Guys that was a great discussion...
But I still have a question or two. Well actually a lot more than that
but we can't answer them all.
---
I know I'm not ready to build my own receiver, unless I went the micro
R2 route (I'm going to build one some day).
But that still doesn't solve my need for a ham band(s) receiver - to
use as a receiver and as a necessary piece of test equipment.
---
I know that the Drake 2b is good. But how easy (and cheap) is it to get
one? Are most "wore" out?
I've heard that a common ailment is that the mechanical filter will be
screwed up.
What are some receivers to look for (don't say the Collins - I don't
have enough money)?
BTW, got the EMRFD for Christmas. I like reading it but I have a lot to
learn...
Thanks,
Dan KB9JLO

bcdlr wrote:

But that still doesn't solve my need for a ham band(s) receiver - to
use as a receiver and as a necessary piece of test equipment.
---

And a related question: Folks made a lot of useful comments about
hardware-defined receivers last round, but no one has mentioned
software-defined ones. Are there any SDR's in existence that rival the
best HDRs?

I know that the Drake 2b is good.
Well, I used to have one and didn't think it was wonderful. The 4C is
good, but now you're talking s-line money. Besides, as a lab instrument
I'd have thought you'd want a receiver with accurate frequency
read-out.

Cheers!
Jim, N5JRS (was K5YUT)

"bcdlr" wrote in message
oups.com...

I know I'm not ready to build my own receiver, unless I went the micro
R2 route (I'm going to build one some day).

You are never ready to build your own until you bite the bullet and do it

But that still doesn't solve my need for a ham band(s) receiver - to
use as a receiver and as a necessary piece of test equipment.

If you want to use the receiver as a piece of test equipment (and a decent
receiver can be a really great piece of test equipment) then you want a
modern, synthesized, solid-state receiver.

I know that the Drake 2b is good. But how easy (and cheap) is it to get
one? Are most "wore" out?

The 2B was a great rig in its time, but that was back in another century.
Almost anything recent, even real junk, will be better, and a lot less
hassle. Sorry to the guys who wax nostalgic about the old hollow state
gear, but get something hollow state if you like to be constantly
maintaining it, if you like drifty, unstable, etc. Compared to other stuff
AT THE TIME, the Drake was great. But any modern rice box will run circles
around it. And rigs from that time are now getting old enough that they will
soon need a major overhaul. I you aren't ready to build an R2 then you
certainly aren't ready to care for a geriatric radio.

What are some receivers to look for (don't say the Collins - I don't
have enough money)?

What do you want to do? If you are going to operate a lot of SSB, then a
Collins mechanical filter is almost a requirement, although some of the more
recent DSPs might be better they are a slightly different form of operation
so I suspect it is a lot personal. If you intend to operate CW, PSK mostly,
then the requirements are different.

If you want to use it as test gear, then you want 1) synthesized, 2) DC to
daylight -- almost any modern rice box will fit this bill. If you want to
use it on 75 meter phone, then you need brick wall filters or a very good
DSP (or both). Most modern rigs are triple conversion, with a first IFin
the 60 MHz region, second around 10, and third typically 455 kHz. If the
receiver you pick isn't VERY recent, look for a rig with the filters in the
455 kHz IF, rather than the 10, and get the filters if you plan to operate
on busy phone bands. Interestingly, CW is a lot less demanding, and the
other digital modes even less so. The digital modes do require a lot of
stability, but on modern rigs that is pretty much a given.

Because of competition, I think you will find a better deal in a transceiver
than a receiver. Decent receivers are kind of a specialty item so they tend
to be very expensive. Indeed, it seems like you have very low end stuff and
very high end stuff, and not a lot in between. The kind of receiver you can
buy new for a few hundred bucks isn't going to be useable on the ham bands.
On the other hand, if you only want to know whether your homebrew oscillator
is on the right planet, then a cheap, synthesized SWL radio will do the
trick.

Used prices are really uneven. Some things you can do real well on (browse
through the completed auctions on eBay to get a feel for prices), and others
people seem to insist on getting new prices for old gear. If you do go with
used, it may be the best thing to do is to pick something and get on eBay.
The trouble with eBay is that there are enough people that are clueless that
things often sell for well more than they are worth. But on the other hand,
if you don't let yourself get sucked in, and you are patient, you can often
do pretty well. Just be sure you know what you are willing to pay and don't
go beyond that, and that you look forward to spending a month or two getting
what you want. But real bargains are pretty rare anymore.

A few years ago I would have suggested a hamfest. But most of the hamfests
have gotten a lot like eBay. There will be a wide selection at Dayton, but
most will be either real junk or overpriced. I guess that is a difference;
you don't see a huge amount of old junk on eBay, probably because of the
cost and hassle of listing it. You see plenty at hamfests, though.

...

bcdlr wrote:
Guys that was a great discussion...
But I still have a question or two. Well actually a lot more than that
but we can't answer them all.
---
I know I'm not ready to build my own receiver, unless I went the micro
R2 route (I'm going to build one some day).
But that still doesn't solve my need for a ham band(s) receiver - to
use as a receiver and as a necessary piece of test equipment.
---
I know that the Drake 2b is good. But how easy (and cheap) is it to get
one? Are most "wore" out?
I've heard that a common ailment is that the mechanical filter will be
screwed up.


The 2B does not have a mechanical filter so no worries there.

I have a Drake R4A (next generation Drake after the 2B) & it is one of
the best receivers I have ever owned [I've owned maybe 50+ medium &
high end receivers (Collins, Hammarlund, National, Ten-tec, Yaesu,
Kenwood, Swan, Elecraft, etc.) in nearly 50 years of hamming including
many of the newer solid state variety].

My R4A doesn't drift (after warm up), excellent audio, pass band
tuning, 4 stages of selectivity, AM & product detectors, excellent
build quality, extremely reliable & much easier to work on than any of
the newer solid state stuff. I paid $140 for mine & nice examples can
be had for $150 - $250. The R4, R4A & R4B were similar design & were
complete radios out of the box. I've had zero trouble with mine in
eight years. The R4C went to crystal filters & is really a much
different radio.

I would recommend the R4A's & R4B's as great radios that you will not
be dissapointed with for the price.

Look for one that is crystalled up with extra SW freq's & has a clean
copper chassis (they are proned to tarnish).

Terry
W8EJO

bcdlr wrote:
I know I'm not ready to build my own receiver, unless I went the micro
R2 route (I'm going to build one some day).

You can build yourself a regen out of literally junk box parts. Direct
conversion is a step up and not much harder. The micro R2 is even
nicer.

But that still doesn't solve my need for a ham band(s) receiver - to
use as a receiver and as a necessary piece of test equipment.

If you are looking for "the ultimate receiver as a first step" then
homebrewing is NOT for you.

I know that the Drake 2b is good. But how easy (and cheap) is it to get
one? Are most "wore" out?
I've heard that a common ailment is that the mechanical filter will be
screwed up.

They weren't talking about the 2B then. The 2B is LC filtering
throughout. It's nice for the era.

What are some receivers to look for (don't say the Collins - I don't
have enough money)?

The new $100 shortwave receivers with a BFO will get CW and SSB OK. Not
spectacularly well.

Again, you seem to be struggling with both building your first
receiver, and making it the end-all-and-be-all-receiver that you'll
never need another one. Those are largely incompatible goals.

You can build yourself a little QRP transceiver for a smallish amount
of money. Will probably only cover one band and only the CW section,
but that's OK.

You can buy an older all-ham-band (well, pre-WARC) transceiver for
circa $100-$200. Might take some tweaking/cleaning, but that'll be good
for you to learn. Will do CW and SSB just fine, maybe even AM and FM
too if you want that (of very marginal use for most ham activities).

Test equipment on the used market is outrageously cheap. You could set
yourself up with a dual-channel scope and a frequency counter for $200
real easy, less if you shop around. This sort of stuff would've been
unobtanium to a ham in the 60's or early 70's.

Tim.

The only mechanical filters that I have seen problems with are the Japanese
units that you find in the JRC receivers. There is some sort of foam that
deteriorates over the years. I haven't seen a problem with Collins filters.
Receivers don't "wear out". With an older receiver, however, it's a good bet
that you will have to replace the electrolytic caps and replace all of the
carbon composition resistors that have drifted up in value over the years.
I took a different approach....................years ago, I also couldn't
affort the top end receivers so I learned how to design my own high
performance units. It was quite a learning experience, and it is a good way
to go. This experience has landed me a few high paying jobs in the field.
Give it a try!

Pete

"bcdlr" wrote in message
oups.com...
Guys that was a great discussion...
But I still have a question or two. Well actually a lot more than that
but we can't answer them all.
---
I know I'm not ready to build my own receiver, unless I went the micro
R2 route (I'm going to build one some day).
But that still doesn't solve my need for a ham band(s) receiver - to
use as a receiver and as a necessary piece of test equipment.
---
I know that the Drake 2b is good. But how easy (and cheap) is it to get
one? Are most "wore" out?
I've heard that a common ailment is that the mechanical filter will be
screwed up.
What are some receivers to look for (don't say the Collins - I don't
have enough money)?
BTW, got the EMRFD for Christmas. I like reading it but I have a lot to
learn...
Thanks,
Dan KB9JLO

All good answers. The main reason I was not going to build a Micro R2
was not the building but the single band.
I wanted something multiple band and as to frequency readout I was
thinking of adding a digital dial.
This guy has a neat (and cheap) frequency counter:
http://www.foxdelta.com/products/fc2.htm
And the shipping is only $5 to the US. (Haven't bought from him yet or
before, BTW).
---
Yes, I'm trying to maximize my purchase but I don't expect it to do
everything. And I probably should just bite the bullet and build
something but I'd like to have something commercial to fall back on.
This maybe werid reasoning but I'm trying to stay away from a
transceiver because I don't want the transmitter part. I want to try
and build my own transmitters and transceivers.
My first big project plan is to build a BITX20 SSB transceiver. I've
had a blast on 20 meter QRP SSB.
I've built an antenna tuner (Hans Summers' site) and I just finished a
KD1JV 'Tenna Tuner' - that's how I found out my frequency counter was
shot. It was given to me a year or so ago and I had never really used
it.
I also have a Softrock 6.x 40 M receiver I just finished but haven't
tested yet and a Micro 80 XCVR in the same boat (Micro80 is a Russian
Pixie type rig). I also have a AMQRP DDS60 on the bench but haven't
started it yet.
I have a RF signal generator (old Heathkit), two o'scopes but both are
low bandwidth, one is an old Tektronix solid state 3", 4 MHz BW and the
other is some dual trace that is like 5 or 10 MHz - but frankly I don't
remember how to use them correctly. I have a DMM, an AADE LC meter (I
love this thing), some odds and ends single board stuff I've built.
As one of you said, I need something to listen to the oscillator
with... But I'd like just a tad bit more.
Could I really get by with a newer digital dial SW receiver? I thought
they were just too wide open on the front end side to be any good at
all.
I have been eyeing the Drake R4 series... But that's probably more
liquid cash then I have.

Please keep it coming. I learning and asking questions. And some of it
is really starting to make sense!! :-)
---
On the receiver I've put messages on eHam and QRZ for a 'receiver
wanted' - I have some P4 class desktop machines I could trade, but I
haven't gotten any nibbles at all yet. I've been hesitant to put the
same message on rec.radio.swap due to the volume of traffic there.

Dan KB9JLO

"bcdlr" ) writes:
All good answers. The main reason I was not going to build a Micro R2
was not the building but the single band.
I wanted something multiple band and as to frequency readout I was
thinking of adding a digital dial.

But this goes back to the previous thread.

It's far better to build a single band receiver well, and get it
working, than to deal with the issues of multiple bands.

But, that receiver will work all over the place, with some changing
of frequency sensitive circuitry. One of those R2 receivers is
even set up for using modules to change bands.

One of the points of building a receiver that tuned a fixed range,
and then putting converters ahead of it, was that you could build
the main receiver, and use it immediately, and then deal with adding
the other bands.

I've often felt it makes lots of sense to make a good receiver, minus
the frequency selective elements, and then put it into a good box.
Put the "variable oscillator" in a separate box, so you can have a simple
single band VFO to begin with, or even a crystal oscillator for a fixed
frequency, and get the receiver going easily. Then you can work on
the fancier wide range synthesizer, or go through various iterations.
The basic receiver is always available, and so is the fallback variable
oscillator, which is not the case if you need to put the receiver on
the workbench to make some modification.

Now that broadband techniques have come to amateur radio, your "black
box" receiver can keep the frequency selective elements outside the
box. You can play with plug-ins for the desired bands, or something
that switches the LC circuits. Or both, migrating from the simple
to the complicated. You might find that on some bands that are less
important to you, you can get by with a simpler front end filter,
but other bands you want something fancier. If you build a receiver
all in one box, and the ultimate is the end goal, then you don't have
the chance of having the receiver relatively early, and you don't learn
from the experimenting. Plus, your ultimate standards have to be
there across the bands, rather than applied selectiviely.

Ray Moore wrote an artilce in Ham Raido magainze about 1973 or '74 about
receiver design, and showed off what was to him his "ultimate receiver".
But it was a broadcast band receiver, which few of the readership would
be interested in. He was merely using it as an example. His point was
that it's easier to build a really good receiver for a dedicated task
than to build a general purpose receiver that does everything well. He
mentioned that commercial receivers were often a series of tradeoffs because
they needed to provide something to a wide range of buyers, yet then
people are often paying extra for features they will never use.

Starting with a "black box" provides a lot more flexibility than when
putting the frequency selective elements in the box.

It doesn't even have to be the R2. Get a good passive mixer, a decent
SSB-bandwidth 9MHz crystal filter (or build one), and then build up a good
basic receiver that doesn't work without added circuitry. ANd use
that as the "black box".

Michael VE2BVW

bcdlr wrote:
Could I really get by with a newer digital dial SW receiver? I thought
they were just too wide open on the front end side to be any good at
all.

Where are you at, Cental Europe? If so, then the front end is too wide
open.

If the middle of the US, then there's not much problem. If it becomes a
problem, just put an attenuator in front.

The user interface on the new digital dial SW receivers is univerally
sucky. They do awfully bad at "tuning around the band looking for a
QSO", they are really built around the concept that someone will want
to listen to Radio Netherlands at 15735kc and just punch in that number
and expect to find it. There might be a tuning dial but it feels more
like you're dialing through channels than tuning up and down the bands.
The filters are only middlin' for AM, and will be "too wide" for SSB or
CW on the ham bands if things are at all crowded. But contrasted with a
$250 receiver from the 1960's they have a lot of nice things that were
purely pie-in-the-sky back then!

On the receiver I've put messages on eHam and QRZ for a 'receiver
wanted' - I have some P4 class desktop machines I could trade, but I
haven't gotten any nibbles at all yet. I've been hesitant to put the
same message on rec.radio.swap due to the volume of traffic there.

Lots of stuff goes through E-bay. Including the general coverage
receivers you seem to desire, for example I got a WJ-8716 (something
that was almost entirely out of the reach of a non-millionaire ham in
the 70's or 80's) at a tiny tiny fraction of what they originally sell
for. Still not "cheap".

If you like CW, I have recently become very enamored of the Heathkit
HW-16. There's a lot to be said for simple single-mode
limited-bandwidth receivers (or in the case of the HW-12 transceivers).
Break-in on the HW-16 with a couple mods is seamless, it's so good that
I FEEL like I can hear even when I have the key down.

Spring is coming and there will probably be some hamfests near you.
Hamfests tend to be better than say 10 or 15 years ago, when they were
all computer junk. Even if you don't buy, you get to see and usually
touch the stuff.

Tim.

bcdlr wrote:
Guys that was a great discussion...
But I still have a question or two. Well actually a lot more than that
but we can't answer them all.
---
I know I'm not ready to build my own receiver, unless I went the micro
R2 route (I'm going to build one some day).
But that still doesn't solve my need for a ham band(s) receiver - to
use as a receiver and as a necessary piece of test equipment.
---
I know that the Drake 2b is good. But how easy (and cheap) is it to get
one? Are most "wore" out?
I've heard that a common ailment is that the mechanical filter will be
screwed up.
What are some receivers to look for (don't say the Collins - I don't
have enough money)?

You already know the names to look for: Kenwood, Icom,
Yaesu. Most names from the past are either junk by
modern standards, or are expensive collectors items.
You're already on the air, so *talk* to people. Hell, maybe
somebody has an old but still useful radio they're not
using. You'll never know if you don't ask.

There are indeed used professional receivers out there.
You will get an astonishing radio if it has a name on it like
Watkins-Johnson or Harris (two names that have shown
up in this thread), but just because they're less than
they were new doesn't mean they're cheap.

My advice: buy something decent, but don't fret too
much over just what it is. Once you have some
experience with whatever you end up buying, you'll
have a standard for comparison, and will know what
to look for.

You asked about software radios? (I abhor the term
SDR) Buzzword city, ultra-trendy, but I'd be surprised
if 1 ham in 100 really knew how they worked. Get it
right, though, and a software radio can do things no
hardware radio could dream of doing.

Laura Halliday VE7LDH "That's a totally illegal,
Grid: CN89mg madcap scheme. I like it!"
ICBM: 49 16.05 N 122 56.92 W - H. Pearce