple people seem to
>> really like these.  However, for some reason, these two rigs don't
>> seem to be mentioned much.. are they genuine "sleepers" in this case?
>> The SX-17 appears to have good sensitivity and good selectivity with
>> an IF bandwidth switch actually works.  I think I read that the narrow
>> position is somewhere around 4-5 kc and the wide is somewhere around
>> 10-12 kc.
>>
>> Has anything I've said made sense and may point me to more specific
>> models of receivers I should be looking at?
>>
>> Thanks again.
>>
>> -- 
>> JT Croteau, N1ESE - Manchester, NH (FN42gx)
>> Contest Manager, TARA Skirmish
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
>> AMRadio mailing list
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/ 
>> amradio at mailman.qth.net/
>> List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
>> List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
>> Post: mailto:AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
>> To unsubscribe, send an email to amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
>> the word unsubscribe in the message body.
>
> I recommend Macs to my friends, and PCs to those I don't mind  charging by 
> the hour.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
> AMRadio mailing list
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/
> List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
> List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> To unsubscribe, send an email to amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
> the word unsubscribe in the message body. 



More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 22 Oct 2017.