Awl-- (also posted to rra.antenna)

I posted some time ago regarding the tuning circuitry of car radios vs. home
radios/stereos.
I had long noticed much superior tuning in car radios over my home radios.
Several apparently knowledgeable people on a few radio ngs confirmed this,
even explained it, altho this went over my head.

So based on this assumption of tuning superiority, I went to *great lengths*
to remove a very nice 6-speaker stereo from a car I'm junking (1990 Mazda
929S--nice car, too, seen better days), to hook up in my shop, so I can
listen to some decent radio, instead of brain-killing Reality TV.

*Finally* accomplished said task, and, big big bummer, the reception of the
car radio in my shop/garage is even worse than my home radios/stereos!
Yet, this *same radio*, when I used to park the car this very same garage,
had great reception.

Whazzup????

And, in general, what can I do about this reception problem, since it
appears that a car stereo is not the immediate solution?
I have a 100 foot tree outside, and I'm thinking of climbing it and putting
some kind of antenna at the top.
If I did this, what would be the best thing to put up there, for as much
reception as I can get: fm, am, TV, whatever else is oscillating up there.

What is the problem here, and in much of the NYC area?. No valleys, and I
am even on a bit of a hill, about 10 mi. from Manhattan.
What are my options? Preferably simple/cheap options, but at this point,
I'll try pretty much anything.

When I was a kid (in NYC), I calculated wavelengths, etc, and had antennas
"cut to size" for the various FM stations I was listening to, in all kinds
of orientations. Musta had about 30 antennas taped up in my room. It was
hilarious, BUT I got good reception, and LOTS of stations!
Those same dipole-type antennas are near-useless here.


TIA.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

On Jun 6, 5:13 am, "Proctologically Violated©®"
wrote:
Awl-- (also posted to rra.antenna)

I had long noticed much superior tuning in car radios over my home radios.
Several apparently knowledgeable people on a few radio ngs confirmed this,
even explained it, altho this went over my head.


*Finally* accomplished said task, and, big big bummer, the reception of the
car radio in my shop/garage is even worse than my home radios/stereos!
Yet, this *same radio*, when I used to park the car this very same garage,
had great reception.

Whazzup????

Your on the right track OK - dont give up. Car radios ARE better,
their designed to operate on crappy aerials in a noisy environment.
BUT, they are optimised for the car type aerial - wont go into the
physics. As an starting point,can you plug in a car antenna, even if
it needs getting an extension lead to get it outside and into clear
space? - the leads are available from car stereo places, come with all
the correct plugs/sockets, and (usually) some extra capacitance to
match into the car antenna.....

Let us know how you get on, its a worthwhile project....

Andrew VK3BFA.

"Andrew VK3BFA" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jun 6, 5:13 am, "Proctologically Violated©®"
wrote:
Awl-- (also posted to rra.antenna)

I had long noticed much superior tuning in car radios over my home radios.
Several apparently knowledgeable people on a few radio ngs confirmed this,
even explained it, altho this went over my head.


*Finally* accomplished said task, and, big big bummer, the reception of
the
car radio in my shop/garage is even worse than my home radios/stereos!
Yet, this *same radio*, when I used to park the car this very same garage,
had great reception.

Whazzup????

Your on the right track OK - dont give up. Car radios ARE better,
their designed to operate on crappy aerials in a noisy environment.
BUT, they are optimised for the car type aerial - wont go into the
physics. As an starting point,can you plug in a car antenna, even if
it needs getting an extension lead to get it outside and into clear
space? - the leads are available from car stereo places, come with all
the correct plugs/sockets, and (usually) some extra capacitance to
match into the car antenna.....

Let us know how you get on, its a worthwhile project....

---------------------------------

It is funny how a car antenna is vertical, when most dipoles are horizontal.
Anyway, I have a car antenna floating around I could use.
In the meantime, I dropped two conductor wire from my top window, about 40
feet up.
THAT oughtta get some kind of signal. Unfortunately, it's mostly vertical,
would like to get some of it horizontal--assuming that would help.

Discussions off-line are pointing me to a good log-periodic antenna, on top
of a big-assed tree, rotatable.

If *that* don't work, I guess I'm just gonna have to start whistling old
tunes.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs




Andrew VK3BFA.

On Jun 5, 3:13 pm, "Proctologically Violated©®"
wrote:
I posted some time ago regarding the tuning circuitry of car radios vs. home
radios/stereos.
I had long noticed much superior tuning in car radios over my home radios.
Several apparently knowledgeable people on a few radio ngs confirmed this,
even explained it, altho this went over my head.

Very simple: there isn't much market for high-quality home radio
receivers for a few decades now. With products not being sold by
quality but by how many features they have (look at a DVD player
remote control: more than 100 buttons!!!!) this is not surprising.

So based on this assumption of tuning superiority, I went to *great lengths*
to remove a very nice 6-speaker stereo from a car I'm junking (1990 Mazda
929S--nice car, too, seen better days), to hook up in my shop, so I can
listen to some decent radio, instead of brain-killing Reality TV.

*Finally* accomplished said task, and, big big bummer, the reception of the
car radio in my shop/garage is even worse than my home radios/stereos!
Yet, this *same radio*, when I used to park the car this very same garage,
had great reception.

Car radios antenna systems are matched to the radios. Take a car
antenna, put it on a big piece of sheet metal (aka "virtual car"), and
cable it up to the radio with a correct length of cable (cable
capacitance comes into the matching at least for AM) and you'll do
fine. With some matching circuitry you could match up to the dipoles
etc. you want to build.

If your garage/shop has a metal roof it will be a fine "virtual car"
ground.

Tim.

On 6 Jun, 09:46, Tim Shoppa wrote:
On Jun 5, 3:13 pm, "Proctologically Violated©®"

wrote:
I posted some time ago regarding the tuning circuitry of car radios vs. home
radios/stereos.
I had long noticed much superior tuning in car radios over my home radios.
Several apparently knowledgeable people on a few radio ngs confirmed this,
even explained it, altho this went over my head.

Very simple: there isn't much market for high-quality home radio
receivers for a few decades now. With products not being sold by
quality but by how many features they have (look at a DVD player
remote control: more than 100 buttons!!!!) this is not surprising.

So based on this assumption of tuning superiority, I went to *great lengths*
to remove a very nice 6-speaker stereo from a car I'm junking (1990 Mazda
929S--nice car, too, seen better days), to hook up in my shop, so I can
listen to some decent radio, instead of brain-killing Reality TV.

*Finally* accomplished said task, and, big big bummer, the reception of the
car radio in my shop/garage is even worse than my home radios/stereos!
Yet, this *same radio*, when I used to park the car this very same garage,
had great reception.

Car radios antenna systems are matched to the radios. Take a car
antenna, put it on a big piece of sheet metal (aka "virtual car"), and
cable it up to the radio with a correct length of cable (cable
capacitance comes into the matching at least for AM) and you'll do
fine. With some matching circuitry you could match up to the dipoles
etc. you want to build.

If your garage/shop has a metal roof it will be a fine "virtual car"
ground.

Tim.

And...while building that "virtual car" for the antenna ground-plane,
don't forget to make a car body sized box with upholstery type sound
absorption and place your chair in the center of this virtual speaker
box. You may be surprised at how good that simple car radio will
sound with you inside the speaker box.

Arv
_._

On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:07:39 -0400, Proctologically Violated©® wrote:
It is funny how a car antenna is vertical, when most dipoles are horizontal.

It would be even funnier to see a horizontally-polarized antenna on a
cargrin! (actually, I have one - for the 144MHz ham radio band)

Nearly all AM/MW stations use vertical transmitting antennas, not that
matching polarization is particularly important in that band.

In the U.S., the vast majority of FM stations use both
horizontal *and* vertical polarization (I think they call that "mixed
polarization" overseas) so a vertically-polarized car antenna works just
fine.

THAT oughtta get some kind of signal. Unfortunately, it's mostly vertical,
would like to get some of it horizontal--assuming that would help.

I don't think it'll make much difference.

"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
news
In the U.S., the vast majority of FM stations use both
horizontal *and* vertical polarization (I think they call that "mixed
polarization" overseas) so a vertically-polarized car antenna works just
fine.

I believe they actually use circular polarization, so there's a 3dB loss when
received by a linearly polarized antenna. Still, I'm told this is almost
always a huge improvement over what you get with the transmitter and receiver
both using linearly polaraized antennas.

I don't think it'll make much difference.

I agree. In fact, as far as I've seen, unless you're running high gain
point-to-point links, it doesn't seem that matching antenna polarizations on
both ends matters all that much, since the fields will tends to have become
randomly polarized as they propagate and reflect anyway. (Of course, I figure
one of the much more experienced people here can correct me on this if need
be!)