Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Re\:\s+G2DAF\s+Amps\s+Circuit\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Re\:\s+G2DAF\s+Amps\s+Circuit\s*$/: 33 ]

Total 33 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: Jan.E.Holm@telia.se (Jan.E.Holm@telia.se); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 08:02:06 +0200; There are diodes that work just fine but I just don´t remember what type right now. I know that SM2CEW and SM3BDZ uses doides with excelent result in their DAF boxes. 73, Jim SM2EKM -- be Hi Fi; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00529.html (9,351 bytes)
2. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: 2@vc.net (measures); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 08:06:27 -0700; ''Excellent results'' are not intermodulation distortion products of minus 22db. cheers. - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. end -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps Submis; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00532.html (7,976 bytes)
3. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: baycock@HIWAAY.NET (Bill Aycock); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:33:29 -0500; Previous posts indicate that the numbers Rich used below were NOT for a G2DAF Amp, but for a "bastardized" version. Rich has a "Thing" against the so-called G2DAF, and his comments are to be taken wi; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00533.html (9,147 bytes)
4. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: 2@vc.net (measures); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:03:07 -0700; The 3/2 Power Law is undoubtedly the truth, Bill. - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. end -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrati; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00534.html (8,868 bytes)
5. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:00:31 -0400; Hi Bill, I don't think the G2DAF is a good system either. It has to be, at the very least, very unreliable for IMD quality. It does everything wrong I can possibly imagine. It loads the exciter with; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00535.html (9,195 bytes)
6. SV: [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: sm5ki@algonet.se (sm5ki); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:30:58 +0200; "Has to be" Tom - you assume because you actually do not know. Why do you not try to build a few copies of the ones other hams build and that worked fine and then you will find out why they were so s; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00536.html (11,338 bytes)
7. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: wc6w@juno.com (Radio WC6W); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:01:16 EDT; Hi Bill, Rich, Tom, First, I suppose I should state that I am not a proponent of the G2DAF amplifier geometry. My personal preferences in the amplifier field are in the grid driven, regulated screen,; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00537.html (10,669 bytes)
8. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: sm2cew@telia.com (Peter Sundberg); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:10:52 +0200; Rich, Gimme five minutes in a contest and I will spot 50 stations for you who run the magnificent GG circuit in their amplifiers and still transmit feculence to the degree that you wanna puke. And we; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00538.html (10,081 bytes)
9. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: conrad.farlow@virgin.net (Conrad Farlow); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:43:17 +0100; run feculence Can I just be the first to say OH NO NOT AGAIN! Reaching for the delete key! 73 de Conrad G0RUZ -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps Submissions: amps@contesting.com Admini; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00539.html (9,827 bytes)
10. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: baycock@HIWAAY.NET (Bill Aycock); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:04:55 -0500; Tom- I have heard little good about it, either, except that the "real" G2DAF circuit depended on a particular tube to work acceptably, and that the units Rich is mad at, and talks about, were NOT the; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00540.html (10,483 bytes)
11. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: W3GCG@aol.com (W3GCG@aol.com); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:42:24 EDT; -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00541.html (8,632 bytes)
12. SV: [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:23:10 -0400; Hans, You assume I've never built or measured, or seen measurements made by others, on G2DAF circuits. You assume incorrectly. Been there, done that. It isn't a good idea to dismiss reasonable or go; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00544.html (9,579 bytes)
13. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:23:11 -0400; Just because the exciter is -30dB on third order, it doesn't mean an amplifier that is -35dB will not add noticeable extra bandwidth. I hear similar reasoning from people trying to pass off -20 and; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00545.html (9,092 bytes)
14. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:23:10 -0400; Contests are a bad time to decide what is the problem Peter. I know of people who stupidly turn their solid state exciter's internal power limiting up an extra 25-50% just because the radio "can do; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00546.html (9,741 bytes)
15. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: wc6w@juno.com (Radio WC6W); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:54:58 EDT; On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:23:11 -0400 "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com> writes: Of course it will, in fact the combination, without running through the math, will likely produce an overall 3rd order pro; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00549.html (9,780 bytes)
16. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: wc6w@juno.com (Radio WC6W); Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 22:02:05 EDT; 6AX4 or C.W.O. Hi, That may be the first US publication but, it was predated by the original author's work across the pond. The CQ article also introduced a few errors such as stating the required RF; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00550.html (9,292 bytes)
17. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: ITR@Nanoteq.co.za (Ian Roberts); Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 08:47:34 +0200; We have established already that this DAF thing is probably fine business in key down use such as FM, AM, RTTY, SSTV etc, etc. but is probably worst at SSB. It may be OK on CW. These guys in SM shoul; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00554.html (9,095 bytes)
18. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: 2@vc.net (measures); Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:18:52 -0700; The original circuit was tried by two of the three users in California. There was a problem with not enough screen volts. Their mod helped. The last fix was to regulate the screen with a shunt regul; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00555.html (11,746 bytes)
19. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: 2@vc.net (measures); Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:18:54 -0700; For max suds, regulate the screen at max permitted screen volts. go for it. cheers, Conrad - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. end -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps Subm; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00556.html (9,348 bytes)
20. [AMPS] Re: G2DAF Amps Circuit (score: 1): Author: 2@vc.net (measures); Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:18:55 -0700; minus 22db distortion is hardly "well". With a two-tone driving signal, screen potential was constant and linearity was improved. [chortle] Typical solid state radios are not this good. A two tone t; /archives//html/Amps/2000-10/msg00557.html (10,732 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]