Any significant differences between the Palomar MLB-1 and the RF Systems
MLB? They are both about the same price, the Palamor looks like it's
designed a little better for outdoor use (built-in eyehook for hanging).
Opinions please; thanks.

Jeff

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 09:00:04 -0400, "Unrevealed Source"
wrote:


Any significant differences between the Palomar MLB-1 and the RF Systems
MLB? They are both about the same price, the Palamor looks like it's
designed a little better for outdoor use (built-in eyehook for hanging).
Opinions please; thanks.

Jeff


I've had the Palomar since 1996 (drove to Escondildo and bought it
direct from the warehouse). Wire is Teflon coated tinned copper.
SO-239 is silver plated. It works very well. Buy American whenever
possible.

Does it work well? Perhaps this is the source of the reception problems
you've been having.

On 25 Sep 2005 14:51:54 -0700, wrote:

Does it work well? Perhaps this is the source of the reception problems
you've been having.

I get TIS stations from 50 miles away. I think it's working OK.

Well, maybe you should string out some more wire.

wrote:

Well, maybe you should string out some more wire.

He needs to do something. There should be plenty of DX there, just like there is
here.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 13:57:26 GMT, David wrote:

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 09:00:04 -0400, "Unrevealed Source"
wrote:


Any significant differences between the Palomar MLB-1 and the RF Systems
MLB? They are both about the same price, the Palamor looks like it's
designed a little better for outdoor use (built-in eyehook for hanging).
Opinions please; thanks.

Jeff


I've had the Palomar since 1996 (drove to Escondildo and bought it
direct from the warehouse). Wire is Teflon coated tinned copper.
SO-239 is silver plated. It works very well. Buy American whenever
possible.

If I may throw another possibility into the mix; the ICE 182A has
worked well for me. It will not install like the others (better for
beverage or inverted L) but it has held up well to the difficult
Southern California weather. Have not looked inside to verify the
quality of materials - but many others on the ng have also found it to
be a good performer.
http://www.arraysolutions.com/Produc...age%20Matching

US,

"bpnjensen" wrote in message
ups.com...
He needs to do something. There should be plenty of DX there, just
like there is
here.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

You might be surprised. From what I remember living on the East
Coast,
reception was much better there, with just a plain 50' wire attached
right to the antenna of the Astronaut-8 or the 1940's Zenith
Transoceanic - no transformer. Here in California, we get major
Pacific Rim stuff really well, but the rest of the world - even the
big
boys - are true DX. Europe is tough under all but the very best
circumstances. Even South America takes some work, and you'd think
they'd be easier (they *were* easier, from New England). Africa and
Central Asia, strangely, do better than Europe at certain times of
day,
but it still is heavily dependent on the perfect conditions for
intelligibility.

Another thing that I have to deal with is a noise level about 6
s-units
higher than rural New England ever was. David may have a comparable
problem. When I see posts from Telamon or Stewart McKenzie, I don't
usually see tough DX, but more likely powerhouses that can make it
over
the tough noise. Maybe they do tough DX, but their reports and
comments usually show more powerful stations. If I could away from
the
City, better results might be in the offing.

I've managed to get some pretty weak stations here at my suburban
QTH,
but it takes a lot of work and aspirin to get there. Maybe what
makes
a difference is whether your goal is to simply ID a station
positively
(which in itself can be a task), or to listen for content - IMO, far
more difficult. Spanish or Pidgin is a lot easier to understand
when
it is intelligible, of course.

I'd love to try my setup back at your place in MI. I bet I'd have a
lot better fortunes there, just as I did in New England.

Have you thought about going the loop antenna
route to cut down on the noise??

--Mike L.

Have you thought about going the loop antenna
route to cut down on the noise??

--Mike L.

Absolutely - first a big horizontal loop that I can build pretty
cheaply, just a matter (now) of finding the time and proper routing.
It will necessarily include my entire house within the loop, including
part of the support structure, so I am hoping for the best but
expecting the mediocre.

Then, if all else fails, trying out a commercial small amplified
vertical loop, like the Wellbrook.

I do use a dipole that works pretty well on the higher bands (11 MHz
and up), and since installing a transformer on my random wire I've
noticed a *slight* decrease in noise on that aerial - but it ain't
enough. I am surrounded by RF junkola, some of which will *never* go
away (like high-voltage lines front and back yards and splattery 50 kW
MW transmitters a couple miles away, gushing harmonics like a
fountain).

Bruce Jensen