I emailed George about this today, if I understand his
reply, (n) db of filter loss may be required to meet
the emission specs after the carrier is nulled. The
stock TT filters in my experience have noticable gain
as compared to the stock TT filters, epecially at CW
bandwidths.
Sorry to the fellow that needs to live with the 2.4 in
the 9MHZ position, that really defeats the benefit of
the 2.4 filter in the 6 mhz position.
Running the VI+ at this moment with a pair of 2.8's
and could not imagine wanting anything else for cw or
ssb...
Re: [TenTec] 2.8khz and Carrier Balance??? (LONG!!!)
from [Steve N4LQ] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 2.8khz and Carrier Balance???
(LONG!!!)
From: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq at iglou.com>
Reply-to: tentec@contesting.com
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 22:28:06 -0500
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Well I understand the need to adjust the carrier null
but what I do not understand is the recent claims that
somehow the 2.8khz filter has something to do with
getting the carrier null out of adjustment. Sure, it's
a good idea to check it and tweak it up...er...down
but I don't think changing the filter affects
anything.
Steve N4LQ
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|